Untargeted LC-HRMS-based metabolomics to identify novel biomarkers of metastatic colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer is one of the main causes of cancer death worldwide, and novel biomarkers are urgently needed for its early diagnosis and treatment. The utilization of metabolomics to identify and quantify metabolites in body fluids may allow the detection of changes in their concentrations that could serve as diagnostic markers for colorectal cancer and may also represent new therapeutic targets. Metabolomics generates a pathophysiological ‘fingerprint’ that is unique to each individual. The purpose of our study was to identify a differential metabolomic signature for metastatic colorectal cancer. Serum samples from 60 healthy controls and 65 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer were studied by liquid chromatography coupled to high-resolution mass spectrometry in an untargeted metabolomic approach. Multivariate analysis revealed a separation between patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and healthy controls, who significantly differed in serum concentrations of one endocannabinoid, two glycerophospholipids, and two sphingolipids. These findings demonstrate that metabolomics using liquid-chromatography coupled to high-resolution mass spectrometry offers a potent diagnostic tool for metastatic colorectal cancer.This study was supported by a grant (n° 15CC056/DTS17/00081- ISCIII-FEDER) from the Fundación para la Investigación Biosanitaria de Andalucía Oriental (FIBAO) and Roche Pharma S.L. Authors from the Fundación MEDINA acknowledge the receipt of financial support from this public-private partnership of Merck Sharp & Dohme de España S.A. with the University of Granada and Andalusian Regional Government (PIN-0474-2016)

Update on the Endoscopic Management of Peptic Ulcer Bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is the most common gastrointestinal emergency, with peptic ulcer as the most common cause. Appropriate resuscitation followed by early endoscopy for diagnosis and treatment are of major importance in these patients. Endoscopy is recommended within 24 h of presentation. Endoscopic therapy is indicated for patients with high-risk stigmata, in particular those with active bleeding and visible vessels. The role of endoscopic therapy for ulcers with adherent clots remains to be elucidated. Ablative or mechanical therapies are superior to epinephrine injection alone in terms of prevention of rebleeding. The application of an ulcer-covering hemospray is a new promising tool. High dose proton pump inhibitors should be administered intravenously for 72 h after endoscopy in high-risk patients. Helicobacter pylori should be tested for in all patients with peptic ulcer bleeding and eradicated if positive. These recommendations have been captured in a recent international guideline

Immunochemical faecal occult blood test: number of samples and positivity cutoff. What is the best strategy for colorectal cancer screening?

Immunochemical faecal occult blood tests have shown a greater sensitivity than guaiac test in colorectal cancer screening, but optimal number of samples and cutoff have still to be defined. The aim of this multicentric study was to evaluate the performance of immunochemical-based screening strategies according to different positivity thresholds (80, 100, 120 ng ml−1) and single vs double sampling (one, at least one, or both positive samples) using 1-day sample with cutoff at 100 ng ml−1 as the reference strategy. A total of 20 596 subjects aged 50–69 years were enrolled from Italian population-based screening programmes. Positivity rate was 4.5% for reference strategy and 8.0 and 2.0% for the most sensitive and the most specific strategy, respectively. Cancer detection rate of reference strategy was 2.8‰, and ranged between 2.1 and 3.4‰ in other strategies; reference strategy detected 15.6‰ advanced adenomas (range=10.0–22.5‰). The number needed to scope to find a cancer or an advanced adenoma was lower than 2 (1.5–1.7) for the most specific strategies, whereas it was 2.4–2.7, according to different thresholds, for the most sensitive ones. Different strategies seem to have a greater impact on adenomas rather than on cancer detection rate. The study provides information when deciding screening protocols and to adapt them to local resources

Screening for colorectal cancer: possible improvements by risk assessment evaluation?

Emerging results indicate that screening improves survival of patients with colorectal cancer. Therefore, screening programs are already implemented or are being considered for implementation in Asia, Europe and North America. At present, a great variety of screening methods are available including colono- and sigmoidoscopy, CT- and MR-colonography, capsule endoscopy, DNA and occult blood in feces, and so on. The pros and cons of the various tests, including economic issues, are debated. Although a plethora of evaluated and validated tests even with high specificities and reasonable sensitivities are available, an international consensus on screening procedures is still not established. The rather limited compliance in present screening procedures is a significant drawback. Furthermore, some of the procedures are costly and, therefore, selection methods for these procedures are needed. Current research into improvements of screening for colorectal cancer includes blood-based biological markers, such as proteins, DNA and RNA in combination with various demographically and clinically parameters into a “risk assessment evaluation” (RAE) test. It is assumed that such a test may lead to higher acceptance among the screening populations, and thereby improve the compliances. Furthermore, the involvement of the media, including social media, may add even more individuals to the screening programs. Implementation of validated RAE and progressively improved screening methods may reform the cost/benefit of screening procedures for colorectal cancer. Therefore, results of present research, validating RAE tests, are awaited with interest

User's perspectives of barriers and facilitators to implementing quality colonoscopy services in Canada: a study protocol

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Colorectal cancer (CRC) represents a serious and growing health problem in Canada. Colonoscopy is used for screening and diagnosis of symptomatic or high CRC risk individuals. Although a number of countries are now implementing quality colonoscopy services, knowledge synthesis of barriers and facilitators perceived by healthcare professionals and patients during implementation has not been carried out. In addition, the perspectives of various stakeholders towards the implementation of quality colonoscopy services and the need of an efficient organisation of such services have been reported in the literature but have not been synthesised yet. The present study aims to produce a comprehensive synthesis of actual knowledge on the barriers and facilitators perceived by all stakeholders to the implementation of quality colonoscopy services in Canada.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>First, we will conduct a comprehensive review of the scientific literature and other published documentation on the barriers and facilitators to implementing quality colonoscopy services. Standardised literature searches and data extraction methods will be used. The quality of the studies and their relevance to informing decisions on colonoscopy services implementation will be assessed. For each group of users identified, barriers and facilitators will be categorised and compiled using narrative synthesis and meta-analytical techniques. The principle factors identified for each group of users will then be validated for its applicability to various Canadian contexts using the Delphi study method. Following this study, a set of strategies will be identified to inform decision makers involved in the implementation of quality colonoscopy services across Canadian jurisdictions.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study will be the first to systematically summarise the barriers and facilitators to implementation of quality colonoscopy services perceived by different groups and to consider the local contexts in order to ensure the applicability of this knowledge to the particular realities of various Canadian jurisdictions. Linkages with strategic partners and decision makers in the realisation of this project will favour the utilisation of its results to support strategies for implementing quality colonoscopy services and CRC screening programs in the Canadian health system.</p