Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading cancer-related causes of death in the world. Since the 70s, many countries have adopted different CRC screening programs, which has resulted in a decrease in mortality. However, current screening test options still present downsides. The commercialized stool-based tests present high false-positive rates and low sensitivity, which negatively affects the detection of early stage carcinogenesis. The gold standard colonoscopy has low uptake due to its invasiveness and the perception of discomfort and embarrassment that the procedure may bring. In this review, we collected and described the latest data about alternative CRC screening techniques that can overcome these disadvantages. Web of Science and PubMed were employed as search engines for studies reporting on CRC screening tests and future perspectives. The searches generated 555 articles, of which 93 titles were selected. Finally, a total of 50 studies, describing 14 different CRC alternative tests, were included. Among the investigated techniques, the main feature that could have an impact on CRC screening perception and uptake was the ease of sample collection. Urine, exhaled breath, and blood-based tests promise to achieve good diagnostic performance (sensitivity of 63–100%, 90–95%, and 47–97%, respectively) while minimizing stress and discomfort for the patient.
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading cancer-related causes of death in the world. Since the 70s, many countries have adopted different CRC screening programs which has resulted in a decrease in mortality. However, current screening test options still present downsides. The commercialized stool-based tests present high false-positive rates and low sensitivity, which negatively affects the detection of early stage carcinogenesis. The gold standard colonoscopy has low uptake due to its invasiveness and the perception of discomfort and embarrassment that the procedure may bring.In this review, we collected and described the latest data about alternative CRC screening techniques that can overcome these disadvantages. Web of Science and PubMed were employed as search engines for studies reporting on CRC screening tests and future perspectives. The searches generated 555 articles, of which 93 titles were selected. Finally, a total of 50 studies, describing 14 different CRC alternative tests, were included. Among the investigated techniques the main feature that could have an impact on CRC screening perception and uptake was the ease of sample collection. Urine, exhaled breath and blood-based tests promise to achieve good diagnostic performance (sensitivity of 63-100%, 90-95%, 47-97%, respectively) while minimizing stress and discomfort for the patient.
Background Biomarker discovery in colorectal cancer has mostly focused on methylation patterns in normal and colorectal tumor tissue, but adenomas remain understudied. Therefore, we performed the first epigenome-wide study to profile methylation of all three tissue types combined and to identify discriminatory biomarkers. Results Public methylation array data (Illumina EPIC and 450K) were collected from a total of 1 892 colorectal samples. Pairwise differential methylation analyses between tissue types were performed for both array types to “double evidence” differentially methylated probes (DE DMPs). Subsequently, the identified DMPs were filtered on methylation level and used to build a binary logistic regression prediction model. Focusing on the clinically most interesting group (adenoma vs carcinoma), we identified 13 DE DMPs that could effectively discriminate between them (AUC = 0.996). We validated this model in an in-house experimental methylation dataset of 13 adenomas and 9 carcinomas. It reached a sensitivity and specificity of 96% and 95%, respectively, with an overall accuracy of 96%. Our findings raise the possibility that the 13 DE DMPs identified in this study can be used as molecular biomarkers in the clinic. Conclusions Our analyses show that methylation biomarkers have the potential to discriminate between normal, precursor and carcinoma tissues of the colorectum. More importantly, we highlight the power of the methylome as a source of markers for discriminating between colorectal adenomas and carcinomas, which currently remains an unmet clinical need.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.