A Cell-free DNA Blood-Based Test for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Author(s): Daniel C. Chung, M.D., Darrell M. Gray II, M.D., M.P.H., Harminder Singh, M.D., Rachel B. Issaka, M.D., M.A.S. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9691-1655, Victoria M. Raymond, M.S. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5223-0981, Craig Eagle, M.D., Sylvia Hu, Ph.D., Darya I. Chudova, Ph.D., AmirAli Talasaz, Ph.D., Joel K. Greenson, M.D., Frank A. Sinicrope, M.D. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2907-1000, Samir Gupta, M.D., M.S.C.S., and William M. Grady, M.D.

Source: N Engl J Med 2024;390:973-983

Dr. Anjan Patel's Thoughts

Colorectal cancer screening by peripheral blood testing? This cell-free DNA assay had an 83% sensitivity and 90% specificity for advanced neoplasia. However, the issue is that this does not detect precancerous lesions well. Colonoscopy has its obvious advantages as it can both diagnose colorectal cancer as well as eradicate precancerous lesions.

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is the third most diagnosed cancer in adults in the United States. Early detection could prevent more than 90% of colorectal cancer–related deaths, yet more than one third of the screening-eligible population is not up to date with screening despite multiple available tests. A blood-based test has the potential to improve screening adherence, detect colorectal cancer earlier, and reduce colorectal cancer–related mortality.

METHODS

We assessed the performance characteristics of a cell-free DNA (cfDNA) blood-based test in a population eligible for colorectal cancer screening. The coprimary outcomes were sensitivity for colorectal cancer and specificity for advanced neoplasia (colorectal cancer or advanced precancerous lesions) relative to screening colonoscopy. The secondary outcome was sensitivity to detect advanced precancerous lesions.

RESULTS

The clinical validation cohort included 10,258 persons, 7861 of whom met eligibility criteria and were evaluable. A total of 83.1% of the participants with colorectal cancer detected by colonoscopy had a positive cfDNA test and 16.9% had a negative test, which indicates a sensitivity of the cfDNA test for detection of colorectal cancer of 83.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 72.2 to 90.3). Sensitivity for stage I, II, or III colorectal cancer was 87.5% (95% CI, 75.3 to 94.1), and sensitivity for advanced precancerous lesions was 13.2% (95% CI, 11.3 to 15.3). A total of 89.6% of the participants without any advanced colorectal neoplasia (colorectal cancer or advanced precancerous lesions) identified on colonoscopy had a negative cfDNA blood-based test, whereas 10.4% had a positive cfDNA blood-based test, which indicates a specificity for any advanced neoplasia of 89.6% (95% CI, 88.8 to 90.3). Specificity for negative colonoscopy (no colorectal cancer, advanced precancerous lesions, or nonadvanced precancerous lesions) was 89.9% (95% CI, 89.0 to 90.7).

CONCLUSIONS

In an average-risk screening population, this cfDNA blood-based test had 83% sensitivity for colorectal cancer, 90% specificity for advanced neoplasia, and 13% sensitivity for advanced precancerous lesions. (Funded by Guardant Health; ECLIPSE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04136002.)

Author Affiliations

From the Division of Gastroenterology and Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston (D.C.C.); Gray Area Strategies, Owings Mills, MD (D.M.G.); the Association of Black Gastroenterologists and Hepatologists, New York (D.M.G.); the Departments of Internal Medicine and Community Health Sciences, Max Rady College of Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba and Paul Albrechtsen Research Institute CancerCare Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada (H.S.); the Divisions of Public Health Sciences (R.B.I., W.M.G.), Clinical Research (R.B.I.), and Translational Science and Therapeutics (W.M.G.), Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, and the Division of Gastroenterology, University of Washington School of Medicine (R.B.I., W.M.G.) — both in Seattle; Guardant Health, Palo Alto (V.M.R., C.E., S.H., D.I.C., A.T.), and the University of California, San Diego, La Jolla (S.G.) — both in California; the Department of Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor (J.K.G.); and the Divisions of Oncology, Gastroenterology, and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Mayo Comprehensive Cancer Center and Mayo Alix School of Medicine, Rochester, MN (F.A.S.).

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus nivolumab in microsatellite instability-high metastatic colorectal cancer (CheckMate 8HW): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

Combination beat monotherapy is another option for MSI patients. Is combo better then pembro?

Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab in Microsatellite-Instability–High Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Here is a large phase-III well done study confirming what we knew from earlier studies, that ipilimumab plus nivolumab (Ipi+Nivo) is highly active and effective in the microsatellite instability-high metastatic colorectal cancer (MSI-high met-CRC) population. This is most likely more effective than single agent IO therapy but with higher rates of toxicity. When all things are equal, I would consider this to be the standard of care (SOC) in this context.

Oxaliplatin Added to Fluoropyrimidine/Bevacizumab as Initial Therapy for Unresectable Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in Older Patients: A Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label Phase III Trial (JCOG1018)

This Japanese study showed no benefit with the addition of oxaliplatin to fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab (5FU+bev) in patients who were aged 70-74 but unfit, or >=75. Interestingly survival was actually shorter in the patients who received oxaliplatin at 21.3 vs 19.7 months.

Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab Versus Standard of Care for Previously Treated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Final Analysis of the Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III LEAP-017 Study

Overall survival (OS) improvement was not statistically significant in the study arm but is a non-chemotherapy option. Patients here had tumors with MSS.

Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Irinotecan Plus Cetuximab Versus Cetuximab as Maintenance Therapy in First-Line Therapy for RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Phase III ERMES Study

Less maintenance is NOT NON-inferior, so it is inferior in patients with wild type BRAF metastatic colon cancer. So it is better to keep on the full regimen. Although, quality of life is better.