ObjectiveTo assess whether a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) could be used to select patients with suspected colorectal cancer (CRC) symptoms for urgent investigation.DesignMulticentre, double-blinded diagnostic accuracy study in 50 National Health Service (NHS) hospitals across England between October 2017 and December 2019. Patients referred to secondary care with suspected CRC symptoms meeting NHS England criteria for urgent 2 weeks wait referral and triaged to investigation with colonoscopy were invited to perform a quantitative FIT. The sensitivity of FIT for CRC, and effect of relevant variables on its diagnostic accuracy was assessed.Results9822 patients were included in the final analysis. The prevalence of CRC at colonoscopy was 3.3%. The FIT positivity decreased from 37.2% to 19.0% and 7.6%, respectively, at cut-offs of 2, 10 and 150 µg haemoglobin/g faeces (µg/g). The positive predictive values of FIT for CRC at these cut-offs were 8.7% (95% CI, 7.8% to 9.7%), 16.1% (95% CI 14.4% to 17.8%) and 31.1% (95% CI 27.8% to 34.6%), respectively, and the negative predictive values were 99.8% (95% CI 99.7% to 99.9%), 99.6% (95% CI 99.5% to 99.7%) and 98.9% (95% CI 98.7% to 99.1%), respectively. The sensitivity of FIT for CRC decreased at the same cut-offs from 97.0% (95% CI 94.5% to 98.5%) to 90.9% (95% CI 87.2% to 93.8%) and 70.8% (95% CI 65.6% to 75.7%), respectively, while the specificity increased from 64.9% (95% CI 63.9% to 65.8%) to 83.5% (95% CI 82.8% to 84.3%) and 94.6% (95% CI 94.1% to 95.0%), respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.93 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.95).ConclusionFIT sensitivity is maximised to 97.0% at the lowest cut-off (2 µg/g); a negative FIT result at this cut-off can effectively rule out CRC and a positive FIT result is better than symptoms to select patients for urgent investigations.Trial registration numberISRCTN49676259.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Data: MRI assessment of rectal cancer not only assesses tumor depth and surgical resectability but also extramural disease which affects prognosis. We have observed that nonnodal tumor nodules (tumor deposits; mrTDs) have a distinct MRI appearance compared to lymph node metastases (mrLNMs). Objective: We aimed to assess whether mrTDs and mrLNMs have different prognostic implications and compare these to other known prognostic markers. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of 233 patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer from January 2007 to October 2015.Data were obtained from electronic records and MRIs blindly rereported. Survival was determined using Kaplan-Meier method. Prognostic markers were evaluated using Cox regression and competing risks analysis. Inter-observer agreement for mrTD was measured using Cohen Kappa. Results: On multivariable analysis, baseline mrTD/mrEMVI (extramural venous invasion) status was the only significant MRI factor for adverse survival [hazard ratio (HR) 2.36 (1.54-3.61] for overall survival, 2.37 (1.47-3.80) for disease-free survival (both P < 0.001), superseding T and N categories. mrLNMs were associated with good prognosis (HR 0.50 (0.31-0.80) P = 0.004 for overall survival, 0.60 (0.40-0.90) P = 0.014 for disease-free survival). On multivariable analysis, mrTDs/mrEMVI were strongly associated with distant recurrence ) P ≤ 0.001) whereas T and N category were not. In a subgroup analysis of posttreatment MRIs in postchemoradiotherapy patients, mrTD/mrEMVI status was again the only significant prognostic factor; furthermore those who showed a good treatment response had a prognosis similar to patients who were negative at baseline. Inter-observer agreement for detection of mrTDs was k0.77 and k0.83. Conclusions: Current MRI staging predicting T and N status does not adequately predict prognosis. Positive mrTD/mrEMVI status has greater prognostic accuracy and would be superior in determining treatment and follow-up protocols. Chemoradiotherapy may be a highly effective treatment strategy in mrTD/mrEMVI positive patients.

Faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) has a high sensitivity for the detection of colorectal cancer (CRC). In a symptomatic population FIT may identify those patients who require colorectal investigation with the highest priority. FIT offers considerable advantages over the use of symptoms alone, as an objective measure of risk with a vastly superior positive predictive value for CRC, while conversely identifying a truly low risk cohort of patients. The aim of this guideline was to provide a clear strategy for the use of FIT in the diagnostic pathway of people with signs or symptoms of a suspected diagnosis of CRC. The guideline was jointly developed by the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/British Society of Gastroenterology, specifically by a 21-member multidisciplinary guideline development group (GDG). A systematic review of 13 535 publications was undertaken to develop 23 evidence and expert opinion-based recommendations for the triage of people with symptoms of a suspected CRC diagnosis in primary care. In order to achieve consensus among a broad group of key stakeholders, we completed an extended Delphi of the GDG, and also 61 other individuals across the UK and Ireland, including by members of the public, charities and primary and secondary care. Seventeen research recommendations were also prioritised to inform clinical management.

No abstract

published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.If the publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the "Taverne" license above, please follow below link for the End User

Background Closure of an abdominal stoma, a common elective operation, is associated with frequent complications; one of the commonest and impactful is incisional hernia formation. We aimed to investigate whether biological mesh (collagen tissue matrix) can safely reduce the incidence of incisional hernias at the stoma closure site. Methods In this randomised controlled trial (ROCSS) done in 37 hospitals across three European countries (35 UK, one Denmark, one Netherlands), patients aged 18 years or older undergoing elective ileostomy or colostomy closure were randomly assigned using a computer-based algorithm in a 1:1 ratio to either biological mesh reinforcement or closure with sutures alone (control). Training in the novel technique was standardised across hospitals. Patients and outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was occurrence of clinically detectable hernia 2 years after randomisation (intention to treat). A sample size of 790 patients was required to identify a 40% reduction (25% to 15%), with 90% power (15% drop-out rate). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02238964.