Colorectal cancer screening using stool DNA analysis in clinical practice: early clinical experience with respect to patient acceptance and colonoscopic follow-up of abnormal tests

Stool DNA testing for early detection of colorectal cancer: systematic review using the HTA Core Model® for Rapid Relative Effectiveness Assessment

Background

Stool DNA testing for early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) is a non-invasive technology with the potential to supplement established CRC screening tests. The aim of this health technology assessment was to evaluate effectiveness and safety of currently CE-marked stool DNA tests, compared to other CRC tests in CRC screening strategies in an asymptomatic screening population.

Methods

The assessment was carried out following the guidelines of the European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA). This included a systematic literature search in MED-LINE, Cochrane and EMBASE in 2018. Manufacturers were asked to provide additional data. Five patient interviews helped assessing potential ethical or social aspects and patients' experiences and preferences. We assessed the risk of bias using QUADAS-2, and the quality of the body of evidence using GRADE.

Results

We identified three test accuracy studies, two of which investigated a multitarget stool DNA test (Cologuard^®, compared fecal immunochemical test (FIT)) and one a combined DNA stool assay (ColoAlert^®, compared to guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (gFOBT), Pyruvate Kinase Isoenzyme Type M2 (M2-PK) and combined gFOBT/M2-PK). We found five published surveys on patient satisfaction. No primary study investigating screening effects on CRC incidence or on overall mortality was found. Both stool DNA tests showed in direct comparison higher sensitivity for the detection of CRC and (advanced) adenoma compared to FIT, or gFOBT, respectively, but had lower specificity. However, these comparative results may depend on the exact type of FIT used. The reported test failure rates were higher for stool DNA testing than for FIT. The certainty of evidence was moderate to high for Cologuard^® studies, and low to very low for the ColoAlert^® study which refers to a former version of the product and yielded no direct evidence on the test accuracy for ad-vanced versus non-advanced adenoma.

Conclusions

ColoAlert^® is the only stool DNA test currently sold in Europe and is available at a lower price than Cologuard^®, but reliable evidence is lacking. A screening study including the current product version of ColoAlert^® and suitable comparators would, therefore, help evaluate the effectiveness of this screening option in a European context.

Factors Likely to Affect the Uptake of Genomic Approaches to Cancer Screening in Primary Care: A Scoping Review

Genomic tests are being developed for use in cancer screening. As most screening is offered in primary care settings, primary care provider and patient perceptions of such tests are likely to affect uptake. We conducted a scoping review to synthesize information on factors likely to affect patient and provider use of biospecimen collection and analysis for cancer screening, methods referred to as liquid biopsy or multi-cancer early detection (MCED) testing when used to detect multiple cancers. We ultimately identified 7 articles for review and analyzed them for major themes. None reported on primary care provider perspectives. Six articles focused on patient perceptions about testing for a single cancer (colorectal), and 1 reported on patient views related to testing for multiple cancers. Factors favoring this type of testing included its non-invasiveness, and the perceived safety, convenience, and effectiveness of testing. There is a dearth of information in the literature on primary care provider perceptions about liquid biopsy and MCED testing. The limited information on patient perceptions suggests that they are receptive to such tests. Research on primary care provider and patient test-related knowledge, attitudes, and behavior is needed to guide future implementation in primary care settings.

Development of a colorectal cancer screening intervention for Alaska Native people during a pandemic year

Objectives

Alaska Native (AN) people experience twice the rate of colorectal cancer (CRC) as US Whites. There is a need for increased screening and early detection. We describe the development and implementation of a randomized controlled trial of the multi-target stool DNA test (mt-sDNA; Cologuard® Exact Sciences, Madison WI) to increase CRC screening among AN people.

Methods

A total of 32 rural/remote AN communities were randomized to a varied intensity intervention (patient navigation vs mailed health education) compared to 14 communities receiving usual opportunistic care. Outcome measures include screening completion and method used (mt-sDNA vs colonoscopy). Health care provider interviews and AN patient focus groups will be used to assess patient-, provider-, and system-level CRC screening promoters and barriers.

Results

The study began in April 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in a number of challenges and study adaptations. These included difficulty finding laboratory space, lack of timely mail service due to flight reductions across the state, and travel restrictions that led to postponement of in-person focus groups. Videoconferencing platforms for Tribal engagement replaced face-to-face interactions. After an extensive search, a laboratory with space available was identified and the preprocessing laboratory established. Study staff will work closely with patients to monitor mail service to get mt-sDNA kits sent on time. We are also exploring the use of videoconferencing platforms as alternatives to in-person focus groups.

Conclusions

Despite the challenges encountered during the COVID-19 pandemic, we successfully initiated the intervention and established the first mt-sDNA preprocessing laboratory in Alaska.

Colorectal Cancer Screening: Have We Addressed Concerns and Needs of the Target Population?

Despite the recognized benefits of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, uptake is still suboptimal in many countries. In addressing this issue, one important element that has not received sufficient attention is population preference. Our review provides a comprehensive summary of the up-to-date evidence relative to this topic. Four OVID databases were searched: Ovid MEDLINE® ALL, Biological Abstracts, CAB Abstracts, and Global Health. Among the 742 articles generated, 154 full texts were selected for a more thorough evaluation based on predefined inclusion criteria. Finally, 83 studies were included in our review. The general population preferred either colonoscopy as the most accurate test, or fecal occult blood test (FOBT) as the least invasive for CRC screening. The emerging blood test (SEPT9) and capsule colonoscopy (nanopill), with the potential to overcome the pitfalls of the available techniques, were also favored. Gender, age, race, screening experience, education and beliefs, the perceived risk of CRC, insurance, and health status influence one’s test preference. To improve uptake, CRC screening programs should consider offering test alternatives and tailoring the content and delivery of screening information to the public’s preferences. Other logistical measures in terms of the types of bowel preparation, gender of endoscopist, stool collection device, and reward for participants can also be useful.

Cost-Effectiveness of Multitarget Stool DNA Testing vs Colonoscopy or Fecal Immunochemical Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Alaska Native People

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of multitarget stool DNA testing (MT-sDNA) compared with colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) for Alaska Native adults.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A Markov model was used to evaluate the 3 screening test effects over 40 years. Outcomes included colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality, costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). The study incorporated updated evidence on screening test performance and adherence and was conducted from December 15, 2016, through November 6, 2019.

RESULTS

With perfect adherence, CRC incidence was reduced by 52% (95% CI, 46% to 56%) using colonoscopy, 61% (95% CI, 57% to 64%) using annual FIT, and 66% (95% CI, 63% to 68%) using MT-sDNA. Compared with no screening, perfect adherence screening extends life by 0.15, 0.17, and 0.19 QALYs per person with colonoscopy, FIT, and MT-sDNA, respectively. Colonoscopy is the most expensive strategy: approximately $110 million more than MT-sDNA and $127 million more than FIT. With imperfect adherence (best case), MT-sDNA resulted in 0.12 QALYs per person vs 0.05 and 0.06 QALYs per person by FIT and colonoscopy, respectively. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses supported the base-case analysis. Under varied adherence scenarios, MT-sDNA either dominates or is cost-effective (ICERs, $1740-$75,868 per QALY saved) compared with FIT and colonoscopy.

CONCLUSION

Each strategy reduced costs and increased QALYs compared with no screening. Screening by MT-sDNA results in the largest QALY savings. In Markov model analysis, screening by MT-sDNA in the Alaska Native population was cost-effective compared with screening by colonoscopy and FIT for a wide range of adherence scenarios.

Alaska Native Patient and Provider Perspectives on the Multitarget Stool DNA Test Compared With Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Objective: Alaska Native (AN) people have among the world's highest rate of colorectal cancer (CRC). We assessed perceptions of AN people and their health care providers of a new take-home multitarget stool DNA test (MT-sDNA; Cologuard) relative to colonoscopy. Methods: Cross-sectional surveys of AN people aged 40 to 75 years (mailed) and providers (online). Results: Participants included 1616 AN patients (19% response rate) and 87 providers (26% response rate; 57% AN people). Over half (58%) of patients preferred colonoscopy for CRC screening, while 36% preferred MT-sDNA. Unscreened patients were significantly more likely to state a preference for MT-sDNA than previously screened patients (42% vs 31%, P < .05) as were younger patients (<60 years old) compared with older patients (40% vs 30%, P < .05). Most providers thought that MT-sDNA would improve screening rates (69%), would recommend if available (79%), and be implementable (79%). Perceived barriers differed substantially between patients and providers in both type and magnitude. Leading colonoscopy barriers reported by patients were travel (44%) and bowel preparation (40%), while providers thought that fear of pain (92%) and invasiveness of the test (87%) were the primary barriers. For MT-sDNA, patients' belief that colonoscopy was better (56%) and not knowing how to do the test (40%) were primary barriers, while providers thought stool collection (67%) and having a stool sample in their home (63%) were leading barriers. Conclusions: This study found that MT-sDNA has potential acceptability among AN people and their health care providers. Both groups reported a willingness to use MT-sDNA and did not perceive major barriers to its use. This preference was especially true of unscreened and younger patients. The majority of providers indicated they would use MT-sDNA if available and that it would improve CRC screening rates. In this population, where colonoscopy access is limited, MT-sDNA has the potential to improve CRC screening adherence.

Colorectal cancer development and advances in screening

Most colon tumors develop via a multistep process involving a series of histological, morphological, and genetic changes that accumulate over time. This has allowed for screening and detection of early-stage precancerous polyps before they become cancerous in individuals at average risk for colorectal cancer (CRC), which may lead to substantial decreases in the incidence of CRC. Despite the known benefits of early screening, CRC remains the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Hence, it is important for health care providers to have an understanding of the risk factors for CRC and various stages of disease development in order to recommend appropriate screening strategies. This article provides an overview of the histological/molecular changes that characterize the development of CRC. It describes the available CRC screening methods and their advantages and limitations and highlights the stages of CRC development in which each screening method is most effective.

Driver Gene Mutations in Stools of Colorectal Carcinoma Patients Detected by Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing

Detection of driver gene mutations in stool DNA represents a promising noninvasive approach for screening colorectal cancer (CRC). Amplicon-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) is a good option to study mutations in many cancer genes simultaneously and from a low amount of DNA. Our aim was to assess the feasibility of identifying mutations in 22 cancer driver genes with Ion Torrent technology in stool DNA from a series of 65 CRC patients. The assay was successful in 80% of stool DNA samples. NGS results showed 83 mutations in cancer driver genes, 29 hotspot and 54 novel mutations. One to five genes were mutated in 75% of cases. TP53, KRAS, FBXW7, and SMAD4 were the top mutated genes, consistent with previous studies. Of samples with mutations, 54% presented concomitant mutations in different genes. Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway genes were mutated in 70% of samples, with 58% having alterations in KRAS, NRAS, or BRAF. Because mutations in these genes can compromise the efficacy of epidermal growth factor receptor blockade in CRC patients, identifying mutations that confer resistance to some targeted treatments may be useful to guide therapeutic decisions. In conclusion, the data presented herein show that NGS procedures on stool DNA represent a promising tool to detect genetic mutations that could be used in the future for diagnosis, monitoring, or treating CRC.

Screening for Colorectal Cancer Using a Multitarget Stool DNA Test: Modeling the Effect of the Intertest Interval on Clinical Effectiveness

BACKGROUND

A multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test was recently approved for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening for men and women, aged ≥ 50 years, at average risk of CRC. The guidelines currently recommend a 3-year interval for mt-sDNA testing in the absence of empirical data. We used clinical effectiveness modeling to project decreases in CRC incidence and related mortality associated with mt-sDNA screening to help inform interval setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Archimedes model (Archimedes Inc., San Francisco, CA) was used to conduct a 5-arm, virtual, clinical screening study of a population of 200,000 virtual individuals to compare the clinical effectiveness of mt-sDNA screening at 1-, 3-, and 5-year intervals compared with colonoscopy at 10-year intervals and no screening for a 30-year period. The study endpoints were the decrease in CRC incidence and related mortality of each strategy versus no screening. Cost-effectiveness ratios (US dollars per quality-adjusted life year [QALY]) of mt-sDNA intervals were calculated versus no screening.

RESULTS

Compared with 10-year colonoscopy, annual mt-sDNA testing produced similar reductions in CRC incidence (65% vs. 63%) and related mortality (73% vs. 72%). mt-sDNA testing at 3-year intervals reduced the CRC incidence by 57% and CRC mortality by 67%, and mt-sDNA testing at 5-year intervals reduced the CRC incidence by 52% and CRC mortality by 62%. At an average price of $600 per test, the annual, 3-year, and 5-year mt-sDNA screening costs would be $20,178, $11,313, and $7388 per QALY, respectively, compared with no screening.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that screening every 3 years using a multitarget mt-sDNA test provides reasonable performance at acceptable cost.

Diagnostic value of stool DNA testing for multiple markers of colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The diagnostic value of stool DNA (sDNA) testing for colorectal neoplasms remains controversial. To compensate for the lack of large-scale unbiased population studies, a meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic value of sDNA testing for multiple markers of colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced adenoma.

METHODS

The PubMed, Science Direct, Biosis Review, Cochrane Library and Embase databases were systematically searched in January 2012 without time restriction. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model using sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic OR (DOR), summary ROC curves, area under the curve (AUC), and 95% CIs as effect measures. Heterogeneity was measured using the χ(2) test and Q statistic; subgroup analysis was also conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 20 studies comprising 5876 individuals were eligible. There was no heterogeneity for CRC, but adenoma and advanced adenoma harboured considerable heterogeneity influenced by risk classification and various detection markers. Stratification analysis according to risk classification showed that multiple markers had a high DOR for the high-risk subgroups of both CRC (sensitivity 0.759 [95% CI 0.711 to 0.804]; specificity 0.883 [95% CI 0.846 to 0.913]; AUC 0.906) and advanced adenoma (sensitivity 0.683 [95% CI 0.584 to 0.771]; specificity 0.918 [95% CI 0.866 to 0.954]; AUC 0.946) but not for the average-risk subgroups of either. In the methylation subgroup, sDNA testing had significantly higher DOR for CRC (sensitivity 0.753 [95% CI 0.685 to 0.812]; specificity 0.913 [95% CI 0.860 to 0.950]; AUC 0.918) and advanced adenoma (sensitivity 0.623 [95% CI 0.527 to 0.712]; specificity 0.926 [95% CI 0.882 to 0.958]; AUC 0.910) compared with the mutation subgroup. There was no significant heterogeneity among studies for subgroup analysis.

CONCLUSION

sDNA testing for multiple markers had strong diagnostic significance for CRC and advanced adenoma in high-risk subjects. Methylation makers had more diagnostic value than mutation markers.

Multiplexed VeraCode bead-based serological immunoassay for colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in the US and Western world. Despite increased screening and advances in treatment, the mortality rate (ca. 50,000/year) and high national health-care burden for CRC are likely to remain high unless an effective non-invasive screening test for CRC is instituted for a large segment of the population. Blood-based protein biomarkers hold great promise for early disease diagnosis and personalized medicine; yet robust and reproducible multiplexing platforms and methodologies have lagged behind their genomic counterparts. Here, we report the development of a novel, multiplexed, hybrid immunoassay for CRC that is formatted on barcoded VeraCode™ micro-beads, which have until now only been used for genomic assays. The method combines a sandwich immunoassay format for detection of serum protein biomarkers with an antigen assay for autoantibody detection. The serum protein biomarkers CEA and GDF15 as well as autoantibodies to the p53 tumor associated antigen (TAA) were used to exemplify the method. This multiplex biomarker panel was configured to run on Illumina's holographically barcoded VeraCode™ micro-bead platform, which is capable of measuring hundreds of analytes simultaneously in a single well from small volumes of blood (<50 μL) using a 96-well industry standard microtiter plate. This novel use of the VeraCode™ micro-bead platform translates into a potentially low volume, high throughput, multiplexed assay for CRC, for the purposes of biomarker validation, as well as patient screening, diagnostics and prognostics. In an evaluation of a 186 patient sera training set (CRC and normal), we obtained a diagnostic sensitivity of 54% and a specificity of 98%. We anticipate that by expanding and refining the biomarkers in this initial panel, and performing more extensive clinical validations, such an assay could ultimately provide a basis for CRC population screening to complement the more invasive, expensive and low throughput (but highly sensitive and specific) colonoscopy.

Molecular events in primary and metastatic colorectal carcinoma: a review

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a heterogeneous disease, developing through a multipathway sequence of events guided by clonal selections. Pathways included in the development of CRC may be broadly categorized into (a) genomic instability, including chromosomal instability (CIN), microsatellite instability (MSI), and CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP), (b) genomic mutations including suppression of tumour suppressor genes and activation of tumour oncogenes, (c) microRNA, and (d) epigenetic changes. As cancer becomes more advanced, invasion and metastases are facilitated through the epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT), with additional genetic alterations. Despite ongoing identification of genetic and epigenetic markers and the understanding of alternative pathways involved in the development and progression of this disease, CRC remains the second highest cause of malignancy-related mortality in Canada. The molecular events that underlie the tumorigenesis of primary and metastatic colorectal carcinoma are detailed in this manuscript.

Novel molecular screening approaches in colorectal cancer

Traditional methods for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening have reduced rates of malignancy and death; however, low compliance and morbidities associated with invasive techniques have encouraged efforts for establishing equally effective, less invasive novel screening approaches. We review the current state of novel screening approaches in CRC to include CT colonography, fecal DNA, DNA methylation, micro-RNA, and protein and molecular markers.

Fecal molecular markers for colorectal cancer screening

Despite multiple screening techniques, including colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, radiological imaging, and fecal occult blood testing, colorectal cancer remains a leading cause of death. As these techniques improve, their sensitivity to detect malignant lesions is increasing; however, detection of precursor lesions remains problematic and has generated a lack of general acceptance for their widespread usage. Early detection by an accurate, noninvasive, cost-effective, simple-to-use screening technique is central to decreasing the incidence and mortality of this disease. Recent advances in the development of molecular markers in faecal specimens are encouraging for its use as a screening tool. Genetic mutations and epigenetic alterations that result from the carcinogenetic process can be detected by coprocytobiology in the colonocytes exfoliated from the lesion into the fecal matter. These markers have shown promising sensitivity and specificity in the detection of both malignant and premalignant lesions and are gaining popularity as a noninvasive technique that is representative of the entire colon. In this paper, we summarize the genetic and epigenetic fecal molecular markers that have been identified as potential targets in the screening of colorectal cancer.

Fecal DNA testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening: the ColoSure™ test

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Screening has been shown to be effective in reducing colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, and fecal occult blood tests are all recommended screening tests that have widespread availability. Nevertheless, many people do not receive the evidence-based recommended screening for colorectal cancer. Additional stool-based methods have been developed that offer more options for colorectal cancer screening, including a variety of fecal DNA tests. The only fecal DNA test that is currently available commercially in the United States is ColoSure(TM), which is marketed as a non-invasive test that detects an epigenetic marker (methylated vimentin) associated with colorectal cancer and pre-cancerous adenomas. We examined the published literature on the analytic validity, clinical validity, and clinical utility of ColoSure and we briefly summarized the current colorectal cancer screening guidelines regarding fecal DNA testing. We also addressed the public health implications of the test and contextual issues surrounding the integration of fecal DNA testing into current colorectal cancer screening strategies. The primary goal was to provide a basic overview of ColoSure and identify gaps in knowledge and evidence that affect the recommendation and adoption of the test in colorectal cancer screening strategies.

A simplified, noninvasive stool DNA test for colorectal cancer detection

BACKGROUND

As a noninvasive colorectal cancer (CRC) screening test, a multi-marker first generation stool DNA (sDNA V 1.0) test is superior to guaiac-based fecal occult blood tests. An improved sDNA assay (version 2), utilizing only two markers, hypermethylated vimentin gene (hV) and a two site DNA integrity assay (DY), demonstrated in a training set (phase 1a) an even higher sensitivity (88%) for CRC with a specificity of 82%.

AIM

To validate in an independent set of patients (phase 1b) the sensitivity and specificity of sDNA version 2 for CRC.

METHODS

Forty-two patients with CRC and 241 subjects with normal colonoscopy (NC) provided stool samples, to which they immediately added DNA stabilizing buffer, and mailed their specimen to the laboratory. DNA was purified using gel-based capture, and analyzed for hV and DY using methods identical to those previously published.

RESULTS

Using the same cutpoints as the 1a training set (N = 162; 40 CRCs, 122 normals), hV demonstrated a higher and DY a slightly lower sensitivity, for a combined sensitivity of hV + DY of 86%. Optimal cutpoints based on the combined phase 1a + 1b dataset (N = 445; 82 CRCs, 363 normals) yielded a CRC sensitivity of 83%. The vast majority of cancers were detected regardless of tumor stage, tumor location, or patient age. Assay specificity in the phase 1b dataset for hV, DY, and hV + DY was 82%, 85%, and 73%, respectively, using the phase 1a cutpoints. Optimal cutpoints based on the combined phase 1a + 1b dataset yield a specificity of 82%.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides validation of a simplified, improved sDNA test that incorporates only two markers and that demonstrates high sensitivity (83%) and specificity (82%) for CRC. Test performance is highly reproducible in a large set of patients. The use of only two markers will make the test easier to perform, reduce the cost, and facilitate distribution to local laboratories.

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

In the United States, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer diagnosed among men and women and the second leading cause of death from cancer. CRC largely can be prevented by the detection and removal of adenomatous polyps, and survival is significantly better when CRC is diagnosed while still localized. In 2006 to 2007, the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology came together to develop consensus guidelines for the detection of adenomatous polyps and CRC in asymptomatic average-risk adults. In this update of each organization's guidelines, screening tests are grouped into those that primarily detect cancer early and those that can detect cancer early and also can detect adenomatous polyps, thus providing a greater potential for prevention through polypectomy. When possible, clinicians should make patients aware of the full range of screening options, but at a minimum they should be prepared to offer patients a choice between a screening test that primarily is effective at early cancer detection and a screening test that is effective at both early cancer detection and cancer prevention through the detection and removal of polyps. It is the strong opinion of these 3 organizations that colon cancer prevention should be the primary goal of screening.

As tests evolve and costs of cancer care rise: reappraising stool-based screening for colorectal neoplasia

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer screening and treatment are rapidly evolving. Aims To reappraise stool-based colorectal cancer screening in light of changing test performance characteristics, lower test cost and increasing colorectal cancer care costs.

METHODS

Using a Markov model, we compared faecal DNA testing every 3 years, annual faecal occult blood testing or immunochemical testing, and colonoscopy every 10 years.

RESULTS

In the base case, faecal occult blood testing and faecal immunochemical testing gained life-years/person and cost less than no screening. Faecal DNA testing version 1.1 at $300 (the current PreGen Plus test) gained 5323 life-years/100 000 persons at $16 900/life-year gained and faecal DNA testing version 2 (enhanced test) gained 5795 life-years/100 000 persons at $15 700/life-year gained vs. no screening. In the base case and most sensitivity analyses, faecal occult blood testing and faecal immunochemical testing were preferred to faecal DNA testing. Faecal DNA testing version 2 cost $100 000/life-year gained vs. faecal immunochemical testing when per-cycle adherence with faecal immunochemical testing was 22%. Faecal immunochemical testing with excellent adherence was superior to colonoscopy every 10 years.

CONCLUSIONS

As novel biological therapies increase colorectal cancer treatment costs, faecal occult blood testing and faecal immunochemical testing could become cost-saving. The cost-effectiveness of faecal DNA testing compared with no screening has improved, but faecal occult blood testing and faecal immunochemical testing are preferred to faecal DNA testing when patient adherence is high. Faecal immunochemical testing may be comparable to colonoscopy every 10 years in persons adhering to yearly testing.

Colonography by CT, MRI and PET/CT combined with conventional colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening and staging

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a leading cancer killer worldwide. But the disease is both curable and preventable at an early stage. Regular CRC cancer screening has been shown to reduce the risk of dying from CRC. However, the importance of large-scale screening is only now starting to be appreciated. This article reviews a variety of imaging procedures available for detecting ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD), polyps and CRC in their early stage and also presents details on various screening options. Detecting, staging and re-staging of patients with CRC also require multimodality, multistep imaging approaches. Staging and re-staging with conventional colonoscopy (CC), computer tomography colonography (CTC), magnetic resonance colonography (MRC) and positron emission tomography/computer tomography colonography (PET/CTC) are of paramount importance in determining the most appropriate therapeutic method and in predicting the risk of tumor recurrence and overall prognosis. The advantages and limitations of these modalities are also discussed.

DNA stool test for colorectal cancer: hypermethylation of the secreted frizzled-related protein-1 gene

PURPOSE

To investigate a potential mode of noninvasive screening for colorectal cancer, we evaluated the hypermethylation of the secreted frizzled-related protein-1 gene promoter in human stool DNA.

METHODS

In stool samples from 36 patients with colorectal neoplasia (7 adenoma, 29 colorectal cancer) and 17 healthy control subjects, isolated DNA was treated with sodium bisulfite and analyzed by methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction with primers specific for methylated or unmethylated promoter sequences of the secreted frizzled-related protein-1 gene.

RESULTS

Hypermethylation of the secreted frizzled-related protein-1 promoter was present in the stool DNA of patients with adenoma and colorectal cancer. A sensitivity of 89 percent and specificity of 86 percent were achieved in the detection of colorectal neoplasia. The difference in hypermethylation status of the secreted frizzled-related protein-1 promoter between the patients with colorectal neoplasia and the control group was statistically highly significant (P < 0.001). Adenoma and early tumor Stage I (International Union Against Cancer) displayed both unmethylated and methylated secreted frizzled-related protein-1 promoter sequences, whereas advanced tumor stages showed only methylated secreted frizzled-related protein-1 (P = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate that this DNA stool test of hypermethylation of the secreted frizzled-related protein-1 promoter is a sensitive and specific method. It has the potential of a clinically useful test for the early detection of colorectal cancer.