Cordero OJ, Mosquera-Ferreiro L, Gomez-Tourino I. Improving colorectal cancer screening programs. World J Gastroenterol 2024; 30(22): 2849-2851 [PMID: 38947291 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v30.i22.2849]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Oscar J Cordero, PhD, Professor, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Santiago de Compostela, CIBUS Building, Campus Vida, Santiago de Compostela 15782, Spain. oscarj.cordero@usc.es
Research Domain of This Article
Oncology
Article-Type of This Article
Editorial
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Gastroenterol. Jun 14, 2024; 30(22): 2849-2851 Published online Jun 14, 2024. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v30.i22.2849
Improving colorectal cancer screening programs
Oscar J Cordero, Lucia Mosquera-Ferreiro, Iria Gomez-Tourino
Oscar J Cordero, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela 15782, Spain
Lucia Mosquera-Ferreiro, Iria Gomez-Tourino, Centre for Research in Molecular Medicine and Chronic Diseases (CiMUS), University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela 15782, Galicia, Spain
Author contributions: Cordero OJ, Mosquera-Ferreiro L, and Gomez-Tourino I contributed to the manuscript writing and editing, illustrations, and review of literature of this paper; Cordero OJ designed the overall concept and outline of the manuscript; Gomez-Tourino I contributed to the discussion and design of the manuscript; and all authors have read and approved the final manuscript.
Supported byXunta de Galicia (Ayudas de Consolidación y Estructuración de Unidades de Investigación Competitivas de la Consellería de Cultura, Educación, Formación Profesional y Universidades, GRC, ED431C 2023/28 and GRC, ED431C 2023/09.
Conflict-of-interest statement: All the authors report no relevant conflicts of interest for this article.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Corresponding author: Oscar J Cordero, PhD, Professor, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Santiago de Compostela, CIBUS Building, Campus Vida, Santiago de Compostela 15782, Spain. oscarj.cordero@usc.es
Received: April 10, 2024 Revised: May 6, 2024 Accepted: May 20, 2024 Published online: June 14, 2024 Processing time: 56 Days and 21.9 Hours
Abstract
In this editorial we comment on the article by Agatsuma et al published in the World Journal of Gastroenterology. They suggest policies for more effective colorectal screening. Screening is the main policy that has led to lower mortality rates in later years among the population that was eligible for screening. Colonoscopy is the gold standard tool for screening and has preventive effects by removing precancerous or early malignant polyps. However, colonoscopy is an invasive process, and fecal tests such as the current hemoglobin immunodetection were developed, followed by endoscopy, as the general tool for population screening, avoiding logistical and economic problems. Even so, participation and adherence rates are low. Different screening options are being developed with the idea that if people could choose between the ones that best suit them, participation in population-based screening programs would increase. Blood tests, such as a recent one that detects cell-free DNA shed by tumors called circulating tumor DNA, showed a similar accuracy rate to stool tests for cancer, but were less sensitive for advanced precancerous lesions. At the time when the crosstalk between the immune system and cancer was being established as a new hallmark of cancer, novel immune system-related biomarkers and information on patients’ immune parameters, such as cell counts of different immune populations, were studied for the early detection of colorectal cancer, since they could be effective in asymptomatic people, appearing earlier in the adenoma-carcinoma development compared to the presence of fecal blood. sCD26, for example, detected 80.37% of advanced adenomas. To reach as many eligible people as possible, starting at an earlier age than current programs, the direction could be to apply tests based on blood, urine or salivary fluid to samples taken during routine visits to the primary health system.
Core Tip: Although cancer cases are increasing worldwide, the decline in cancer-associated deaths in middle-aged people in recent years has demonstrated progress in cancer treatment, detection, and prevention policies. Colorectal screening, one of those successful policies, however, has some drawbacks, such as low adherence to the fecal hemoglobin immunodetection. New ways to detect colorectal cancer are being discussed.
