9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Epi proColon® 2.0 CE: A Blood-Based Screening Test for Colorectal Cancer

      ,
      Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy
      Springer Science and Business Media LLC

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Epi proColon® 2.0 CE is a blood-based test designed to aid in the early detection of colorectal cancer. The test comprises a qualitative assay for the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) detection of methylated Septin9 DNA, the presence of which is associated with colorectal cancer: however, positive results should be verified by colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy. Epi proColon® 2.0 CE discriminated between patients with colorectal cancer and healthy controls with high clinical sensitivity and specificity in pivotal case-control studies. The sensitivity of the test did not appear to be affected by the tumour location or by patient age or gender. In addition, limited data suggest that Epi proColon® 2.0 CE discriminated between patients with colorectal cancer and healthy controls with higher sensitivity and generally similar specificity to that of the faecal immunochemical test, and with higher sensitivity and specificity to that of the guaiac-based faecal occult blood test (statistical data not available). In an observational study, most patients who refused colonoscopy for screening accepted a non-invasive test option as an alternative, and preferred Epi proColon® 2.0 CE over a stool-based test. Large prospective trials of Epi proColon® 2.0 CE in a screening setting will be required to further elucidate the cost-effectiveness of the test. Nevertheless, currently available data suggests that Epi proColon® 2.0 CE has the potential to be a sensitive and convenient screening option for patients refusing screening by colonoscopy.

          Related collections

          Most cited references9

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          DNA methylation biomarkers for blood-based colorectal cancer screening.

          Sensitive, specific blood-based tests are difficult to develop unless steps are taken to maximize performance characteristics at every stage of marker discovery and development. We describe a sieving strategy for identifying high-performing marker assays that detect colorectal cancer (CRC)-specific methylated DNA in plasma. We first used restriction enzyme-based discovery methods to identify marker candidates with obviously different methylation patterns in CRC tissue and nonpathologic tissue. We then used a selection process incorporating microarrays and/or real-time PCR analysis of tissue samples to further test marker candidates for maximum methylation in CRC tissue and minimum amplification in tissues from both healthy individuals and patients with other diseases. Real-time assays of 3 selected markers were validated with plasma samples from 133 CRC patients and 179 healthy control individuals in the same age range. Restriction enzyme-based testing identified 56 candidate markers. This group was reduced to 6 with microarray and real-time PCR testing. Three markers, TMEFF2, NGFR, and SEPT9, were tested with plasma samples. TMEFF2 methylation was detected in 65% [95% confidence interval, 56%-73%] of plasma samples from CRC patients and not detected in 69% (62%-76%) of the controls. The corresponding results for NGFR were 51% (42%-60%) and 84% (77%-89%); for SEPT9, the values were 69% (60%-77%) and 86% (80%-91%). The stringent criteria applied at all steps of the selection and validation process enabled successful identification and ranking of blood-based marker candidates.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Tumor markers in colorectal cancer, gastric cancer and gastrointestinal stromal cancers: European group on tumor markers 2014 guidelines update

            Biomarkers currently play an important role in the detection and management of patients with several different types of gastrointestinal cancer, especially colorectal, gastric, gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ) adenocarcinomas and gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). The aim of this article is to provide updated and evidence-based guidelines for the use of biomarkers in the different gastrointestinal malignancies. Recommended biomarkers for colorectal cancer include an immunochemical-based fecal occult blood test in screening asymptomatic subjects ≥50 years of age for neoplasia, serial CEA levels in postoperative surveillance of stage II and III patients who may be candidates for surgical resection or systemic therapy in the event of distant metastasis occurring, K-RAS mutation status for identifying patients with advanced disease likely to benefit from anti-EGFR therapeutic antibodies and microsatellite instability testing as a first-line screen for subjects with Lynch syndrome. In advanced gastric or GOJ cancers, measurement of HER2 is recommended in selecting patients for treatment with trastuzumab. For patients with suspected GIST, determination of KIT protein should be used as a diagnostic aid, while KIT mutational analysis may be used for treatment planning in patients with diagnosed GISTs.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Detection of Methylated SEPT9 in Plasma Is a Reliable Screening Method for Both Left- and Right-Sided Colon Cancers

              Background Methylated Septin 9 (SEPT9) is a sensitive biomarker for colorectal cancer (CRC) from peripheral blood. However, its relationship to cancer localization, guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) have not been described. Methodology/Principal Findings Plasma samples were collected for SEPT9 analysis from patients with no evidence of disease (NED) (n = 92) before colonoscopy and CRC (n = 92) before surgical treatment. DNA was isolated and bisulfite-converted using Epi proColon kit 2.0. Qualitative determination was performed using Epi proColon 2.0 RT-PCR assay. Samples for gFOBT and CEA analysis were collected from NED (n = 17 and 27, respectively) and CRC (n = 22 and 27, respectively). SEPT9 test was positive in 15.2% (14/92) of NED and 95.6% (88/92) of CRC, including 100% (67/67) from stage II to stage IV CRC and 84% (21/25) of stage I CRC when a sample was called positive if 1 out of 3 PCR replicates was positive. In a second analysis (2 out of 3 PCR replicates) specificity improved to 99% (91/92) of NEDs, at a sensitivity of 79.3% (73/92) of SEPT9 positives in CRC. gFOBT was positive in 29.4% (5/17) of NED and 68.2% (15/22) of CRC and elevated CEA levels were detected in 14.8% (4/27) of NED and 51.8% (14/27) of CRC. Both SEPT9 (84.8%) and CEA (85.2%) showed higher specificity than gFOBT (70.6%). SEPT9 was positive in 96.4% (54/56) of left-sided colon cancer (LSCC) cases and 94.4% (34/36) of right-sided colon cancer (RSCC) cases. gFOBT was positive in 83.3% (10/12) of cases with LSCC and 50% (5/10) of cases with RSCC, elevated CEA was detected 60% (9/15) of LSCC and 41.7% (5/12) of RSCC. Conclusions/Significance The high degree of sensitivity and specificity of SEPT9 in plasma makes it a better method to detect CRC than gFOBT and CEA, even for the more difficult to detect RSCC.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy
                Mol Diagn Ther
                Springer Science and Business Media LLC
                1177-1062
                1179-2000
                April 2017
                February 2 2017
                April 2017
                : 21
                : 2
                : 225-232
                Article
                10.1007/s40291-017-0259-y
                28155091
                000d1241-4795-402b-aa5a-afa1af4a018b
                © 2017

                http://www.springer.com/tdm

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article