EditorialComparing Fecal Immunochemical Tests: Improved Standardization Is Needed
References (20)
- et al.
Stool screening for colorectal cancer: molecular approaches
Gastroenterology
(2005) - et al.
Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology
Gastroenterology
(2008) The imperative of equal funding for studies that evaluate any of the evidence-based, guideline-recommended colorectal cancer screening tests
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol
(2009)- et al.
A comparison of the immunochemical fecal occult blood test and total colonoscopy in the asymptomatic population
Gastroenterology
(2005) - et al.
Lower risk of advanced neoplasia among patients with a previous negative result from a fecal test for colorectal cancer
Gastroenterology
(2012) - et al.
Standardized colonoscopy reporting and data system: report of the Quality Assurance Task Group of the National Colorectal Cancer Roundtable
Gastrointest Endosc
(2007) - et al.
Risk of developing proximal versus distal colorectal cancer after a negative colonoscopy: a population-based study
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol
(2008) - et al.
The reduction in colorectal cancer mortality after colonoscopy varies by site of the cancer
Gastroenterology
(2010) - et al.
A comparison of fecal occult-blood tests for colorectal-cancer screening
N Engl J Med
(1996) - et al.
The impact of a celebrity promotional campaign on the use of colon cancer screening: the Katie Couric effect
Arch Intern Med
(2003)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.
Cited by (0)
Conflicts of interest The authors disclose the following:
Callum G. Fraser acts as a consultant for Immunostics Inc, Ocean, NJ, USA, and received travel and accommodation for DDW in Chicago, 2011. Alpha Labs Ltd, Eastleigh, Hants, UK, paid travel and accommodation for the WEO CRCSC meeting in Stockholm, 2011.
The remaining authors disclose no conflicts.
Copyright © 2012 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.