Search

Background and Aims Approximately 20-30% of colorectal cancers (CRC) arise from the serrated polyp pathway. CRC screening options have differential sensitivity to detect sessile serrated polyps (SSPs). We used the CRC-AIM model to assess how the detection of SSPs impacts predicted life-years gained (LYG), CRC incidence, and CRC mortality with multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening. Methods A simulated cohort of average-risk US individuals underwent triennial mt-sDNA or annual FIT screening between ages 45-75 years. SSP-attributed CRCs were modeled at 0% (base-case), 14.3%, 20%, and 30%, in combination with 4 adherence/attendance scenarios. S1: 100% stool-screening adherence/100% follow-up colonoscopy attendance after a positive stool-test. S2: reported stool-screening adherence (mt-sDNA=71%; FIT=43%)/100% follow-up colonoscopy attendance. S3: reported stool-screening adherence/reported follow-up colonoscopy attendance (mt-sDNA=72%; FIT=47%). S4: reported stool-screening adherence/72% follow-up colonoscopy attendance. Outcomes were per 1000 individuals. Sensitivity analyses used ranges of stool-screening adherence or follow-up attendance. Results At S1, S2, S3, and S4, LYG with FIT at base-case (0% SSP-attributed CRC) was 346.7, 279.3, 126.6, and 196.1, respectively, and with mt-sDNA was 324.6, 311.8, 215.8, and 215.8. Among the 4 adherence/attendance scenarios, modeling SSP-attributed CRCs decreased LYG by 4.9-20.9 with FIT and 2.0-5.1 with mt-sDNA. At S3 and 30% SSP-attributable CRCs, mt-sDNA had 95.1 more LYG, 21.5% greater CRC incidence reduction, and 22.2% greater CRC mortality reduction than FIT. Conclusions Incorporating SSPs and real-world adherence into the CRC-AIM modeling analyses yielded more practice-relevant estimates of CRC screening outcomes and should be applied in future studies to afford more appropriate assessment of comparative effectiveness estimates between guideline-endorsed screening options.

After 2 screen-setting studies showing high sensitivity for colorectal cancer and advanced precancerous lesions, multitarget stool DNA testing was endorsed by the US Preventative Services Task Force as a first-line colorectal cancer screening test. Uptake has increased exponentially since approval by the US Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Adherence to testing is approximately 70%. Patients with positive results have high diagnostic colonoscopy completion rates in single-center studies. The positive predictive value for colorectal neoplasia in postapproval studies is high. Next-generation test prototypes show promise to extend specificity gains while maintaining high sensitivity.

Purpose FIT-DNA test is supposed to be highly sensitive for advanced colorectal neoplasms and is advocated in some developed countries, but lack extensive use in developing countries. Methods A case control study on stool DNA test for colorectal neoplasms patients was conducted from March 2016 to October 2017 in China. We recruited CRC, colorectal neoplasms and normal controls from ambulatory patients and screening attendees in communities. The stool DNA was tested by a molecular panel similar as ColoGuard in addition to fecal immunochemical test(FIT) in a blinded manner. A risk scoring system was used to determine the positiveness of tests with histological diagnosis as its reference standard. Results Eligible subjects included 203 colorectal cancer (CRC), 49 advanced adenoma (AA), 156 non-advanced adenoma(NAA) and 431 normal controls(NC). The FIT-DNA kit detected 97.5% CRC (n = 198, 95% CI = 95.4–99.7) and 53.1% AA (n = 26, 95% CI = 39.1–67.0), with specificity of 89.1% (95% CI = 86.2–92.0) in NC and 88.1% (95% CI = 85.5–90.7) in non-advanced controls. The FIT embedded in the kit alone identified 94.6% (n = 192, 95% CI = 91.5–97.7) CRC and 36.7% AA (n = 18, 95% CI = 23.2–50.2). Consistency of KRAS mutation, BMP3 methylation, NDRG4 methylation in 26 paires stool DNA and CRC tumor DNA were 80.9%, 71.4% and 81.8%, respectively. Conclusion At the sacrifice of significantly decreased specificity, a FIT-DNA kit may has better sensitivity than FIT for predicting advanced colorectal adenoma, but not for predicting colorectal cancer. More evidences are needed for the extensive use of FIT-DNA testing.

International audience; The human gut microbiome can now be characterized in unprecedented detail by an approach based on high-throughput sequencing of total stool DNA, that we name quantitative metagenomics. Central to the approach is a catalog that lists all the genes of intestinal microbes that are known -9.9 millions, identified by the analysis of 1267 stool samples. Beyond the gene list, genetic units that carry them begun to be known; many of these correspond to bacterial species that were never isolated and cultured yet. Quantitative metagenomics allows developing powerful algorithms to diagnose a disease, monitor patients and identify individuals at risk to progress towards a disease. This lays ground for developing new approaches to better restore and even preserve the health by modulation of the altered microbiome, which contributes to promote or aggravate a disease.

To assess the accuracy of a multitarget stool DNA test (MT-sDNA) compared with fecal immunochemical testing for hemoglobin (FIT) for detection of screening-relevant colorectal neoplasia (SRN) in Alaska Native people, who have among the world's highest rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) and limited access to conventional screening approaches.We performed a prospective, cross-sectional study of asymptomatic Alaska Native adults aged 40-85 years and older undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopy between February 6, 2012, and August 7, 2014.Among 868 enrolled participants, 661 completed the study (403 [61%] women). Overall, SRN detection by MT-sDNA (49%) was superior to that by FIT (28%; P.001); in the screening group, SRN detection rates were 50% and 31%, respectively (P=.01). Multitarget stool DNA testing detected 62% of adenomas 2 cm or larger vs 29% by FIT (P=.05). Sensitivity by MT-sDNA increased with adenoma size (to 80% for lesions ≥3 cm; P=.01 for trend) and substantially exceeded FIT sensitivity at all adenoma sizes. For sessile serrated polyps larger than 1 cm (n=9), detection was 67% by MT-sDNA vs 11% by FIT (P=.07). For CRC (n=10), detection was 100% by MT-sDNA vs 80% by FIT (P=.48). Specificities were 93% and 96%, respectively (P=.03).The sensitivity of MT-sDNA for cancer and larger polyps was high and significantly greater than that of FIT for polyps of any size, while specificity was slightly higher with FIT. These findings could translate into high cumulative neoplasm detection rates on serial testing within a screening program. The MT-sDNA represents a potential strategy to expand CRC screening and reduce CRC incidence and mortality, especially where access to endoscopy is limited.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has been shown to reduce CRC incidence and mortality and is widely recommended. However, despite the demonstrated benefits of screening and ongoing efforts to improve screening rates, a large percentage of the population remains unscreened. Noninvasive stool based tests offer great opportunity to enhance screening uptake. The evidence supporting the use of both fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) and stool DNA (sDNA) has been growing rapidly and both tests are now commercially available for use. Other stool biomarkers (eg, RNA and protein based) are also actively under study both for use independently and as adjuncts to the currently available tests. This mini review provides current, state of the art knowledge about noninvasive stool based screening. It includes a more detailed examination of those tests currently in use (ie, FIT and sDNA) but also provides an overview of stool testing options under development (ie, protein and RNA).

Background Methylation-sensitive high-resolution melting (MS-HRM) is a new technique for assaying DNA methylation, but its feasibility for assaying stool in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) is unknown. Methods First, the MS-HRM and methylation-specific PCR (MSP) detection limits were tested. Second, the methylation statuses of SFRP2 and VIM were analyzed in stool samples by MS-HRM, and in matching tumor and normal colon tissues via bisulfite sequencing PCR (BSP). Third, a case–control study evaluated the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of MS-HRM relative to results obtained with MSP and the fecal immunochemical test (FIT). Finally, the linearity and reproducibility of MS-HRM were assessed. Results The detection limits of MS-HRM and MSP were 1% and 5%, respectively. The diagnostic sensitivities of MS-HRM (87.3%, 55/63) in stool and BSP in matching tumor tissue (92.1%, 58/63) were highly consistent (κ = 0.744). The MS-HRM assay detected 92.5% (37/40) methylation in CRCs, 94.4% (34/36) in advanced adenomas, and 8.8% (5/57) in normal controls. The results of MS-HRM analysis were stable and reliable and showed fairly good linearity for both SFRP2 (P Conclusions MS-HRM shows potential for CRC screening.

Assay of molecular markers in stool represents a promising noninvasive approach to screen colorectal cancer. Given that neoplasms exfoliate abundantly into the lumen and that DNA recovered from stool can be assayed with sensitive techniques, there is a strong biologic rationale to pursue this emerging technology. A challenge with DNA-based testing relates to the selection of markers. Because of the molecular heterogeneity of cancer, no single marker has yielded perfect sensitivity. Several combinations of markers in early stool assays have produced high detection rates of both colorectal cancer and advanced adenomas in selected patient groups, but observations from large representative populations are lacking at present. Potential expanded applications of stool DNA testing include detection of supracolonic aerodigestive cancers and of dysplasia in inflammatory bowel disease. Further marker discovery and technologic refinements should translate into improved test performance and fuel a continued evolution with this screening approach.

Background and Aims Multitarget stool DNA (MT-sDNA) testing is now approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for average-risk colorectal cancer screening. Trials leading to its approval used blinded colonoscopy as the reference standard. In the postapproval screen setting, the clinical performance and impact of MT-sDNA testing on unblinded colonoscopy has not been described. We measured the impact that knowledge of a positive MT-sDNA test result has on colonoscopy yield and quality. Methods The unblinded group comprised all patients with positive MT-sDNA results on screening from September 1, 2014 to September 30, 2015 at a single tertiary center. Off-label test patients were excluded. The blinded group included all MT-sDNA–positive participants in a preapproval screening study from the same center. Detailed colonoscopy findings and withdrawal times were recorded. Results There were 172 MT-sDNA–positive patients in the unblinded group and 72 in the blinded group. More total adenomatous/sessile serrated polyps (70% vs 53%, P = .013) and advanced neoplasms (28% vs 21%, P = .27) were detected in unblinded than in blinded groups. Median numbers of polyps detected were 2 (IQR, 1-4) and 1 (IQR, 0-2) in unblinded and blinded groups, respectively ( P = .0007). Among polyps detected, flat or slightly raised lesions in the right side of the colon were proportionately more frequent with unblinded (40%) than with blinded examinations (9%) ( P = .0017). Median withdrawal time was 19 minutes (IQR, 13-29) in the unblinded group compared with 13 minutes (IQR, 10-20) in the blinded group ( P = .0001). Conclusions Knowledge of a positive MT-sDNA result appears to have a beneficial impact on the diagnostic yield and quality of subsequent colonoscopy.