Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Multi-Target Stool DNA Test: Is the Future Here?

  • GI Oncology (R Bresalier, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Gastroenterology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening reduces CRC incidence and mortality and is widely recommended. However, despite these demonstrated benefits, a large percentage of the population remains unscreened. The multi-target stool DNA (MT-sDNA) test is a new, non-invasive option for CRC screening that has a high accuracy rate in detection of colorectal neoplasia and offers great opportunity to enhance screening uptake. This review provides the current state of the art knowledge about the use of MT-sDNA in CRC screening.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CMS:

Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services

CRC:

Colorectal cancer

FDA:

Food and Drug Administration

MT-sDNA:

Multi-target stool DNA

SSP:

Sessile serrated polyp

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Global Burden of Disease Cancer Collaboration. The global burden of cancer 2013. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1(4):505–27.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66:7–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Saquib N, Saquib J, Ioannidis JP. Does screening for disease save lives in asymptomatic adults? Systematic review of meta-analyses and randomized trials. Int J Epidemiol. 2015;44:264–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Zauber AG, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Knudsen AB, et al. Evaluating test strategies for colorectal cancer screening; a decision analysis for the US Preventative Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:659–69.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Screening for colorectal cancer: US Preventative Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2008;149:627–637.

  6. Vital signs: colorectal cancer screening test use—United States, 2012. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2013;62:881-888.

  7. McLachlan SA, Clements A, Austoker J. Patients’ experiences and reported barriers to colonoscopy in the screening context—a systematic review of the literature. Patient Educ Couns. 2012;86:137–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Brenner H, Hoffmeister M, Arndt V, et al. Protection from right- and left-sided colorectal neoplasms after colonoscopy: population-based study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102:89–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Nishihara R, Wu K, Lochhead MB, et al. Long-term colorectal cancer incidence and mortality after lower endoscopy. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1095–105. Nicely done study highlighting the higher rate of right-sided interval colon cancers.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ahlquist DA. Molecular detection of colorectal neoplasia. Gastroenterol. 2010;138:2127–39.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Zou H, Harrington JJ, Shire AM, et al. Highly methylated genes in colorectal neoplasia: implications for screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2007;16:2686–96.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ostwald C, Linnebacher M, Weirich V, et al. Chromosomally and microsatellite stable colorectal carcinomas without the CpG island methylator phenotype in a molecular classification. Int J Oncol. 2009;35:321–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ahlquist DA, Harrington JJ, Burgart LJ, et al. Morphometric analysis of the “mucocellular layer” overlying colorectal cancer and normal mucosa: relevance to exfoliation and stool screening. Hum Pathol. 2000;31:51–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kamra A, Kessie G, Chen JH, et al. Exfoliated colonic epithelial cells: surrogate targets for evaluation of bioactive food components in cancer prevention. J Nutr. 2005;135:2719–22.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ahlquist DA, McGill DB, Fleming JL, et al. Patterns of occult bleeding in asymptomatic colorectal cancer. Cancer. 1989;63:1826–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Elias H, Hyde DM, Mullens RS, Lambert FC. Colonic adenomas: stereology and growth mechanisms. Dis Colon Rectum. 1981;24:331–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ahlquist DA, Skoletsky JE, Boynton KA, et al. Colorectal cancer screening by detection of altered human DNA in stool: feasibility of a multitarget assay panel. Gastroenterology. 2000;119:1219–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ahlquist DA, Zou H, Domanico M, et al. Next-generation stool DNA test accurately detects colorectal cancer and large adenomas. Gastroenterology. 2012;142:248–56. quiz e25-e26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Lidgard GP, Dominco M, Bruinsma JJ, et al. Clinical performance of an automated stool DNA assay for detection of colorectal neoplasia. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;11:1313–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Imperiale TF, Ransohoff DF, Itzkowitz SH, et al. Multitarget stool DNA testing for colorectal-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:1287–97. Seminal study leading to FDA approval of MT-sDNA that demonstrates its performance characteristics compared to FIT.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Redwood DG, Asay ED, Blake ID, et al. Stool DNA testing for screening detection of colorectal neoplasia in Alaska native people. Mayo Clin Proc. 2016;91(1):61–70. Cross-sectional study in Alaskan natives showing high accuracy of MT-sDNA.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Morikawa T, Kato J, Yamaji Y, et al. A comparison of the immunochemical fecal occult blood test and total colonoscopy in the asymptomatic population. Gastroenterology. 2005;129:422–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ahlquist DA, Sargent DJ, Loprinzi CL, et al. Stool DNA and occult blood testing for screen detection of colorectal neoplasia. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:441–50. W81.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Imperiale TF, Ransohoff DF, Itzkowitz SH, et al. Fecal DNA versus fecal occult blood for colorectal-cancer screening in average-risk population. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:2704–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Pickhardt PJ. The natural history of colorectal polyps and masses: rediscovered truths from the barium era. Am J Radiol. 2007;188:619–21.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Berger BM, Imperiale T, Hilsden R, et al. Noninvasive detection of sessile serrated polyps in an average risk colorectal cancer screening population: comparison of stool-based multi-target DNA and fecal immunochemical testing. Gastroenterology. 2014;146:S-31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Smith RA, Manassaram-Baptiste D, Brooks D, et al. Cancer screening in the United States, 2015: a review of current American Cancer Society Guidelines and current issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65:30–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Berger BM, Schroy PC, Dinh TA. Screening for colorectal cancer using a multitarget stool DNA test: modeling the effect of the interest interval on clinical effectiveness. Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2015 Dec;18 [Epub ahead of print].

  29. Ahlquist DA. Multi-target stool DNA test: a new high bar for noninvasive screening. Dig Dis Sci. 2015;60:623–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Samadder NJ, Curtin K, Tuohy TMF, et al. Characteristics of missed or interval colorectal cancer and patient survival: a population-based study. Gastroenterology. 2014;146:950–60. Well-done study showing the rates of interval CRC in large Utah population.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Lieberman DA, Ransohoff D, Winawer SJ, Giardello FM, et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after screening and polypectomy: a consensus update by the US multi-society task force on colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology. 2012;143:844–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Allison JE, Meijer G. Colonic polyps: the harm of overdiagnosis. Pract Gastroenterol. 2012:25-38.

  33. Stryker SJ, Wolff BG, Culp CE, et al. Natural history of untreated colonic polyps. Gastroenterology. 1987;93:1009–13.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Rubio CA. Qualitative DNA, differences between two structurally different lesions: high-grade dysplasia and carcinoma in situ in colorectal adenomas. Anticancer Res. 2007;27:2881–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Toll AD, Fabius D, Hyslop T, et al. Prognostic significance of high-grade dysplasia in colorectal adenomas. Colorectal Dis. 2011;13:370–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Pickhardt PJ, Hain HS, Kim DH, Hassan C. Low rates of cancer or high-grade dysplasia in colorectal polyps collected from computed tomography colonography screening. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;8:610–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Ahlquist DA, Taylor WR, Yab TC, et al. Aberrantly methylated gene marker levels in stool: effects of demographic, exposure, body mass, and other patient characteristics. J Mol Biomark Diagn. 2012;3:1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Baxter NN, Goldwasser MA, Paszat LF, et al. Association of colonoscopy and death from colorectal cancer. Ann Intern Med. 2009;150:1–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Brenner H, Chang-Claude J, Seiler CM, et al. Protection from colorectal cancer after colonoscopy: a population-based, case-control study. Ann Intern Med. 2011;154:22–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Imperiale TF, Eckert G, Juliar BE, et al. Prevalence and variable detection of proximal colon serrated polyps during screening colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;69:1288–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:2191–200.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Kahi CJ, Hewett DG, Norton DL, et al. Prevalence and variable detection of proximal colon serrated polyps during screening colonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;9:42–6. This study highlights the high-variability of detection of sessile serrated polyps by endoscopists.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kaminski MF, Regula J, Kraszewska E, Polkowski M, et al. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1795–803.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Corley DA, Marks AR, Zhao WK, et al. Adenoma detection rate and the risk of colorectal cancer and death. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:1298–306.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Heigh RIYT, Taylor WR, Hussain FT, Smyrk TC, et al. Detection of colorectal serrated polyps by stool DNA testing: comparison with fecal immunochemical testing for occult blood (FIT). PLoS One. 2014;9:e85659.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Bampton PA, Sandford J, Cole SR, et al. Interval faecal occult blood testing in a colonoscopy based screening programme detects additional pathology. Gut. 2005;54:803–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Burnett-Hartman AN, Newcomb P, Phipps AI, et al. Colorectal endoscopy, advanced adenomas, and sessile serrated polyps: implications for proximal colon cancer. Am J Gastroenterol. 2012;107:1213–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Patel SG, Ahnen DJ. Prevention of interval colorectal cancers: what every clinician needs to know. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;12:7–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Ahlquist DA, Sargent D, Loprinzi CL, Goldberg RM, et al. False-positive stool DNA results on colorectal cancer screening: yield from supracolonic evaluation. Gastroenterology. 2004;126:A-58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA

    Seth Sweetser & David A. Ahlquist

Authors
  1. Seth Sweetser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David A. Ahlquist
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seth Sweetser.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

SS and DAA’s employer, Mayo Clinic, has licensed technology to Exact Sciences that was used in the development of Cologuard. As an inventor on this licensed technology, DAA shares in royalties from Exact Sciences to Mayo Clinic. DAA is also a scientific advisor and research collaborator with Exact Sciences.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

All reported studies/experiments with human or animal subjects performed by the authors have been previously published and were in compliance with all applicable ethical standards (including the Helsinki declaration and its amendments, institutional/national research committee standards, and international/national/institutional guidelines).

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on GI Oncology

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sweetser, S., Ahlquist, D.A. Multi-Target Stool DNA Test: Is the Future Here?. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 18, 30 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11894-016-0510-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11894-016-0510-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation