Search

Abstract Background Colorectal cancer is a public health issue and was the third leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide in 2022. Early diagnosis can improve prognosis, making screening a central part of colorectal cancer management. Blood-based screening, diagnosis and follow-up of colorectal cancer patients are possible with the study of cell-free circulating tumor DNA. This study aimed to identify novel DNA methylation biomarkers of colorectal cancer that can be used for the follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer. Methods A DNA methylation profile was established in the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database (n = 507) using bioinformatics analysis and subsequently confirmed using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database (n = 348). The in silico profile was then validated on local tissue and cell-free DNA samples using methylation-specific digital PCR in colorectal cancer patients (n = 35) and healthy donors (n = 35). Results The DNA methylation of COL25A1 and METAP1D was predicted to be a colorectal cancer biomarker by bioinformatics analysis (ROC AUC = 1, 95% CI [0.999–1]). The two biomarkers were confirmed with tissue samples, and the combination of COL25A1 and METAP1D yielded 49% sensitivity and 100% specificity for cell-free DNA. Conclusion Bioinformatics analysis of public databases revealed COL25A1 and METAP1D DNA methylation as clinically applicable liquid biopsies DNA methylation biomarkers. The specificity implies an excellent positive predictive value for follow-up, and the high sensitivity and relative noninvasiveness of a blood-based test make these biomarkers compatible with colorectal cancer screening. However, the clinical impact of these biomarkers in colorectal cancer screening and follow-up needs to be established in further prospective studies.

Abstract Our current view of DNA methylation processes is strongly moving: First, even if it was generally admitted that DNMT3A and DNMT3B are associated with de novo methylation and DNMT1 is associated with inheritance DNA methylation, these distinctions are now not so clear. Secondly, since one decade, many partners of DNMTs have been involved in both the regulation of DNA methylation activity and DNMT recruitment on DNA. The high diversity of interactions and the combination of these interactions let us to subclass the different DNMT-including complexes. For example, the DNMT3L/DNMT3A complex is mainly related to de novo DNA methylation in embryonic states, whereas the DNMT1/PCNA/UHRF1 complex is required for maintaining global DNA methylation following DNA replication. On the opposite to these unspecific DNA methylation machineries (no preferential DNA sequence), some recently identified DNMT-including complexes are recruited on specific DNA sequences. The coexistence of both types of DNA methylation (un/specific) suggests a close cooperation and an orchestration between these systems to maintain genome and epigenome integrities. Deregulation of these systems can lead to pathologic disorders.