Francisco Rodriguez-Moranta

Postoperative Surveillance in Patients With Colorectal Cancer Who Have Undergone Curative Resection: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial

PURPOSE Although systematic postoperative surveillance of patients with colorectal cancer has been demonstrated to improve survival, it remains unknown whether a more intensive strategy provides any significant advantage. This prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial was aimed at comparing the efficacy of two different surveillance strategies in terms of both survival and recurrence resectability. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with stage II or III colorectal cancer were allocated randomly to either a simple surveillance strategy including clinical evaluation and serum carcinoembryonic antigen monitoring, or an intensive strategy in which abdominal computed tomography or ultrasonography, chest radiograph, and colonoscopy were added. RESULTS A total of 259 patients were included: 132 were observed according to the simple strategy and 127 were observed according to the intensive strategy. Both groups were similar with respect to baseline characteristics and rate and type of tumor recurrence. After a median follow-up of 48 months, there was no difference in the probability of overall survival in the whole series (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.49 to 1.54; P = .62). However, the intensive strategy was associated with higher overall survival in patients with stage II tumors (HR = 0.34; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.98; P = .045) and in those with rectal lesions (HR = 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.81; P = .03), mainly due to higher rate of resectability for recurrent tumors. Colonoscopy was responsible for the detection of the highest proportion (44%) of resectable tumor recurrence in the intensive arm. CONCLUSION A more intensive surveillance strategy improves the prognosis of patients with stage II colorectal cancer or those with rectal tumors. Inclusion of regular performance of colonoscopy seems justified up to the fifth year of follow-up, at least.

Colorectal cancer: From prevention to personalized medicine

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a very heterogeneous disease that is caused by the interaction of genetic and environmental factors. CRC develops through a gradual accumulation of genetic and epigenetic changes, leading to the transformation of normal colonic mucosa into invasive cancer. CRC is one of the most prevalent and incident cancers worldwide, as well as one of the most deadly. Approximately 1235108 people are diagnosed annually with CRC, and 609051 die from CRC annually. The World Health Organization estimates an increase of 77% in the number of newly diagnosed cases of CRC and an increase of 80% in deaths from CRC by 2030. The incidence of CRC can benefit from different strategies depending on its stage: health promotion through health education campaigns (when the disease is not yet present), the implementation of screening programs (for detection of the disease in its early stages), and the development of nearly personalized treatments according to both patient characteristics (age, sex) and the cancer itself (gene expression). Although there are different strategies for screening and although the number of such strategies is increasing due to the potential of emerging technologies in molecular marker application, not all strategies meet the criteria required for screening tests in population programs; the three most accepted tests are the fecal occult blood test (FOBT), colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy. FOBT is the most used method for CRC screening worldwide and is also the primary choice in most population-based screening programs in Europe. Due to its non-invasive nature and low cost, it is one of the most accepted techniques by population. CRC is a very heterogeneous disease, and with a few exceptions (APC, p53, KRAS), most of the genes involved in CRC are observed in a small percentage of cases. The design of genetic and epigenetic marker panels that are able to provide maximum coverage in the diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia seems a reasonable strategy. In recent years, the use of DNA, RNA and protein markers in different biological samples has been explored as strategies for CRC diagnosis. Although there is not yet sufficient evidence to recommend the analysis of biomarkers such as DNA, RNA or proteins in the blood or stool, it is likely that given the quick progression of technology tools in molecular biology, increasingly sensitive and less expensive, these tools will gradually be employed in clinical practice and will likely be developed in mass.

DNA Methylation Biomarkers for Noninvasive Diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer

DNA methylation biomarkers for noninvasive diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC) and precursor lesions have been extensively studied. Different panels have been reported attempting to improve current protocols in clinical practice, although no definite biomarkers have been established. In the present study, we have examined patient biopsies starting from a comprehensive analysis of DNA methylation differences between paired normal and tumor samples in known cancer-related genes aiming to select the best performing candidates informative for CRC diagnosis in stool samples. Five selected markers were considered for subsequent analyses in independent biologic cohorts and in silico data sets. Among the five selected genes, three of them (AGTR1, WNT2 and SLIT2) were validated in stool DNA of affected patients with a detection sensitivity of 78% [95% confidence interval (CI), 56%–89%]. As a reference, DNA methylation of VIM and SEPT9 was evaluated in a subset of stool samples yielding sensitivities of 55% and 20%, respectively. Moreover, our panel may complement histologic and endoscopic diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)-associated neoplasia, as it was also efficient detecting aberrant DNA methylation in non-neoplastic tissue samples from affected patients. This novel panel of specific methylation markers can be useful for early diagnosis of CRC using stool DNA and may help in the follow-up of high-risk patients with IBD. Cancer Prev Res; 6(7); 656–65. ©2013 AACR.

Clinical usefulness of KRAS mutational analysis in the diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma by means of endosonography-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy.

Aim : To establish the usefulness of KRAS mutational analysis in the diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma by comparing this technique with conventional cytology in aspirates obtained by endosonography‐guided fine‐needle aspiration.

Novel Methylation Panel for the Early Detection of Colorectal Tumors in Stool DNA

BACKGROUND Previous studies showed that the assessment of promoter hypermethylation of a limited number of genes in tumor biopsies may identify the majority of colorectal tumors. This study aimed to assess the clinical usefulness of a panel of methylation biomarkers in stool DNA in the identification of colorectal tumors, using methylation-specific melting curve analysis (MS-MCA), a technique that simultaneously analyzes all cytosine-phosphate-guanine (CpG) residues within a promoter. MATERIALS AND METHODS The promoter methylation status of 4 tumor-related genes (RARB2, p16INK4a, MGMT, and APC) was analyzed in DNA stool samples and corresponding tissues in an initial set of 12 patients with newly diagnosed primary colorectal carcinomas and 20 patients with newly diagnosed colorectal adenomas, using methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction. Results were replicated in a set of 82 patients (20 healthy subjects, 16 patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), 20 patients with adenomas, and 26 patients with carcinomas), using MS-MCA analyses. RESULTS In the initial set, >or= 1 positive methylation marker was detected in the stools of 9 of 12 patients (75%) with carcinomas and 12 of 20 patients (60%) with adenomas, with no false-positive results. Stool analyses missed 7 methylated lesions (25%). In the replication set, stool DNA testing detected 16 of 26 carcinomas (62%) and 8 of 20 adenomas (40%). The MS-MCAs missed 14 methylated tumors (37%). No aberrant methylation was evident in healthy subjects, but the RARB2 marker was positive in 2 of 15 stool samples (13%) of patients with IBD. CONCLUSION Analysis via MS-MCA of a panel of methylation markers in stool DNA may offer a good alternative in the early, noninvasive detection of colorectal tumors.

Aberrant gene expression in mucosa adjacent to tumor reveals a molecular crosstalk in colon cancer

BackgroundA colorectal tumor is not an isolated entity growing in a restricted location of the body. The patient’s gut environment constitutes the framework where the tumor evolves and this relationship promotes and includes a complex and tight correlation of the tumor with inflammation, blood vessels formation, nutrition, and gut microbiome composition. The tumor influence in the environment could both promote an anti-tumor or a pro-tumor response.MethodsA set of 98 paired adjacent mucosa and tumor tissues from colorectal cancer (CRC) patients and 50 colon mucosa from healthy donors (246 samples in total) were included in this work. RNA extracted from each sample was hybridized in Affymetrix chips Human Genome U219. Functional relationships between genes were inferred by means of systems biology using both transcriptional regulation networks (ARACNe algorithm) and protein-protein interaction networks (BIANA software).ResultsHere we report a transcriptomic analysis revealing a number of genes activated in adjacent mucosa from CRC patients, not activated in mucosa from healthy donors. A functional analysis of these genes suggested that this active reaction of the adjacent mucosa was related to the presence of the tumor. Transcriptional and protein-interaction networks were used to further elucidate this response of normal gut in front of the tumor, revealing a crosstalk between proteins secreted by the tumor and receptors activated in the adjacent colon tissue; and vice versa. Remarkably, Slit family of proteins activated ROBO receptors in tumor whereas tumor-secreted proteins transduced a cellular signal finally activating AP-1 in adjacent tissue.ConclusionsThe systems-level approach provides new insights into the micro-ecology of colorectal tumorogenesis. Disrupting this intricate molecular network of cell-cell communication and pro-inflammatory microenvironment could be a therapeutic target in CRC patients.

Clinical Performance of Original and Revised Bethesda Guidelines for the Identification of MSH2/MLH1 Gene Carriers in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Colorectal Cancer: Proposal of a New and Simpler Set of Recommendations

Identification of individuals who should undergo hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) genetic testing is a critical and difficult issue. For this purpose, the National Cancer Institute outlined a set of recommendations, the Bethesda guidelines, which have recently been revised.OBJECTIVE:To compare the clinical performance of original and revised Bethesda guidelines for the detection of MSH2/MLH1 gene carriers in patients with colorectal cancer.METHODS:A total of 1,222 patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer were included in the EPICOLON study, a prospective, multicenter, nationwide epidemiology survey aimed at establishing the incidence of HNPCC in Spain (JAMA 2005; 293:1986–1994). Performance characteristics of the original and revised Bethesda guidelines were assessed with respect to the presence of MSH2/MLH1 germline mutations. Logistic regression analysis was performed to establish the most effective strategy.RESULTS:Original or revised Bethesda guidelines were equivalent strategies in terms of sensitivity (100%vs 100%; ns), specificity (98.1%vs 97.9%; ns), and overall accuracy (98.1%vs 97.9%; ns), as well as positive (25.8%vs 24.2%) and negative predictive values (100%vs 100%). The most discriminating individual variables were criteria number 1 (i.e., fulfillment of the Amsterdam criteria; RR = 34.14; 95% CI = 6.85–170.16; p < 0.001) and number 2 (i.e., individuals with two HNPCC-related neoplasms; RR = 35.63; 95% CI = 4.83–262.6; p < 0.001) of the original guidelines, and criterion number 1 of the revised guidelines (i.e., colorectal cancer diagnosed under 50 yr of age; RR = 29.34; 95% CI = 3.81–225.96; p= 0.001). The aggregation of these three criteria was equivalent to both Bethesda guidelines in terms of sensitivity (100%) and negative predictive value (100%), but superior to the revised criteria regarding specificity (98.5%; p < 0.05), overall accuracy (98.5%; p < 0.05), and positive predictive value (30.8%).CONCLUSIONS:Original and revised Bethesda guidelines are equivalent, highly effective criteria for the identification of MSH2/MLH1 gene mutation carriers in patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer. A new set of recommendations, based on a combination of some of their individual criteria, may provide additional advantages in terms of effectiveness.

Nanofluidic Digital PCR for KRAS Mutation Detection and Quantification in Gastrointestinal Cancer

BACKGROUND Concomitant quantification of multiple mutant KRAS (v-Ki-ras2 Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog) alleles may provide information in addition to that provided by standard mutation-detection procedures. We assessed the feasibility of a nanofluidic digital PCR array platform to detect and quantify KRAS mutations simultaneously in clinically relevant samples. METHODS We assessed 2 groups of patients (colorectal and pancreatic disease): Group 1 consisted of 27 patients with colorectal carcinomas, 14 patients with adenomas, and 5 control individuals; group 2 consisted of 42 patients with pancreatic carcinoma, 4 with adenocarcinomas of the ampulla, and 6 with chronic pancreatitis). Digital PCR was performed with the Digital Array Chip (Fluidigm). RESULTS Nanofluidic digital PCR detected mutant alleles at 0.05% to 0.1%, depending on the variant analyzed. For the colorectal disease group, conventional PCR detected 9 (64%) of 14 adenomas that were positive for KRAS mutants, whereas digital PCR increased this number to 11 (79%) of 14. Sixteen (59%) of 27 carcinomas showed KRAS mutation with conventional PCR. Two additional cases were detected with digital PCR. In 5 cases (3 adenomas, 2 carcinomas), the total number of mutant alleles changed. For the pancreatic disease group, digital PCR increased the number of positive cases from 26 to 34 (81%) and identified ≥ 2 mutant alleles in 25 cases, compared with conventional PCR, which identified multiple KRAS mutant alleles in only 12 cases. A good correlation was observed between results obtained with tumor biopsies and those obtained with pancreatic juice. CONCLUSIONS Digital PCR provides a robust, quantitative measure of the proportion of KRAS mutant alleles in routinely obtained samples. It also allows a better classification of tumors, with potential clinical relevance.

Cyclooxygenase 2 Expression in Colorectal Cancer with DNA Mismatch Repair Deficiency

Background: Cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) overexpression is a frequent but not universal event in colorectal cancer. It has been suggested that COX-2 protein expression is reduced in colorectal cancer with a defective mismatch repair (MMR) system, a phenomenon commonly associated with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) but also present in up to 15% of sporadic tumors. Aim: To assess COX-2 expression in a large series of fully characterized colorectal cancer patients with respect to the MMR system and to dissect the mechanisms responsible for altered COX-2 expression in this setting. Patients and Methods: MMR-deficient colorectal cancer were identified in a nationwide, prospective, multicenter study (EPICOLON project). Control MMR-proficient colorectal cancer patients were randomly selected. COX-2 expression was evaluated by immunohistochemistry. Personal and familial characteristics, as well as MSH2/MLH1 expression and germ line mutations, were evaluated. Results: One hundred fifty-three patients, 46 with MMR deficiency and 107 with MMR proficiency, were included in the analysis. Overall, tumor COX-2 overexpression was observed in 107 patients (70%). COX-2 overexpression was observed in 85 patients (79%) with a MMR-proficient system, but only in 22 patients (48%) with a MMR-deficient colorectal cancer (P < 0.001). The lack of COX-2 overexpression was independently associated with a MMR-deficient system (odds ratio, 3.89; 95% confidence interval, 1.78-8.51; P = 0.001) and a poor degree of differentiation (OR, 3.83; 95% CI, 1.30-11.31; P = 0.015). In the subset of patients with a MMR-deficient colorectal cancer, lack of COX-2 overexpression correlated with a poor degree of differentiation, no fulfillment of Amsterdam II criteria, absence of MSH2/MLH1 germ line mutations, presence of tumor MSH2 expression, and lack of tumor MLH1 expression. CpG island promoter hypermethylation of COX2 was observed in 6 of 18 (33%) tumors lacking COX-2 expression in comparison with 2 of 28 (7%) tumors expressing this protein (P = 0.04). Conclusions: Up to half of MMR-deficient colorectal cancer do not show COX-2 overexpression, a fact observed almost exclusively in patients with sporadic forms. COX2 hypermethylation seems to be responsible for gene silencing in one third of them. These results suggest the potential utility of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in HNPCC chemoprevention and may explain the lack of response of this approach in some sporadic tumors.

Prevalence and Characteristics of MUTYH-Associated Polyposis in Patients with Multiple Adenomatous and Serrated Polyps

Purpose: The present study aimed to determine the prevalence of MUTYH mutations in patients with multiple colonic polyps and to explore the best strategy for diagnosing MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP) in these patients. Experimental Design: This study included 405 patients with at least 10 colonic polyps each. All cases were genetically tested for the three most frequent MUTYH mutations. Whole-gene analysis was performed in heterozygous patients and in 216 patients lacking the three most frequent mutations. Polyps from 56 patients were analyzed for the KRAS-Gly12Cys and BRAF V600E somatic mutations. Results: Twenty-seven (6.7%) patients were diagnosed with MAP, of which 40.8% showed serrated polyps. The sensitivity of studying only the three common variants was 74.1%. Of 216 patients without any monoallelic mutation in common variants, whole-gene analysis revealed biallelic pathogenic mutation in only one. G396D mutation was associated with serrated lesions and older age at diagnosis. There was a strong association between germinal MUTYH mutation and KRAS Gly12Cys somatic mutation in polyps. BRAF V600E mutation was found in 74% of serrated polyps in MUTYH-negative patients and in none of the polyps of MAP patients. Conclusions: We observed a low frequency of MUTYH mutations among patients with multiple adenomatous and serrated polyps. The MAP phenotype frequently included patients with serrated polyps, especially when G396D mutation was involved. Our results show that somatic molecular markers of polyps can be useful in identifying MAP cases and support the need for the complete MUTYH gene analysis only in patients heterozygous for recurrent variants. Clin Cancer Res; 20(5); 1158–68. ©2014 AACR.