Defining post–colon capsule endoscopy colorectal cancer (pCCECRC)—an International Capsule Endoscopy Research (iCARE) group consensus statement

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) has seen increased adoption as a large bowel diagnostic test over the past decade. Unlike colonoscopy, the post-test colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes are yet to be standardised and reported. This international consensus aimed to establish a framework to define pCCECRC. METHODS: A modified Delphi process was conducted in accordance with CREDES guidance. Expert panellists were recruited from the International Capsule Endoscopy Research (iCARE) group and leads of CCE services in the United Kingdom and Ireland. Statements were informed by a systematic literature review and developed by a core steering group. Two rounds of anonymous online voting were undertaken to measure expert agreement on a total of 11 statements. A scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) was utilised. Agreement was defined as ≥ 75% agree or strongly agree with a maximum IQR of 1. RESULTS: 40 experts participated in round one, with 36 completing round two. Consensus was achieved for all statements. One statement, relating to how pCCECRC should be defined did not reach the consensus threshold in round 1 and was revised before reaching consensus in round 2. pCCECRC was endorsed as an appropriate quality metric, with definitions aligned to PCCRC where feasible. A 6-month post-procedure grace period was agreed, and reporting of a pCCECRC-3-year rate was recommended. Separate unadjusted (service-level) and adjusted (test-specific) pCCECRC rates were defined. A structured "most plausible explanation" framework for attribution is proposed that both aligns with PCCRC methodology and considers the more complex diagnostic pathway of CCE services that usually entails multiple tests. CONCLUSION: This consensus proposes standardised definitions and reporting recommendations for pCCECRC. The proposed framework is intended to support quality assurance and evaluation of CCE services. Validation using real-world service datasets is required.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Surgical Endoscopy
Published
2026-05-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-026-12892-5
Primary Topic
Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Defining post–colon capsule endoscopy colorectal cancer (pCCECRC)—an International Capsule Endoscopy Research (iCARE) group consensus statement

Peter Murchie, Ian Lei, the iCARE consensus collaborative, Angus Watson et al.
Surgical Endoscopy
Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
article

Defining post–colon capsule endoscopy colorectal cancer (pCCECRC)—an International Capsule Endoscopy Research (iCARE) group consensus statement

Peter Murchie, Ian Lei, the iCARE consensus collaborative, Angus Watson, Anastasios Koulaouzidis, Hussain Ibrahim
article en

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) has seen increased adoption as a large bowel diagnostic test over the past decade. Unlike colonoscopy, the post-test colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes are yet to be standardised and reported. This international consensus aimed to establish a framework to define pCCECRC. METHODS: A modified Delphi process was conducted in accordance with CREDES guidance. Expert panellists were recruited from the International Capsule Endoscopy Research (iCARE) group and leads of CCE services in the United Kingdom and Ireland. Statements were informed by a systematic literature review and developed by a core steering group. Two rounds of anonymous online voting were undertaken to measure expert agreement on a total of 11 statements. A scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) was utilised. Agreement was defined as ≥ 75% agree or strongly agree with a maximum IQR of 1. RESULTS: 40 experts participated in round one, with 36 completing round two. Consensus was achieved for all statements. One statement, relating to how pCCECRC should be defined did not reach the consensus threshold in round 1 and was revised before reaching consensus in round 2. pCCECRC was endorsed as an appropriate quality metric, with definitions aligned to PCCRC where feasible. A 6-month post-procedure grace period was agreed, and reporting of a pCCECRC-3-year rate was recommended. Separate unadjusted (service-level) and adjusted (test-specific) pCCECRC rates were defined. A structured "most plausible explanation" framework for attribution is proposed that both aligns with PCCRC methodology and considers the more complex diagnostic pathway of CCE services that usually entails multiple tests. CONCLUSION: This consensus proposes standardised definitions and reporting recommendations for pCCECRC. The proposed framework is intended to support quality assurance and evaluation of CCE services. Validation using real-world service datasets is required.

Surgical Endoscopy
University of Southern Denmark (DK), University of Aberdeen (GB), University Hospital Coventry (GB), NHS Highland (GB)
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.