Early‐onset colorectal cancer: why it should be high on our list of differentials

Garrett, Celine; Steffens, Daniel; Solomon, Michael J.; Koh, Cherry

doi:10.1111/ans.17698

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Environmental factors, such as a Western diet and obesity, have been associated with CRC development at an earlier age (3,4). As many CRC screening programs do not begin until the age of 45-50 years old (5,6), there is often a delay in the diagnosis of these patients (7), and cancer is not detected until a later stage when it is associated with higher mortality (8). Interestingly, this stage difference cannot be fully explained by the diagnosis delay, pointing to differences in underlying pathophysiology (8).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of differentially expressed genes and splicing events in early-onset colorectal cancer

Marx,

Mankarious,

Koltun

et al. 2024

Front. Oncol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) has been steadily increasing in younger individuals over the past several decades for reasons that are incompletely defined. Identifying differences in gene expression profiles, or transcriptomes, in early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC, < 50 years old) patients versus later-onset colorectal cancer (LOCRC, > 50 years old) patients is one approach to understanding molecular and genetic features that distinguish EOCRC.MethodsWe performed RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq) to characterize the transcriptomes of patient-matched tumors and adjacent, uninvolved (normal) colonic segments from EOCRC (n=21) and LOCRC (n=22) patients. The EOCRC and LOCRC cohorts were matched for demographic and clinical characteristics. We used The Cancer Genome Atlas Colon Adenocarcinoma (TCGA-COAD) database for validation. We used a series of computational and bioinformatic tools to identify EOCRC-specific differentially expressed genes, molecular pathways, predicted cell populations, differential gene splicing events, and predicted neoantigens.ResultsWe identified an eight-gene signature in EOCRC comprised of ALDOB, FBXL16, IL1RN, MSLN, RAC3, SLC38A11, WBSCR27 and WNT11, from which we developed a score predictive of overall CRC patient survival. On the entire set of genes identified in normal tissues and tumors, cell type deconvolution analysis predicted a differential abundance of immune and non-immune populations in EOCRC versus LOCRC. Gene set enrichment analysis identified increased expression of splicing machinery in EOCRC. We further found differences in alternative splicing (AS) events, including one within the long non-coding RNA, HOTAIRM1. Additional analysis of AS found seven events specific to EOCRC that encode potential neoantigens.ConclusionOur transcriptome analyses identified genetic and molecular features specific to EOCRC which may inform future screening, development of prognostic indicators, and novel drug targets.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of differentially expressed genes and splicing events in early-onset colorectal cancer

Marx,

Mankarious,

Koltun

et al. 2024

Front. Oncol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A decade-long study on pathological distinctions of resectable early versus late onset colorectal cancer and optimal screening age determination

Song,

Han,

Qian

et al. 2024

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The incidence of Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer (EOCRC) is increasing. However, the prognosis of EOCRC compared to Late-Onset Colorectal Cancer (LOCRC), and the ideal age for initial colorectal cancer (CRC) screening are not clear. In this study, we identified the pathological differences between the groups and determined the optimal screening age for CRC patients. We included 10,172 patients diagnosed with CRC from January 2011 to December 2021 in this study. Survival differences were compared by plotting Kaplan–Meier survival curves and conducting landmark analysis. Additionally, the diagnostic age of CRC patients was analyzed using age cumulative curves. Compared to LOCRC patients, EOCRC patients had a higher proportion of deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) and more advanced TNM staging (P < 0.05). The five-year survival of EOCRC patients was significantly better than that of LOCRC patients (P < 0.05). Laparoscopic surgery improved the long-term survival of EOCRC patients. Proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) favored the long-term survival of EOCRC patients. The survival rate of EOCRC patients at TNM stages I and II was higher than that of LOCRC patients at the same stages (P < 0.05). The age cumulative curve showed a substantial increase in the number of CRC patients at 40 years. The long-term prognosis of EOCRC patients is better than that of LOCRC patients, especially among those with pMMR, stages I–II, and who undergo laparoscopic surgery. For people with a high risk of cancer, such as a family history of cancer and poor lifestyle habits, the starting age for CRC screening should be 40 years.

show abstract

Early Onset Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma (EOPAC): presentation, clinical course and treatment outcomes in comparison to Average Onset Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma (AOPAC): a retrospective cohort study

Rashad,

Gouda,

Sabra

et al. 2024

BMC Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) is a disease of decimal prognosis, with around 50% of patients presenting with metastatic disease. Previous trials reported a high incidence of early onset pancreatic cancer (EOPAC) in Egypt, presenting about 25% of patients with PAC. The clinic-pathological features and prognosis of EOPAC needs more study. Patients and methods A retrospective analysis of patients’ records at Shefa Al-Orman comprehensive cancer center database. Patients with histo-pathologically confirmed diagnosis of PAC. We categorized patients according to the age at diagnosis into EOPAC (≤ 50 years) and average onset PAC (AOPAC). Data on risk factors, family history, presenting symptoms, clinic-pathological features, treatment, and prognosis were extracted. Patients with histopathologically confirmed diagnosis of pancreatic cancer diagnosed between December 2016-December 2022 were included. Results The study cohort consisted of 412 patients. EOPAC represented 20.3% of patients, with no significant differences in risk factors and family history compared to AOPAC. Duration of symptoms before diagnosis is longer in EOPAC, with the majority of EOPAC presenting with localized disease (23.8%) and locally advanced tumors (28.5%) compared to AOPAC. AOPAC presented more with metastatic disease (64% vs. 45.2%, p = 0.003). EOPAC are usually submitted to more aggressive treatment including radical surgery, neoadjuvant therapy, and aggressive chemotherapy regimens in metastatic disease. Disease free survival (DFS) of EOPAC was shorter than AOPAC (11 months vs. 17 months, p = 0.889), but overall survival OS was significantly longer in EOPAC (10 months vs. 6 months, p = 0.013). Conclusion Patients with EOPAC in Egypt represent around 25% of cases. EOPAC tend to have a shorter disease free survival (DFS) in patients presenting with localized disease. The overall survival (OS) is longer in EOPAC compared to AOPAC. Further studies are mandatory to identify the epidemiological and risk factors of EOPAC in Egypt.

show abstract

Early‐onset colorectal cancer: why it should be high on our list of differentials

Cited by 3 publications

References 50 publications

Identification of differentially expressed genes and splicing events in early-onset colorectal cancer

Identification of differentially expressed genes and splicing events in early-onset colorectal cancer

A decade-long study on pathological distinctions of resectable early versus late onset colorectal cancer and optimal screening age determination

Early Onset Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma (EOPAC): presentation, clinical course and treatment outcomes in comparison to Average Onset Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma (AOPAC): a retrospective cohort study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About