The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of CT colonography, colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy and faecal occult blood tests for the detection of advanced adenoma in an average risk population
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This prospective trial was designed to compare the performance characteristics of five different screening tests in parallel for the detection of advanced colonic neoplasia: CT colonography (CTC), colonoscopy (OC), flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS), faecal immunochemical stool testing (FIT) and faecal occult blood testing (FOBT). METHODS: Average risk adults provided stool specimens for FOBT and FIT, and underwent same-day low-dose 64-multidetector row CTC and OC using segmentally unblinded OC as the standard of reference. Sensitivities and specificities were calculated for each single test, and for combinations of FS and stool tests. CTC radiation exposure was measured, and patient comfort levels and preferences were assessed by questionnaire. RESULTS: 221 adenomas were detected in 307 subjects who completed CTC (mean radiation dose, 4.5 mSv) and OC; 269 patients provided stool samples for both FOBT and FIT. Sensitivities of OC, CTC, FS, FIT and FOBT for advanced colonic neoplasia were 100% (95% CI 88.4% to 100%), 96.7% (82.8% to 99.9%), 83.3% (95% CI 65.3% to 94.4%), 32% (95% CI 14.9% to 53.5) and 20% (95% CI 6.8% to 40.7%), respectively. Combination of FS with FOBT or FIT led to no relevant increase in sensitivity. 12 of 45 advanced adenomas were smaller than 10 mm. 46% of patients preferred CTC and 37% preferred OC (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: High-resolution and low-dose CTC is feasible for colorectal cancer screening and reaches sensitivities comparable with OC for polyps >5 mm. For patients who refuse full bowel preparation and OC or CTC, FS should be preferred over stool tests. However, in cases where stool tests are performed, FIT should be recommended rather than FOBT.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Computed Tomography — An Increasing Source of Radiation Exposure
Brenner, D. J., & Hall, E. J. (2007) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra072149 · Cited by 8,748
Prevention of Colorectal Cancer by Colonoscopic Polypectomy
Winawer, S. J., Zauber, A. G., Ho, M. N., O'Brien, M. J., Gottlieb, L. S., Sternberg, S. S., Waye, J. D., Schapiro, M., Bond, J. H., Panish, J. F., et al. (1993) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199312303292701 · Cited by 4,592
Reducing Mortality from Colorectal Cancer by Screening for Fecal Occult Blood
Mandel, J. S., Bond, J. H., Church, T. R., Snover, D. C., Bradley, G. M., Schuman, L. M., & Ederer, F. (1993) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199305133281901 · Cited by 3,229
Levin, B., Lieberman, D. A., McFarland, B., Andrews, K. S., Brooks, D., Bond, J., Dash, C., Giardiello, F. M., Glick, S., Johnson, D., et al. (2008) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2008.02.002 · Cited by 2,990
Computed Tomographic Virtual Colonoscopy to Screen for Colorectal Neoplasia in Asymptomatic Adults
Pickhardt, P. J., Choi, J. R., Hwang, I., Butler, J. A., Puckett, M. L., Hildebrandt, H. A., Wong, R. K., Nugent, P. A., Mysliwiec, P. A., & Schindler, W. R. (2003) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa031618 · Cited by 1,972
Use of Colonoscopy to Screen Asymptomatic Adults for Colorectal Cancer
Lieberman, D. A., Weiss, D. G., Bond, J. H., Ahnen, D. J., Garewal, H., Harford, W. V., Provenzale, D., Sontag, S., Schnell, T., Durbin, T. E., et al. (2000) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200007203430301 · Cited by 1,815
Levin, B., Lieberman, D. A., McFarland, B., Smith, R. A., Brooks, D., Andrews, K. S., Dash, C., Giardiello, F. M., Glick, S., Levin, T. R., et al. (2008) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/ca.2007.0018 · Cited by 1,801
A Case–Control Study of Screening Sigmoidoscopy and Mortality from Colorectal Cancer
Selby, J. V., Friedman, G. D., Quesenberry, C. P., & Weiss, N. S. (1992) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199203053261001 · Cited by 1,702
Colorectal cancer screening: Clinical guidelines and rationale
Winawer, S., Fletcher, R., Miller, L., Godlee, F., Stolar, M., Mulrow, C., Woolf, S., Glick, S., Ganiats, T., Bond, J., et al. (1997) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/gast.1997.v112.agast970594 · Cited by 1,612
Colonoscopic miss rates of adenomas determined by back-to-back colonoscopies
Rex, D., Cutler, C., Lemmel, G., Rahmani, E., Clark, D., Helper, D., Lehman, G., & Mark, D. (1997) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1016/s0016-5085(97)70214-2 · Cited by 1,553
Cited by
Colorectal cancer screening: a global overview of existing programmes
Schreuders, E. H., Ruco, A., Rabeneck, L., Schoen, R. E., Sung, J. J. Y., Young, G. P., & Kuipers, E. J. (2015) · Gut · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2014-309086 · Cited by 1,328
Lin, J. S., Bowles, E. J. A., Williams, S. B., & Morrison, C. C. (2017) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2017.0562 · Cited by 1,082
Lin, J. S., Perdue, L. A., Henrikson, N. B., Bean, S. I., & Blasi, P. R. (2021) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2021.4417 · Cited by 650
Diagnostics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer
Kolligs, F. T. (2016) · Visceral Medicine · doi:10.1159/000446488 · Cited by 223
Self-citationGrosu, S., Wesp, P., Graser, A., Maurus, S., Schulz, C., Knösel, T., Cyran, C. C., Ricke, J., Ingrisch, M., & Kazmierczak, P. M. (2021) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2021202363 · Cited by 75
Metadata
- Authors
- Graser, A., Stieber, P., Nagel, D., Schafer, C., Horst, D., Becker, C. R., Nikolaou, K., Lottes, A., Geisbusch, S., Kramer, H., Wagner, A. C., Diepolder, H., Schirra, J., Roth, H. J., Seidel, D., Goke, B., Reiser, M. F., & Kolligs, F. T.
- Venue
- Gut
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2008-10-13
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 241-248
- ISSN
- 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2155233355
- Cited by
- 389
- References
- 37
- FWCI
- 15.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of CT colonography, colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy and faecal occult blood tests for the detection of advanced adenoma in an average risk population. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gut.2008.156448
- The paper
- Graser, A., Stieber, P., Nagel, D., Schafer, C., Horst, D., Becker, C. R., Nikolaou, K., Lottes, A., Geisbusch, S., Kramer, H., Wagner, A. C., Diepolder, H., Schirra, J., Roth, H. J., Seidel, D., Goke, B., Reiser, M. F., & Kolligs, F. T. (2009). Comparison of CT colonography, colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy and faecal occult blood tests for the detection of advanced adenoma in an average risk population. Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.2008.156448
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
