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.).

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Articles

Trastuzumab Rezetecan in Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2–Expressing Advanced Gastric Cancer or Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma and Colorectal Cancer: A Multicenter, Open-Label, Phase I Trial

Encouraging phase I signal for this HER2-targeted Antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) in heavily pretreated GI cancers, 45% overall response rate (ORR) and 16.3mo median overall survival (OS) in HER2-positive gastric compares favorably with T-DXd benchmarks, and the 40.5% objective response rate (ORR) with 22.7mo OS in HER2-positive colorectal cancer (CRC) is notable. The 2% ILD rate looks meaningfully better than T-DXd’s reported range, which could be a real differentiator. Hematologic toxicity is substantial but manageable. Small China-only phase I, but worth watching closely as this advances.

Read More »

Postoperative Hepatic Arterial Infusion With Oxaliplatin After Surgery of Four or More Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Randomized Phase II Trial

For high-risk patients with four or more colorectal liver metastases, adjuvant hepatic arterial infusion oxaliplatin roughly doubled hepatic recurrence-free survival versus standard IV chemotherapy (25 vs. 12 months), with recurrence-free survival (RFS) benefit as well. Overall survival (OS) didn't reach significance but the absolute difference and 5-year OS of 62% versus 47% suggest a real effect worth confirming in phase III. Toxicity was higher in the hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) arm but manageable with no treatment-related deaths. Generalizability remains the challenge, these needs specialized centers with HAI expertise, but worth keeping in mind for your highest-risk resected liver met patients.

Read More »

Randomized Phase II/III Trial Comparing Hepatectomy, Followed by mFOLFOX6 With Hepatectomy Alone for Liver Metastasis From Colorectal Cancer: Long-Term Results of JCOG0603

The mature overall survival (OS) data from this Japanese randomized trial answer the question the initial publication left open, and the answer is no, adjuvant mFOLFOX6 after hepatectomy for resectable colorectal liver metastases does not improve overall survival (HR 1.07, P=.74), despite the previously reported DFS benefit. Five-year OS was numerically worse in the chemotherapy arm (73% vs 80%), though not significantly so. The disease-free survival (DFS) benefit was likely confounded by oxaliplatin-induced hepatic changes obscuring imaging and imbalances in post-recurrence therapy. Selection of patients and those with curable vs incurable intent surgery may have led to some bias in my opinion.

Read More »

Tumor Debulking in Combination With Chemotherapy in Multiorgan Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The ORCHESTRA Randomized Clinical Trial

Open-label, phase 3 clinical trial, 382 patients were randomized to receive chemotherapy alone or chemotherapy plus tumor debulking. The overall survival rates were not statistically different, with a median overall survival in the chemotherapy alone group of 27.5 m vs 30.0 m in the chemotherapy plus tumor debulking group hence tumor debulking added to palliative systemic chemotherapy did not result in significantly improved survival compared with chemotherapy alone in patients with multiorgan metastatic colorectal cancer.

Read More »

Atezolizumab plus FOLFOX for Stage III Mismatch Repair–Deficient Colon Cancer

This is a strong adjuvant signal in resected stage III dMMR colon cancer, adding atezolizumab to mFOLFOX6 cut the risk of recurrence or death in half and improved 3-year DFS from 76% to 86%. OS hasn’t separated yet, but that may be confounded by immunotherapy at relapse. Toxicity was higher, as expected, with more grade 3–4 events and immune-related adverse events (AE)s, but overall manageable. This feels practice changing for stage III dMMR disease.

Read More »