Joel Petit1, Georgia Carroll2, Tiffany Gould2, Peter Pockney3, Matthew Dun4, Rodney J Scott5. 1. Division of Surgery, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia; School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia; Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, Australia; School of Biomedical Sciences and Pharmacy, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia. Electronic address: joel.petit@newcastle.edu.au. 2. Division of Surgery, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia; School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia; Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, Australia. 3. Division of Surgery, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia; School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia. 4. School of Biomedical Sciences and Pharmacy, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia. 5. Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, Australia; School of Biomedical Sciences and Pharmacy, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia; Pathology North, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) has emerged as an excellent candidate for the future of liquid biopsies for many cancers. There has been growing interest in blood-based liquid biopsy because of the potential of ctDNA to produce a noninvasive test that can be used for: the diagnosis of colorectal cancer, monitoring therapy response, and providing information on overall prognosis. The aim of this review was to collate and explore the current evidence regarding ctDNA as a screening tool for colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: A systematic review of published articles in English over the past 20 y was performed using Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases on May 23, 2017. After a full-text review, a total of 69 studies were included. Two assessment tools were used to review and compare the methodological quality of these studies. RESULTS: Among the 69 studies included, 17 studies reviewed total cfDNA, whereas six studies looked at the DNA integrity index and 15 focused on ctDNA. There were a total of 40 studies that reviewed methylated cfDNA with 19 of these focussing specifically on SEPT9. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review indicate that methylated epigenetic ctDNA markers are perhaps the most promising candidates for a blood-based CRC-screening modality using cell-free (cf) DNA. Methylated cfDNA appears to be less specific for CRC compared to ctDNA; however, they have demonstrated good sensitivity for early-stage CRC. Further research is required to determine which methylated cfDNA markers are the most accurate when applied to large cohorts of patients. In addition, reliable comparison of results across multiple studies would benefit from standardization of methodology for DNA extraction and PCR techniques in the future.
BACKGROUND: Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) has emerged as an excellent candidate for the future of liquid biopsies for many cancers. There has been growing interest in blood-based liquid biopsy because of the potential of ctDNA to produce a noninvasive test that can be used for: the diagnosis of colorectal cancer, monitoring therapy response, and providing information on overall prognosis. The aim of this review was to collate and explore the current evidence regarding ctDNA as a screening tool for colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: A systematic review of published articles in English over the past 20 y was performed using Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases on May 23, 2017. After a full-text review, a total of 69 studies were included. Two assessment tools were used to review and compare the methodological quality of these studies. RESULTS: Among the 69 studies included, 17 studies reviewed total cfDNA, whereas six studies looked at the DNA integrity index and 15 focused on ctDNA. There were a total of 40 studies that reviewed methylated cfDNA with 19 of these focussing specifically on SEPT9. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review indicate that methylated epigenetic ctDNA markers are perhaps the most promising candidates for a blood-based CRC-screening modality using cell-free (cf) DNA. Methylated cfDNA appears to be less specific for CRC compared to ctDNA; however, they have demonstrated good sensitivity for early-stage CRC. Further research is required to determine which methylated cfDNA markers are the most accurate when applied to large cohorts of patients. In addition, reliable comparison of results across multiple studies would benefit from standardization of methodology for DNA extraction and PCR techniques in the future.
Authors: Veronika Voronova; Peter Glybochko; Andrey Svistunov; Viktor Fomin; Philipp Kopylov; Peter Tzarkov; Alexey Egorov; Evgenij Gitel; Aligeydar Ragimov; Alexander Boroda; Elena Poddubskaya; Marina Sekacheva Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2020-05-22 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Tomasz Sawicki; Monika Ruszkowska; Anna Danielewicz; Ewa Niedźwiedzka; Tomasz Arłukowicz; Katarzyna E Przybyłowicz Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2021-04-22 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Arvind Dasari; Van K Morris; Carmen J Allegra; Chloe Atreya; Al B Benson; Patrick Boland; Ki Chung; Mehmet S Copur; Ryan B Corcoran; Dustin A Deming; Andrea Dwyer; Maximilian Diehn; Cathy Eng; Thomas J George; Marc J Gollub; Rachel A Goodwin; Stanley R Hamilton; Jaclyn F Hechtman; Howard Hochster; Theodore S Hong; Federico Innocenti; Atif Iqbal; Samuel A Jacobs; Hagen F Kennecke; James J Lee; Christopher H Lieu; Heinz-Josef Lenz; O Wolf Lindwasser; Clara Montagut; Bruno Odisio; Fang-Shu Ou; Laura Porter; Kanwal Raghav; Deborah Schrag; Aaron J Scott; Qian Shi; John H Strickler; Alan Venook; Rona Yaeger; Greg Yothers; Y Nancy You; Jason A Zell; Scott Kopetz Journal: Nat Rev Clin Oncol Date: 2020-07-06 Impact factor: 65.011