Full text

Turn on search term navigation

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American College of Gastroenterology. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

To improve colorectal cancer (CRC) survival and lower incidence rates, colonoscopy and/or fecal immunochemical test screening are widely implemented. Although candidate DNA methylation biomarkers have been published to improve or complement the fecal immunochemical test, clinical translation is limited. We describe technical and methodological problems encountered after a systematic literature search and provide recommendations to increase (clinical) value and decrease research waste in biomarker research. In addition, we present current evidence for diagnostic CRC DNA methylation biomarkers.

METHODS:

A systematic literature search identified 331 diagnostic DNA methylation marker studies published before November 2020 in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. For 136 bodily fluid studies, extended data extraction was performed. STARD criteria and level of evidence were registered to assess reporting quality and strength for clinical translation.

RESULTS:

Our systematic literature search revealed multiple issues that hamper the development of DNA methylation biomarkers for CRC diagnosis, including methodological and technical heterogeneity and lack of validation or clinical translation. For example, clinical translation and independent validation were limited, with 100 of 434 markers (23%) studied in bodily fluids, 3 of 434 markers (0.7%) translated into clinical tests, and independent validation for 92 of 411 tissue markers (22%) and 59 of 100 bodily fluids markers (59%).

DISCUSSION:

This systematic literature search revealed that major requirements to develop clinically relevant diagnostic CRC DNA methylation markers are often lacking. To avoid the resulting research waste, clinical needs, intended biomarker use, and independent validation should be better considered before study design. In addition, improved reporting quality would facilitate meta-analysis, thereby increasing the level of evidence and enabling clinical translation.

Details

Title
Lessons From a Systematic Literature Search on Diagnostic DNA Methylation Biomarkers for Colorectal Cancer: How to Increase Research Value and Decrease Research Waste?
Author
Zheng, Feng 1 ; Oberije, Cary J, G 2 ; van de Wetering Alouisa J P 3 ; Koch, Alexander 1 ; Wouters Kim A D 1 ; Vaes Nathalie 1 ; Masclee Ad A M 4 ; Carvalho, Beatriz 5 ; Meijer, Gerrit A 5 ; Zeegers, Maurice P 6 ; Herman, James G 7 ; Melotte Veerle 8 ; van Engeland Manon 1 ; Smits, Kim M 9 

 Department of Pathology, GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands; 
 Department of Pathology, GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands;; The D-Lab, Department of Precision Medicine, GROW—School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands; 
 Department of Pathology, GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands;; Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands; 
 Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands;; Division of Gastroenterology-Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands; 
 Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; 
 Department of Complex Genetics, NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands;; Department of Complex Genetics, CAPHRI – Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands; 
 Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA; 
 Department of Pathology, GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands;; Department of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus University Medical Center, University of Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; 
 Department of Pathology, GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands;; Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, GROW – School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands. 
Pages
e00499
Section
Review Article
Publication year
2022
Publication date
Jun 2022
Publisher
Wolters Kluwer Health Medical Research, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
e-ISSN
2155384X
Source type
Scholarly Journal
Language of publication
English
ProQuest document ID
2681010894
Copyright
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American College of Gastroenterology. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.