Position PaperTumour markers in colorectal cancer: European Group on Tumour Markers (EGTM) guidelines for clinical use
Introduction
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide with an estimated 1 million new cases and a half million deaths each year.1 It is now clear that CRC results from the cumulative effects of sequential genetic alterations in proto-oncogenes, tumour suppressor genes and DNA repair genes (for review, see Ref. [2]). In sporadic CRC, these alterations are acquired, and are likely to be caused by exogenous and endogenous carcinogens. In contrast, in cancer syndromes such as familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) and hereditary non-polyposis CRC (HNPCC), critical genetic alterations that predispose to malignancy are inherited.3 For example in FAP, a germline mutation in the APC gene which occurs in every cell predisposes to adenomatous polyps, while in HNPCC, mutations in DNA repair genes result in a more rapid accumulation of genetic alterations which increases the risk of polyp formation.
In recent years a multiplicity of markers have been proposed for CRC (for review, see Refs. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8). These markers can be measured in serum, tissue or stools. In 2003, the European Group on Tumour Markers (EGTM) published guidelines on the use of tumour markers in CRC9 (see Table 1 for a summary). These guidelines focussed almost exclusively on serum markers, especially CEA. The aims of this article are to present guidelines on tissue and faecal markers as well as to update the previous EGTM guidelines on serum markers. We also summarise existing published guidelines on genetic testing for inherited susceptibility to CRC. A summary of the updated EGTM guidelines together with the level of evidence10 for their clinical application is outlined in Table 2.
These guidelines should be particularly helpful to surgeons, physicians and nurses involved in the management of patients with CRC and to laboratory personnel undertaking measurement of tumour markers. Their adoption is of course voluntary and the ultimate decision regarding use of any marker should be made by the treating clinician, i.e. the guidelines are intended to aid rather than replace clinical judgement.
Section snippets
CEA in postoperative surveillance
Although the oldest, CEA remains the most widely used serum marker in patients with CRC. EGTM guidelines for the use of CEA in CRC were previously published in 2003 and are summarised in Table 1. The main use of CEA in CRC is in surveillance following curative resection for primary cancer. Five independent meta-analyses have compared outcome in patients undergoing intensive follow-up versus minimal or no follow-up.11, 12, 13, 14, 15 The first 2 of these 2 studies11, 12 included both
Faecal occult blood testing and screening for CRC
Faecal occult blood testing (FOBT) is the most widely used screening modality for CRC.22 Two main types of FOBT exist, i.e. the guaiac test which is based on the peroxidase-like activity (i.e. pseudoperoxidase) of haem in haemoglobin and the immunochemical test which detects the globin moiety in haemoglobin. Of these 2, the guaiac test has been the more widely evaluated. Four randomised trials have shown that screening with the guaiac-based FOBT reduced both the incidence and mortality of CRC
Tissue-based markers
While serum markers are primarily used for postoperative surveillance and stools-based markers are most likely to be used for screening, tissue-based markers have been investigated for potential prognostic and predictive value. The potential prognostic and predictive value of the most widely studied tissue markers in CRC is discussed below.
Tests for susceptibility to CRC
Approximately 15% of CRC are thought to be due to an inherited or familial predisposition.3 The most common hereditary conditions giving rise to an increased risk of CRC are hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP).
Future work
Guideline articles should not only contain recommendations on existing markers, but should also identify areas requiring further investigation. In the context of tumour markers in CRC, the following topics should be given priority:
- •
In order to develop a more accurate screening test for CRC, the existing panel of DNA markers should be expanded to enhance sensitivity. The main focus should be on structurally altered genes that are present in either adenomas with a high predisposition of
Conflict of interest statement
None declared.
Note: The EGTM is an ad hoc group of scientists and physicians from universities, hospitals and the diagnostic industry with an interest in tumour markers.9 One of its main aims is to produce guidelines on the clinical use of tumour markers. All the authors listed are members of the Gastrointestinal Focus group of the EGTM, apart from CS EH-F and PP who were guest authors.
References (98)
- et al.
Clinical utility of biochemical markers in colorectal cancer: European Group on Tumor Markers (EGTM) guidelines
Eur J Cancer
(2003) - et al.
Current treatment for colorectal cancer metastatic to the liver
Eur J Surg Oncol
(1999) - et al.
Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale, update based on new evidence
Gastroenterology
(2003) - et al.
Colorectal cancer screening by detection of altered human DNA in stool: feasibility of a multitarget assay panel
Gastroenterology
(2000) - et al.
Novel aspects of resistance to drugs targeted to dihydrofolate reductase and thymidylate synthase
Biochim Biophys Acta
(2002) - et al.
Mismatch repair proficiency and in vitro response to 5-fluorouracil
Gastroenterology
(1999) - et al.
Use of 5-fluorouracil and survival in patients with microsatellite unstable colorectal cancer
Gastroenterology
(2004) - et al.
Mutant KRAS, chromosomal instability and prognosis in colorectal cancer
Biochim Biophys Acta
(2005) - et al.
A genetic model for colorectal tumorigenesis
Cell
(1990) - et al.
The risk of hepatoblastoma in familial polyposis
J Pediatr
(1991)
New clinical criteria for hereditary polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC, Lynch syndrome) proposed by the International Group on HNPCC
Gastroenterology
Efficient detection of hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer gene carriers by screening for microsatellite instability before germline genetic testing
Gastroenterology
Controlled 15-year trial on screening for colorectal cancer in families with hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer
Gastroenterology
Decrease in mortality in Lynch syndrome families because of surveillance
Gastroenterology
Global cancer statistics
CA Cancer J Clin
Molecular pathogenesis of colorectal cancer
Cancer
Inherited susceptibility to colorectal cancer
Annu Rev Med
CEA as a marker for colorectal cancer: is it clinically useful
Clin Chem
Tumor markers and colorectal cancer: utility in management
J Surgical Oncol
The promise of biomarkers in colorectal cancer detection
Dis Markers
Prognostic and predictive molecular markers in colorectal carcinoma
Anticancer Res
Role of genomic markers in colorectal cancer treatment
J Clin Oncol
A tumor marker utility grading system (TMUGS): a framework to evaluate clinical utility of tumor markers
J Natl Cancer Inst
Follow up of colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis
Ann Surg
Follow-up of colorectal cancer: a meta analysis
Dis Colon Rectum
Impact on survival of intensive follow up after curative resection for colorectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials
Br Med J
Follow-up of patients with curatively resected colorectal cancer: a practice guideline
BMC Cancer
Surgical resection of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer: a systematic review of published studies
Br J Cancer
Clinical practice guidelines for the use of tumor markers in breast and colorectal cancer
J Clin Oncol
Modulation of fluorouracil by leucovorin in patients with advanced colorectal cancer: an updated meta-analyis
J Clin Oncol
Drug therapy: systematic therapy for colorectal cancer
N Engl J Med
ASCO 2006. Update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in gastrointestinal cancer
J Clin Oncol
Colorectal cancer screening in average risk individuals
Cancer Causes Control
American Cancer Society Guidelines for the Early Detection of Cancer
CA Cancer J Clin
Screening for colorectal cancer: recommendations and rationale
Ann Int Med
Colorectal cancer screening for persons at average risk
J Natl Cancer Instit
Identification of ras oncogene mutations in the stools of patients with curable colorectal tumors
Science
Detecting colorectal cancer in stool with use of multiple genetic targets
J Natl Cancer Inst
New stool test for colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review focusing on performance characteristics and practicalness
Int J Cancer
Faecal DNA versus faecal occult blood for colorectal-cancer screening in an average risk population
N Engl J Med
5-Fluorouracil: mechanism of action and clinical strategies
Nat Rev Cancer
A comprehensive review of 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma
Cancer
Thymidylate synthase level as the main predictive parameter for sensitivity to 5-fluorouracil, but not for folate-based thymidylate synthase inhibitors, in 13 nonselected colon cancer cell lines
Clin Cancer Res
Is the measurement of thymidylate synthase to determine suitability for treatment with 5-fluoropyrimidines ready for prime time?
Clin Cancer Res
Thymidylate synthase expression and prognosis in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
J Clin Oncol
Microsatellite instability
N Engl J Med
Systematic review of microsatellite instability and colorectal cancer prognosis
J Clin Oncol
Cited by (417)
Correlation between human colon cancer specific antigens and Raman spectra. Attempting to use Raman spectroscopy in the determination of tumor markers for colon cancer
2023, Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology, and MedicineRole of DEK in carcinogenesis, diagnosis, prognosis, and therapeutic outcome of breast cancer: An evidence-based clinical review
2023, Critical Reviews in Oncology/HematologyCitation Excerpt :Studies implicating DEK involvement in breast cancer pathogenesis are exhaustive and promising, suggesting a connection to various molecular pathways and impact on diagnosis and prognosis (Liu et al., 2012a; Ying and Wu, 2015). Therefore, an in-depth review of this biomarker is necessary to explore the role of DEK in breast cancer carcinogenesis and, thus, its possibility of involvement in histopathologic diagnosis, prognosis, and clinical outcomes of breast cancer (Duffy et al., 2007). Following previously published studies, (Habiburrahman et al., 2021, 2022) in compiling this evidence-based review, the writers used the PIO query approach: (Population: breast cancer patients or experimental cell models; Importance/intervention: pathological examination, histological assessment, or breast cancer cell culture treated/tampered using the DEK oncoprotein (upregulation or downregulation); and Outcome: carcinogenesis, clinicopathological characteristic, prognostic factor, or treatment outcomes) to conceptualise the literature search process (Holloway and Peart, 2018; Siwek et al., 2002; Oxford CEEBM, 2011).