Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2021 Apr 10;13(8):1820.
doi: 10.3390/cancers13081820.

Towards Novel Non-Invasive Colorectal Cancer Screening Methods: A Comprehensive Review

Affiliations
Review

Towards Novel Non-Invasive Colorectal Cancer Screening Methods: A Comprehensive Review

Allegra Ferrari et al. Cancers (Basel). .

Abstract

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading cancer-related causes of death in the world. Since the 70s, many countries have adopted different CRC screening programs, which has resulted in a decrease in mortality. However, current screening test options still present downsides. The commercialized stool-based tests present high false-positive rates and low sensitivity, which negatively affects the detection of early stage carcinogenesis. The gold standard colonoscopy has low uptake due to its invasiveness and the perception of discomfort and embarrassment that the procedure may bring. In this review, we collected and described the latest data about alternative CRC screening techniques that can overcome these disadvantages. Web of Science and PubMed were employed as search engines for studies reporting on CRC screening tests and future perspectives. The searches generated 555 articles, of which 93 titles were selected. Finally, a total of 50 studies, describing 14 different CRC alternative tests, were included. Among the investigated techniques, the main feature that could have an impact on CRC screening perception and uptake was the ease of sample collection. Urine, exhaled breath, and blood-based tests promise to achieve good diagnostic performance (sensitivity of 63-100%, 90-95%, and 47-97%, respectively) while minimizing stress and discomfort for the patient.

Keywords: CRC; alternative; colorectal cancer screening; non-invasive; review; test.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Methods. CRC = colorectal cancer.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Shaukat A., Allen J.I. Colorectal Cancer Screening Quality and Benchmarks. Springer; Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: 2015. - DOI
    1. Segnan N., Patnick J., von Karsa L. European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Colorectal Cancer Screening and Diagnosis. 1st ed. European Commission; Brussels, Belgium: 2011. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Wolf A.M.D., Fontham E.T.H., Church T.R., Flowers C.R., Guerra C.E., Lamonte S.J., Etzioni R., Mckenna M.T., Oeffinger K.C., Shih Y.-C.T., et al. Colorectal cancer screening for average-risk adults: 2018 guideline update from the American Cancer Society. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2018 doi: 10.3322/caac.21457. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Fauci A.S. Harrison’s Principles of Internal Medicine. 20th ed. McGraw-Hill Education; New York, NY, USA: 2015.
    1. Thayalasekaran S., Frazzoni L., Antonelli G., Fuccio L., Radaelli F., Andrealli A., Senore C., Repici A., Hassan C., Bhandari P. Endoscopic technological innovations for neoplasia detection in organized colorectal cancer screening programs: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2020;92:840–847.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.06.046. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources