backtop


Print 5 comment(s) - last by DanNeely.. on Jun 7 at 4:22 PM

The blood test looks for changes in one particular gene called SDC2

Researchers in South Korea have found an alternative to a colonoscopy for detecting colon cancer. 

The study, conducted by researchers from Genomictree Inc. and Yonsei University College of Medicine in Seoul, offers a noninvasive and simple blood test for colon cancer. 

The blood test watches the methylation of genes, which is a biochemical process vital to how genes function are expressed. By looking at this process, researchers can pinpoint a set of genes with methylation patterns that are found in tissues from colon cancer tumors. 

The researchers look for changes in one particular gene called SDC2, which is linked to colon cancer growth. 

To see if the new blood test worked, the research team took tissues from 133 colon cancer patients and tissues from healthy patients as well. 

Using the gene-based screen test, accurate detection of stage 1 cancer occurred 92 percent of the time. For later stages of cancer, accurate detection dropped to 87 percent. 

For those without cancer, the blood test detected so 95 percent of the time. 

According to lead study author TaeJeong Oh, these results indicate "SDC2 is suitable for early detection of [colorectal cancer] where therapeutic interventions have the greatest likelihood of curing the patient from the disease."

This blood test could give patients a simple alternative to colon cancer detection instead of the invasive colonoscopy. As far as accuracy goes, the blood test is in its early stages and will need more studies by others in order to progress. 

Today's stool tests can't detect cancer every time, and the colonoscopy isn't 100 percent every time either. A colonoscopy can miss polyps because they are hidden in the crevices of the intestines. 

With more research, the simple blood test could one day be an easier and more accurate method of detection. 

Source: NBC News



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

cross-contamination
By kaborka on 6/7/2013 2:17:44 PM , Rating: 2
Not to mention avoiding the significant risk of getting Hep-B/C or HIV from improperly sterilized eqpt! Numerous cases reported.




RE: cross-contamination
By eshan001 on 6/7/2013 3:40:16 PM , Rating: 2
While sensational (and certainly bad), these events are exceedingly rare. What's more common are complications - having operated on numerous colonoscopy related issues (perforation of the colon), it's not a procedure without risk.

Ultimately I think the best part of this is that it's not operator-dependent like a colonoscopy is (i.e. how good is your endoscopist). People quote upwards of 95% sensitivity for colonoscopy but that's in large academic centers - outside the ivory tower who knows.


RE: cross-contamination
By eshan001 on 6/7/2013 3:40:16 PM , Rating: 2
While sensational (and certainly bad), these events are exceedingly rare. What's more common are complications - having operated on numerous colonoscopy related issues (perforation of the colon), it's not a procedure without risk.

Ultimately I think the best part of this is that it's not operator-dependent like a colonoscopy is (i.e. how good is your endoscopist). People quote upwards of 95% sensitivity for colonoscopy but that's in large academic centers - outside the ivory tower who knows.


Othe test failure rates?
By DanNeely on 6/7/2013 4:22:35 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Today's stool tests can't detect cancer every time, and the colonoscopy isn't 100 percent every time either. A colonoscopy can miss polyps because they are hidden in the crevices of the intestines.


... so what are the failure rates of these tests? The rates of the new test aren't relevant without a baseline to compare against.




By phazers on 6/7/2013 3:19:22 PM , Rating: 2
As someone who has had the "periscope up the butt", I can attest that they knock you out before the colonoscopy, so the most uncomfortable parts are the evening before when you have to flush out your bowels with laxatives and enemas, and afterwards when trying to fart out all that air they pumped into your intestine so as to minimize those crevices where a tumor could be hiding. However both of those are definitely uncomfortable experiences.

So a simple and accurate blood test would be much preferred - only a positive test would result in a colonoscopy, during which they can snip out the suspect part and then analyze it further.




"And boy have we patented it!" -- Steve Jobs, Macworld 2007














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki