Cargando…
A cross‐sectional study comparing a blood test for methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 tumor‐derived DNA with CEA for detection of recurrent colorectal cancer
Recurrence will develop in 30–50% of colorectal cancer (CRC) cases despite apparent clearance following treatment. Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is the only guideline‐recommended blood test for monitoring cases for recurrence, but its sensitivity and specificity are suboptimal. This observational s...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5083729/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27726312 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.868 |
_version_ | 1782463266165882880 |
---|---|
author | Young, Graeme P. Pedersen, Susanne K. Mansfield, Scott Murray, David H. Baker, Rohan T. Rabbitt, Philippa Byrne, Susan Bambacas, Libby Hollington, Paul Symonds, Erin L. |
author_facet | Young, Graeme P. Pedersen, Susanne K. Mansfield, Scott Murray, David H. Baker, Rohan T. Rabbitt, Philippa Byrne, Susan Bambacas, Libby Hollington, Paul Symonds, Erin L. |
author_sort | Young, Graeme P. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Recurrence will develop in 30–50% of colorectal cancer (CRC) cases despite apparent clearance following treatment. Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is the only guideline‐recommended blood test for monitoring cases for recurrence, but its sensitivity and specificity are suboptimal. This observational study compared a novel 2‐gene (methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 DNA) blood test with CEA for detection of recurrent CRC. We conducted a paired comparison of the BCAT1/IKZF1 test with CEA (cut‐off 5 ng/mL) in blood from patients in remission after treatment for primary CRC and undergoing surveillance. Blood collected in the 12 months prior to or 3 months after complete investigational assessment of recurrence status were assayed and the results compared by McNemar's test. Of 397 patients enrolled, 220 underwent satisfactory assessment for recurrence and 122 had blood testing performed within the prescribed period. In 28 cases with recurrent CRC, CEA was positive in 9 (32%; 95% CI 16–52%) compared to 19 (68%; 95% CI 48–84%) positive for methylated BCAT1/IKZF1 (P = 0.002). All samples that were CEA positive were also BCAT1/IKZF1 positive. In 94 patients without clinically detectable recurrence, CEA was positive in 6 (6%, 95% CI 2–13%) and BCAT1/IKZF1 in 12 (13%, 95% CI 7–21%), P = 0.210. The odds ratio of a positive CEA test for recurrence was 6.9 (95% CI 2–22) compared to 14.4 (5–39) for BCAT1/IKZF1. The BCAT1/IKZF1 test was more sensitive for recurrence than CEA and the odds of recurrence given a positive test was twice that of CEA. The BCAT1/IKZF1 test should be further considered for monitoring cases for recurrence. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5083729 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-50837292016-10-31 A cross‐sectional study comparing a blood test for methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 tumor‐derived DNA with CEA for detection of recurrent colorectal cancer Young, Graeme P. Pedersen, Susanne K. Mansfield, Scott Murray, David H. Baker, Rohan T. Rabbitt, Philippa Byrne, Susan Bambacas, Libby Hollington, Paul Symonds, Erin L. Cancer Med Clinical Cancer Research Recurrence will develop in 30–50% of colorectal cancer (CRC) cases despite apparent clearance following treatment. Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is the only guideline‐recommended blood test for monitoring cases for recurrence, but its sensitivity and specificity are suboptimal. This observational study compared a novel 2‐gene (methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 DNA) blood test with CEA for detection of recurrent CRC. We conducted a paired comparison of the BCAT1/IKZF1 test with CEA (cut‐off 5 ng/mL) in blood from patients in remission after treatment for primary CRC and undergoing surveillance. Blood collected in the 12 months prior to or 3 months after complete investigational assessment of recurrence status were assayed and the results compared by McNemar's test. Of 397 patients enrolled, 220 underwent satisfactory assessment for recurrence and 122 had blood testing performed within the prescribed period. In 28 cases with recurrent CRC, CEA was positive in 9 (32%; 95% CI 16–52%) compared to 19 (68%; 95% CI 48–84%) positive for methylated BCAT1/IKZF1 (P = 0.002). All samples that were CEA positive were also BCAT1/IKZF1 positive. In 94 patients without clinically detectable recurrence, CEA was positive in 6 (6%, 95% CI 2–13%) and BCAT1/IKZF1 in 12 (13%, 95% CI 7–21%), P = 0.210. The odds ratio of a positive CEA test for recurrence was 6.9 (95% CI 2–22) compared to 14.4 (5–39) for BCAT1/IKZF1. The BCAT1/IKZF1 test was more sensitive for recurrence than CEA and the odds of recurrence given a positive test was twice that of CEA. The BCAT1/IKZF1 test should be further considered for monitoring cases for recurrence. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-10-11 /pmc/articles/PMC5083729/ /pubmed/27726312 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.868 Text en © 2016 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Cancer Research Young, Graeme P. Pedersen, Susanne K. Mansfield, Scott Murray, David H. Baker, Rohan T. Rabbitt, Philippa Byrne, Susan Bambacas, Libby Hollington, Paul Symonds, Erin L. A cross‐sectional study comparing a blood test for methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 tumor‐derived DNA with CEA for detection of recurrent colorectal cancer |
title | A cross‐sectional study comparing a blood test for methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 tumor‐derived DNA with CEA for detection of recurrent colorectal cancer |
title_full | A cross‐sectional study comparing a blood test for methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 tumor‐derived DNA with CEA for detection of recurrent colorectal cancer |
title_fullStr | A cross‐sectional study comparing a blood test for methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 tumor‐derived DNA with CEA for detection of recurrent colorectal cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | A cross‐sectional study comparing a blood test for methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 tumor‐derived DNA with CEA for detection of recurrent colorectal cancer |
title_short | A cross‐sectional study comparing a blood test for methylated BCAT1 and IKZF1 tumor‐derived DNA with CEA for detection of recurrent colorectal cancer |
title_sort | cross‐sectional study comparing a blood test for methylated bcat1 and ikzf1 tumor‐derived dna with cea for detection of recurrent colorectal cancer |
topic | Clinical Cancer Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5083729/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27726312 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.868 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT younggraemep acrosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT pedersensusannek acrosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT mansfieldscott acrosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT murraydavidh acrosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT bakerrohant acrosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT rabbittphilippa acrosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT byrnesusan acrosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT bambacaslibby acrosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT hollingtonpaul acrosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT symondserinl acrosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT younggraemep crosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT pedersensusannek crosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT mansfieldscott crosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT murraydavidh crosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT bakerrohant crosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT rabbittphilippa crosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT byrnesusan crosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT bambacaslibby crosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT hollingtonpaul crosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer AT symondserinl crosssectionalstudycomparingabloodtestformethylatedbcat1andikzf1tumorderiveddnawithceafordetectionofrecurrentcolorectalcancer |