Patient perceptions of stool DNA testing for pan-digestive cancer screening: A survey questionnaire

Primary Care Patient Interest in Multi-Cancer Early Detection for Cancer Screening

Multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests are being developed, but little is known about patient receptivity to their use for cancer screening. The current study assessed patient interest in such testing. Our team conducted a prospective, observational study among primary care patients in a large, urban health system. They were asked to complete a telephone survey that briefly described a new blood test in development to identify multiple types of cancer, but was not currently recommended or covered by insurance. The survey included items to assess respondent background characteristics, perceptions about MCED testing, and interest in having such an MCED test. We also used multivariable analyses to identify factors associated with patient interest in test use. In 2023, we surveyed 159 (32%) of 500 identified patients. Among respondents, 125 (79%) reported a high level of interest in having an MCED test. Interest was not associated with personal background characteristics, but was positively associated with the following expectations: testing would be recommended for cancer screening, be convenient, and be effective in finding early-stage disease (OR = 11.70, 95% CI: 4.02, 34.04, p < 0.001). Research is needed to assess patient interest and actual uptake when detailed information on testing is presented in routine care.

Shifting the Cancer Screening Paradigm: The Rising Potential of Blood-Based Multi-Cancer Early Detection Tests

Cancer remains a leading cause of death worldwide, partly owing to late detection which entails limited and often ineffective therapeutic options. Most cancers lack validated screening procedures, and the ones available disclose several drawbacks, leading to low patient compliance and unnecessary workups, adding up the costs to healthcare systems. Hence, there is a great need for innovative, accurate, and minimally invasive tools for early cancer detection. In recent years, multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests emerged as a promising screening tool, combining molecular analysis of tumor-related markers present in body fluids with artificial intelligence to simultaneously detect a variety of cancers and further discriminate the underlying cancer type. Herein, we aim to provide a highlight of the variety of strategies currently under development concerning MCED, as well as the major factors which are preventing clinical implementation. Although MCED tests depict great potential for clinical application, large-scale clinical validation studies are still lacking.

Factors Likely to Affect the Uptake of Genomic Approaches to Cancer Screening in Primary Care: A Scoping Review

Genomic tests are being developed for use in cancer screening. As most screening is offered in primary care settings, primary care provider and patient perceptions of such tests are likely to affect uptake. We conducted a scoping review to synthesize information on factors likely to affect patient and provider use of biospecimen collection and analysis for cancer screening, methods referred to as liquid biopsy or multi-cancer early detection (MCED) testing when used to detect multiple cancers. We ultimately identified 7 articles for review and analyzed them for major themes. None reported on primary care provider perspectives. Six articles focused on patient perceptions about testing for a single cancer (colorectal), and 1 reported on patient views related to testing for multiple cancers. Factors favoring this type of testing included its non-invasiveness, and the perceived safety, convenience, and effectiveness of testing. There is a dearth of information in the literature on primary care provider perceptions about liquid biopsy and MCED testing. The limited information on patient perceptions suggests that they are receptive to such tests. Research on primary care provider and patient test-related knowledge, attitudes, and behavior is needed to guide future implementation in primary care settings.

Multitarget stool DNA test compared with fecal occult blood test for colorectal cancer screening

Patient screening is important for early diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC). The present study aimed to compare the multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test with the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) for CRC screening. A total of 151 individuals were screened using colonoscopy, mt-sDNA and FOBT for the detection of CRC and adenoma. The results of the mt-sDNA test and FOBT were compared with colonoscopy to examine their sensitivity and specificity. Subsequently, the sensitivity and specificity of the mt-sDNA test were compared with those of FOBT in CRC and large adenoma. Stool samples were collected from patients with CRC (n=50) or large adenoma (n=51), as well as from normal controls (n=50). The mt-sDNA test outperformed FOBT in detecting CRC with a sensitivity of 90.0% (45/50) vs. 42.0% (21/50), advanced adenoma with a sensitivity of 70.6% (36/51) vs. 19.6% (10/51), stage I–III CRC with a sensitivity of 91.9% (34/37) vs. 29.7% (11/37), and stage IV CRC with a sensitivity of 84.6% (11/13) vs. 76.9% (10/13). In addition, the mt-sDNA test exhibited a specificity of 94.0% (47/50) in detecting CRC, which was superior to FOBT with a specificity of 90.0% (45/50). Therefore, the mt-sDNA test may have higher sensitivity and specificity compared with FOBT in diagnosing both CRC and advanced adenoma.

Cross-sectional adherence with the multi-target stool DNA test for colorectal cancer screening: Real-world data from a large cohort of older adults

Objective

To determine cross-sectional adherence with the multi-target stool DNA test used for colorectal cancer screening in a large, fully insured Medicare population.

Methods

All patients aged 65–85 with a valid multi-target stool DNA test order from 1 September 2016 to 31 August 2017 identified from the Exact Sciences Laboratories (Madison, WI; sole-source national multi-target stool DNA test provider) database were evaluated for test adherence. Cross-sectional adherence, defined as multi-target stool DNA test completion within 365 days from order date, was analyzed overall and by time to adherence, as well as by available patient (age, sex, test order date, Medicare coverage type) and provider (specialty, year of first multi-target stool DNA test order, multi-target stool DNA test order frequency, and practice location) factors.

Results

Among 368,494 Medicare beneficiaries (64% female), overall cross-sectional adherence was 71%. Cumulative adherence rates increased more rapidly at 30 (44%) and 60 (65%) days, followed by more gradual increases at 90 (67%), 180 (70%), and 365 (71%) days. By provider specialty, primary care clinicians represented a higher percentage of multi-target stool DNA orders than gastroenterologists (88% vs. 6%), but had a lower associated patient adherence rate (71% vs. 78%).

Conclusions

In this large, national sample of Medicare insured older adults, nearly three-quarters of patients adhered with a multi-target stool DNA order for colorectal cancer screening. These real-world data should inform further clinical and population health applications, reimbursement model simulations, and guideline-endorsed colorectal cancer screening strategies adherence.

Fecal DNA Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Fecal (or stool) DNA examination is a noninvasive strategy recommended by several medical professional societies for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in average-risk individuals. Fecal DNA tests assay stool for human DNA shed principally from the colon. Colonic lesions such as adenomatous and serrated polyps and cancers exfoliate cells containing neoplastically altered DNA that may be detected by sensitive assays that target specific genetic and epigenetic biomarkers to discriminate neoplastic lesions from non-neoplastic tissue. Cross-sectional validation studies confirmed initial case-control studies' assessment of performance of an optimized multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test, leading to approval by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2014. Compared to colonoscopy, mt-sDNA showed sensitivity of 92% for detection of CRC, much higher than the 74% sensitivity of another recommended noninvasive strategy, fecal immunochemical testing (FIT). Detections of advanced adenomas and sessile serrated polyps were higher with mt-sDNA than FIT (42% versus 24% and 42% versus 5%, respectively), but overall specificity for all lesions was lower (87% versus 95%). The mt-sDNA test increases patient life-years gained in CRC screening simulations, but its cost relative to other screening strategies needs to be reduced by 80-90% or its sensitivity for polyp detection enhanced to be cost effective. Noninvasive CRC screening strategies such as fecal DNA, however, have the potential to significantly increase national screening rates due to their noninvasive nature and convenience for patients.

What do people think about genetics? A systematic review

Genetics is increasingly becoming a part of modern medical practice. How people think about genetics' use in medicine and their daily lives is therefore essential. Earlier studies indicated mixed attitudes about genetics. However, this might be changing. Using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) as a guideline, we initially reviewed 442 articles that looked at awareness, attitudes, knowledge, and perception of risks among the general and targeted recruitment populations. After fitting our criteria (from the last 5 years, conducted in the USA, non-provider populations, quantitative results reported, and assessed participants 18 years and older), finally 51 eligible articles were thematically coded and presented in this paper. Awareness is reported as relatively high in the studies reviewed. Attitudes are mixed but with higher proportions reporting positive attitudes towards genetic testing and counseling. Self-reported knowledge is reasonably high, specifically with the effects of specific programs developed to raise knowledge levels of the general and targeted recruited populations. Perception of risk is somewhat aligned with actual risk. With the reasonable positive reports of genetic awareness and knowledge, there is similar positive attitude and perception of risk, supporting the need for continued dissemination of such knowledge. Given interest in incorporating community participation in genomic educational strategies, we provide this review as a baseline from which to launch community-specific educational supports and tools.

New insights into colorectal cancer screening and early detection tests

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common cancer in both men and women worldwide. Creating a diagnostic panel is necessary for early diagnosis which could lead to a better long-term survival in cancer patients. Colonoscopy every 10 years, starting at age 50, is the preferred CRC screening test. Many studies have been worked on potential diagnostic biomarkers of CRC. In this article, we described the recent evolutions in the development of CRC noninvasive screening assays. Recently, a multifunctional fecal DNA test has been available commercially in the USA. A few other US FDA-approved tests like Epi proColon® (Epigenomics AG, Berlin, Germany) are also available now. Although a new marker class for fecal occult blood test, a novel biomarker based on fecal bacteria in CRC patients and circulating tumor cells are under investigation, there is still a strong need to do more research for CRC screening strategies.

DNA methylation analysis of secreted frizzled-related protein 2 gene for the early detection of colorectal cancer in fecal DNA

Background:

The early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) with high sensitivity screening is essential for the reduction of cancer-specific mortality. Abnormally methylated genes that are responsible for the pathogenesis of cancers can be used as biomarkers for the detection of CRC. The methylation status of the secreted frizzled-related protein 2 (SFRP2) gene was evaluated for their use as a marker in the noninvasive detection of CRC.

Materials and Methods:

Methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction was performed to analyze the promoter CpG methylation of SFRP2 in the fecal DNA of 25 patients with CRC and 25 individuals exhibiting normal colonoscopy results.

Results:

Promoter methylation levels of SFRP2 in CRC patients and in healthy controls were 60% and 8%, respectively. Methylation of the SFRP2 promoter in fecal DNA is associated with the presence of colorectal tumors.

Conclusion:

Hence, the detection of aberrantly methylated DNA in fecal samples may present a promising, noninvasive screening method for CRC.

Stool DNA methylation assays in colorectal cancer screening

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is fourth most common cancer in men and third in women worldwide. Developing a diagnostic panel of sensitive and specific biomarkers for the early detection of CRC is recognised as to be crucial for early initial diagnosis, which in turn leads to better long term survival. Most of the research on novel potential CRC biomarkers in the last 2 decades has been focussed on stool DNA analysis. In this paper, we describe the recent advances in non-invasive CRC screening and more specifically in molecular assays for aberrantly methylated BMP3 and NDRG4 promoter regions. In several research papers these markers showed superior rates for sensitivity and specificity in comparison to previously described assays. These tests detected the majority of adenomas ≥ 1 cm in size and the detection rates progressively increased with larger adenomas. The methylation status of the BMP3 and NDRG4 promoters demonstrated effective detection of neoplasms at all sites throughout the colon and was not affected by common clinical variables. Recently, a multitarget stool DNA test consisting of molecular assays for aberrantly methylated BMP3 and NDRG4 promoter regions, mutant KRAS and immunochemical assay for human haemoglobin has been made commercially available and is currently reimbursed in the United States. Although this is the most sensitive non-invasive CRC screening test, there is the need for further research in several areas - establishment of the best timeframe for repeated DNA stool testing; validation of the results in populations outside of North America; usefulness for surveillance and prognosis of patients; cost-effectiveness of DNA stool testing in real-life populations.