Skip to main content
Log in

A comparison of an immunological faecal occult blood test Fecatwin sensitive/FECA EIA with Haemoccult in population screening for colorectal cancer

  • Original Article
  • Published:
British Journal of Cancer Submit manuscript

Abstract

Two faecal occult blood tests, a simple chemical test Haemoccult and an immunological test, Fecatwin Sensitive/Feca EIA, were offered to 3,225 asymptomatic individuals as screening for colorectal cancer. One thousand three hundred and four (44%) completed and returned the tests and of these 126 (9.7%) were found to be positive - Haemoccult 40 (3%) and Feca EIA 106 (8.1%). Five cancers (4 Dukes' Stage A, 1 Dukes' Stage C) and 23 adenomas greater than 1 cm were detected - rates of 3.8 per 1000 persons screened and 17.7 per 1000 persons screened respectively. Of the five cancers identified 5 were Feca EIA positive and 3 were Haemoccult positive. Of the 23 adenomas greater than 1 cm diameter identified, J1 were Feca EIA positive and 20 were Haemoccult positive. Seventy-eight Feca EIA positive subjects were investigated and no neoplastic disease was identified. Whilst this sensitive immunological test increases the yield of carcinomas, the high false positive rate makes it unsuitable for population screening for colorectal cancer in its present form.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Armitage, N., Hardcastle, J., Amar, S. et al. A comparison of an immunological faecal occult blood test Fecatwin sensitive/FECA EIA with Haemoccult in population screening for colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer 51, 799–804 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1985.124

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1985.124

  • Springer Nature Limited

This article is cited by

Navigation