MicroRNA (miRNA) profiling is an important step in studying biological associations and identifying marker candidates. miRNA exists in isoforms, called isomiRs, which may exhibit distinct properties. With conventional profiling methods, limitations in assay and analysis platforms may compromise isomiR interrogation. We introduce a comprehensive approach to sequence-oriented isomiR annotation (CASMIR) to allow unbiased identification of global isomiRs from small RNA sequencing data. In this approach, small RNA reads are maintained as independent sequences instead of being summarized under miRNA names. IsomiR features are identified through step-wise local alignment against canonical forms and precursor sequences. Through customizing the reference database, CASMIR is applicable to isomiR annotation across species. To demonstrate its application, we investigated isomiR profiles in normal and neoplastic human colorectal epithelia. We also ran miRDeep2, a popular miRNA analysis algorithm to validate isomiRs annotated by CASMIR. With CASMIR, specific and biologically relevant isomiR patterns could be identified. We note that specific isomiRs are often more abundant than their canonical forms. We identify isomiRs that are commonly up-regulated in both colorectal cancer and advanced adenoma, and illustrate advantages in targeting isomiRs as potential biomarkers over canonical forms. Studying miRNAs at the isomiR level could reveal new insight into miRNA biology and inform assay design for specific isomiRs. CASMIR facilitates comprehensive annotation of isomiR features in small RNA sequencing data for isomiR profiling and differential expression analysis.

Guideline-recommended screening programs exist for only a few cancer types. Although all these programs are understood to lead to reductions in cancer-related mortality, standard-of-care screening tests vary in accuracy, adherence and effectiveness. Recent advances in high-throughput technologies and machine learning have facilitated the development of blood-based multi-cancer cancer early detection (MCED) tests. MCED tests are positioned to be complementary to standard-of-care screening and they may broaden screening availability, especially for individuals who are not adherent with current screening programs and for individuals who may harbor cancers with no available screening options. In this article, we outline some key features that should be considered for study design and MCED test development, provide an example of the developmental pathway undertaken for an emerging multi-biomarker class MCED test and propose a clinical algorithm for an imaging-based diagnostic resolution strategy following MCED testing.

Introduction: Non-invasive assays are needed to better discriminate patients with prostate cancer (PCa) to avoid over-treatment of indolent disease. We analyzed 14 methylated DNA markers (MDMs) from urine samples of patients with biopsy-proven PCa relative to healthy controls and further studied discrimination of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) from healthy controls and Gleason 6 cancers. Methods: To evaluate the panel, urine from 24 healthy male volunteers with no clinical suspicion for PCa and 24 men with biopsy-confirmed disease across all Gleason scores was collected. Blinded to clinical status, DNA from the supernatant was analyzed for methylation signal within specific DNA sequences across 14 genes (HES5, ZNF655, ITPRIPL1, MAX.chr3.6187, SLCO3A1, CHST11, SERPINB9, WNT3A, KCNB2, GAS6, AKR1B1, MAX.chr3.8028, GRASP, ST6GALNAC2) by target enrichment long-probe quantitative-amplified signal assays. Results: Utilizing an overall specificity cut-off of 100% for discriminating normal controls from PCa cases across the MDM panel resulted in 71% sensitivity (95% CI: 49–87%) for PCa detection (4/7 Gleason 6, 8/12 Gleason 7, 5/5 Gleason 8+) and 76% (50–92%) for csPCa (Gleason ≥ 7). At 100% specificity for controls and Gleason 6 patients combined, MDM panel sensitivity was 59% (33–81%) for csPCa (5/12 Gleason 7, 5/5 Gleason 8+). Conclusions: MDMs assayed in urine offer high sensitivity and specificity for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. Prospective evaluation is necessary to estimate discrimination of patients as first-line screening and as an adjunct to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing.