PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 29, 2026Cancer1 citationsOpen Access

Blood‐based cell‐free DNA and multitarget stool RNA screening tests to detect colorectal cancer: A systematic review

View Full Paper
KKKarli KondoRSRita L. ShiauCTClarissa A. B. Troutman

Key Points

  • This review aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and utility of blood-based and stool RNA tests for colorectal cancer screening.
  • Conducted a systematic review of PubMed and other databases up to March 30, 2026.
  • Included 12 studies that assessed cfDNA and mt-sRNA tests for colorectal cancer.
  • Two investigators assessed bias and evidence strength, resolving discord through consensus.
  • cfDNA test sensitivities for colorectal cancer ranged from 80.8% to 81.1% with specificities of 89.5% to 90.4%.
  • mt-sRNA test sensitivities were 93% for CRC and 48% for advanced lesions with specificity of 90%.
  • No serious harms were reported, though evidence on adherence was insufficient.

Abstract

Two new tests, a cell-free DNA (cfDNA) blood-based test (BBT) and multitarget stool RNA (mt-sRNA) test with in-laboratory fecal immunochemical testing, were recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, and a second BBT is under review. These tests have the potential to overcome barriers to screening. This review evaluates the current evidence to better understand their utility for routine screening. The authors searched PubMed, other databases, and gray literature sources through March 30, 2026. Included studies examined the diagnostic accuracy, harms, and the adherence to cfDNA and mt-sRNA screening tests for colorectal cancer (CRC). One investigator abstracted data, and a second confirmed. Two investigators independently assessed the risk of bias and strength of evidence. Discords were resolved through consensus. From 262 titles, 12 studies (17 publications) were included. Three studies provide moderate strength evidence to support the performance characteristics of cfDNA, and one provides low strength evidence for mt-sRNA. For cfDNA, adjusted CRC and advanced precancerous lesions sensitivities ranged from 80.8% to 81.1% and from 12.9% to 13.7%, respectively, and advanced colorectal neoplasia specificity ranged from 89.5% to 90.4%. For mt-sRNA, CRC sensitivities were 93% and 48%, and observed specificity was 90%. No studies reported serious harms, and the evidence comparing adherence was insufficient. We found that cfDNA screening tests for CRC are similar, and although mt-sRNA estimates fall below those demonstrated by mt-sDNA, its in-laboratory fecal immunochemical testing, has the potential to increase adherence. Future research examining adherence is needed, as are data from which to examine their impact on underrepresented populations.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Kondo et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a192c0ffab5b468c4414f99https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.70428
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and others misunderstand stool testing for colorectal cancer2025 · 6 citations
  2. 2Assessing applicability when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health Care Program2011 · 92 citations
  3. 3Barriers and Facilitators to Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Health Fair Attendees in Utah2025 · 1 citations
  4. 4Molecular, Socioeconomic, and Clinical Factors Affecting Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Survival2024 · 34 citations
  5. 5Finding evidence for comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health Care Program2011 · 54 citations