| Literature DB >> 29090038 |
Laura Moody1, Hongshan He2, Yuan-Xiang Pan1,3,4, Hong Chen1,3.
Abstract
The screening and diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC) currently relies heavily on invasive endoscopic techniques as well as imaging and antigen detection tools. More accessible and reliable biomarkers are necessary for early detection in order to expedite treatment and improve patient outcomes. Recent studies have indicated that levels of specific microRNA (miRNA) are altered in CRC; however, measuring miRNA in biological samples has proven difficult, given the complicated and lengthy PCR-based procedures used by most laboratories. In this manuscript, we examine the potential of miRNA as CRC biomarkers, summarize the methods that have commonly been employed to quantify miRNA, and focus on novel strategies that can improve or replace existing technology for feasible implementation in a clinical setting. These include isothermal amplification techniques that can potentially eliminate the need for specialized thermocycling equipment. Additionally, we propose the use of near-infrared (NIR) probes which can minimize autofluorescence and photobleaching and streamline quantification without tedious sample processing. We suggest that novel miRNA quantification tools will be necessary to encourage new discoveries and facilitate their translation to clinical practice.Entities:
Keywords: Colorectal cancer; Diagnosis; Isothermal; Near-infrared (NIR); Optical imaging; Ytterbium; miRNA
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29090038 PMCID: PMC5655825 DOI: 10.1186/s13148-017-0420-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Epigenetics ISSN: 1868-7075 Impact factor: 6.551
Current CRC screening methods
| Tool | Blood or stool | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Advantages | Limitations | Citation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Colonoscopy | Invasive | 75–93 | 100 | • Well validated and widely accepted | • Requires expertise to perform/interpret | [ |
| Sigmoidoscopy | Invasive | 77–84 | 84 | • Typically does not require sedation | • Requires expertise to perform/interpret | [ |
| Fecal occult blood test (FOBT) | Stool | 50 | 91–98 | • Inexpensive | • Low sensitivity | [ |
| Fecal immunochemical test (FIT) | Stool | 93 | 90 | • Inexpensive | • Not as sensitive to colorectal neoplasia | [ |
| Cologuard | Stool | 92–98 | 90 | • Inexpensive | • Not as sensitive to colorectal neoplasia | [ |
| Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) | Blood | 74–80 | 70–95 | • Easy to perform | • Cannot detect early stage CRC | [ |
| Epi proColon | Blood | 66–68 | 91 | • Easy to perform | • Low sensitivity | [ |
Potential miRNA biomarkers for CRC screening
| miRNA | Blood or stool | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Citation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| miR-92a | Blood and stool | 72–79 (blood) | 59–69 (blood) | [ |
| miR-20a | Blood and stool | 46 (blood) | 73 (blood) | [ |
| miR-21 | Blood and stool | 62–85 (blood) | 79–88 (blood) | [ |
| miR-221 | Blood and stool | 86 (blood) | 41 (blood) | [ |
| miR-18a | Stool | 61 | 69 | [ |
| miR-135b | Stool | 78 | 68 | [ |
| miR-144* | Stool | 74 | 87 | [ |
| miR-199a-3p | Blood | 48 | 75 | [ |
| miR-155 | Blood | 58 | 95 | [ |
| miR-183 | Blood | 74 | 89 | [ |
| miR-29a | Blood | 53–65 | 85–93 | [ |
| miR-29b | Blood | 61 | 73 | [ |
| miR-210 | Blood | 75 | 74 | [ |
| miR-196b | Blood | 63 | 87 | [ |
| miR-139-3p | Blood | 97 | 98 | [ |
| miR-622 | Blood | 88 | 64 | [ |
| miR-506 | Blood | 61 | 77 | [ |
| miR-4316 | Blood | 75 | 77 | [ |
miRNA quantification technology
| Technology | Advantages | Limitations | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| qPCR | • Current gold standard for sensitivity and specificity | • No genome-wide coverage | [ |
| Microarray | • Commercially available reagents | • Specific probes | [ |
| NGS | • Genome-wide coverage | • Complicated, non-standardized data analysis | [ |
| Isothermal amplification | • No need for thermocycling equipment | • Disadvantages are technique-specific (see below) | [ |
| • Exponential amplification | • High sensitivity | • May require a nicking enzyme, which complicates primer design | [ |
| • Rolling circle amplification | • 1 primer | • Requires 2 enzymes (polymerase and ligase) | [ |
| • Duplex-specific nuclease signal amplification | • High specificity | • Enzyme is not readily available | [ |
| • Hybridization chain reaction | • No polymerase | • Linear amplification only | [ |
| Near-infrared technology | • No autofluoresence | • Lanthanide probes are not yet commercially available and must be optimized | [ |
Fig. 1Summary of isothermal amplification techniques. a Exponential amplification using a nicking enzyme. b Exponential amplification without nicking enzyme. c Rolling circle amplification. d Duplex-specific nuclease amplification. e Hybridization chain reaction
Fig. 2Working principle of linear FRET probes for nuclei acid detection. Two oligos are designed to base pair with the target RNA at adjacent sequences. One oligo is labeled with a donor chromophore at the 3′ end (Donor Probe). The other oligo is labeled with an acceptor chromophore at the 5′ end of the sequence (Acceptor Probe). Once the two oligos anneal to the target RNA, the chromophores are brought into proximity. Now, under light illumination, the donor probe will transfer energy to the acceptor probe and emit in NIR spectrum