Comments on: Colonoscopies vs. Stool DNA Tests for Colon Cancer Screening http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/ Your Genes, Your Health, Your Choices Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:43:32 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2 By: Lisa Lee http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-145378 Lisa Lee Tue, 07 Oct 2008 17:27:57 +0000 http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-145378 Jason, if you haven't heard the news yet, ColoSure™ is now available. :-) This is the stool DNA test that LabCorp is processing, as you noted above. Read more about it here: <a href="www.dnadirect.com//patients/tests/colon_cancer/index.jsp" rel="nofollow">ColoSure Stool DNA Testing</a> Jason, if you haven’t heard the news yet, ColoSure™ is now available. :-) This is the stool DNA test that LabCorp is processing, as you noted above. Read more about it here: ColoSure Stool DNA Testing

]]> By: jason trembley http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-142811 jason trembley Wed, 24 Sep 2008 23:25:49 +0000 http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-142811 Greg, i do not agree with you at all. We have abysmal screening rates in this country and a test that detects 85% of CRC in all stages and does not MISS flat legions is worth taking any day of the week. stool DNA is much more effective than a mammogram and look at how many folks take this test. A colonoscopy should be used only for positive stool dna, VC and FOBT. It is much too expensive and invasive for screening. If you are at a high risk of CRC, than a colonocopy is the ONLY test you should take..........but for the other 90 million Americans, stool DNA is the future my friend. When the next generation stool DNA test hits the market in 5 years with a 90% sensitivity rate, colonoscopies will be limited to surgery only. It will reduce the costs to the system dramatically. Greg, i do not agree with you at all. We have abysmal screening rates in this country and a test that detects 85% of CRC in all stages and does not MISS flat legions is worth taking any day of the week. stool DNA is much more effective than a mammogram and look at how many folks take this test. A colonoscopy should be used only for positive stool dna, VC and FOBT. It is much too expensive and invasive for screening. If you are at a high risk of CRC, than a colonocopy is the ONLY test you should take……….but for the other 90 million Americans, stool DNA is the future my friend. When the next generation stool DNA test hits the market in 5 years with a 90% sensitivity rate, colonoscopies will be limited to surgery only. It will reduce the costs to the system dramatically.

]]> By: Greg http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-142619 Greg Tue, 23 Sep 2008 01:49:42 +0000 http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-142619 I still fail to understand why we are attempting to intervene as a society with those who know the need for preventative testing of a colonoscopy and still deny themselves the test for comfort reasons. The best technique is clearly the most invasive and uncomfortable, and yet we go out of our way to coddle those unwilling to take the test, they have made their decision and should have to live (or die) by it. This whole discussion seems designed to reward those who go out of their way to not obtain the needed tests for inane reasons. Humans need to understand this test is not optional and must be encouraged to comply with the necessity of obtaining it. Offering less effectual options (stool test) just leads us down the slippery slope of offering cheaper and less invasive testing with no net positive gain in detection and treatment, and a increased and erroneous public preconception that there are other just as effective options, when there is none yet. I still fail to understand why we are attempting to intervene as a society with those who know the need for preventative testing of a colonoscopy and still deny themselves the test for comfort reasons. The best technique is clearly the most invasive and uncomfortable, and yet we go out of our way to coddle those unwilling to take the test, they have made their decision and should have to live (or die) by it.

This whole discussion seems designed to reward those who go out of their way to not obtain the needed tests for inane reasons. Humans need to understand this test is not optional and must be encouraged to comply with the necessity of obtaining it.

Offering less effectual options (stool test) just leads us down the slippery slope of offering cheaper and less invasive testing with no net positive gain in detection and treatment, and a increased and erroneous public preconception that there are other just as effective options, when there is none yet.

]]> By: jason trembley http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-120820 jason trembley Wed, 02 Jul 2008 20:35:43 +0000 http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-120820 Labcorp will be offering a new stool DNA test in a few months! I would have her call them to get the details! A colo should never be the first screening test in my opinion, it should be used to remove both polyps, precancers and cancer only! It is way to expensive and invasive for a screening tool! Labcorp will be offering a new stool DNA test in a few months! I would have her call them to get the details! A colo should never be the first screening test in my opinion, it should be used to remove both polyps, precancers and cancer only! It is way to expensive and invasive for a screening tool!

]]> By: Frank http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-120792 Frank Wed, 02 Jul 2008 14:13:17 +0000 http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-120792 My wife was so afraid of taking the colonostropy that she canceled the appointment. I might add that it has taken tens to build up the courage to make this appoiment. What to Do? Frank My wife was so afraid of taking the colonostropy that she canceled the appointment. I might add that it has taken tens to build up the courage to make this appoiment.
What to Do?

Frank

]]> By: jason tremlbey http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-90224 jason tremlbey Fri, 07 Mar 2008 20:50:00 +0000 http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-90224 Lisa!!!!!!!!!!!! great news indeed. I encourage all folks that currently get the FIT/FOBT test to take this fDNA test every five years instead of these stool blood tests. FIT/FOBT only detect blood in the stool, not cancer. Also, not all cancers bleed, so the test is not very sensitivie. On cost, there is a Version 2 test that should hit the market later this year that costs $300 (so about $60 per year over five years), almost as cheap as an annual worthless FIT test costing $40 to $50. The point is this stool DNA test will save countless lives. Great job ACS. Lisa!!!!!!!!!!!! great news indeed. I encourage all folks that currently get the FIT/FOBT test to take this fDNA test every five years instead of these stool blood tests. FIT/FOBT only detect blood in the stool, not cancer. Also, not all cancers bleed, so the test is not very sensitivie. On cost, there is a Version 2 test that should hit the market later this year that costs $300 (so about $60 per year over five years), almost as cheap as an annual worthless FIT test costing $40 to $50. The point is this stool DNA test will save countless lives. Great job ACS.

]]> By: jason trembley http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-90223 jason trembley Fri, 07 Mar 2008 20:47:11 +0000 http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-90223 you can get a DNA test from labcorp. fDNA test is so much better than both FOBT/FIT, it is not even comparable. When the DNA test comes down to $250 per test and taken every 5 years, the cost is almost similar to a FIT test (only detects blood, not cancer, and not all cancers bleed. the ones that do are usually Stage 3 or 4). In other words, average risk folks should switch to the DNA test over annual FIT/FOBT you can get a DNA test from labcorp. fDNA test is so much better than both FOBT/FIT, it is not even comparable. When the DNA test comes down to $250 per test and taken every 5 years, the cost is almost similar to a FIT test (only detects blood, not cancer, and not all cancers bleed. the ones that do are usually Stage 3 or 4). In other words, average risk folks should switch to the DNA test over annual FIT/FOBT

]]> By: Lisa Lee http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-90222 Lisa Lee Fri, 07 Mar 2008 20:45:46 +0000 http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-90222 Jason, good news this week! The new ACS guidelines are out, and as you predicted, stool DNA testing (or sDNA) is now included. This is also good news for people who want stool DNA testing reimbursed by their insurance. Insurance is much more likely to cover testing when it's included in medical society guidelines. Gadfly, colonoscopy is a unique procedure in that it can be both a screening test and a preventive procedure: you may go in for a colo to screen, but if the physician sees something while he/she's in there (polyps), she can remove them at that time. I'm not sure what your point is. Can you clarify? Jason, good news this week! The new ACS guidelines are out, and as you predicted, stool DNA testing (or sDNA) is now included.

This is also good news for people who want stool DNA testing reimbursed by their insurance. Insurance is much more likely to cover testing when it’s included in medical society guidelines.

Gadfly, colonoscopy is a unique procedure in that it can be both a screening test and a preventive procedure: you may go in for a colo to screen, but if the physician sees something while he/she’s in there (polyps), she can remove them at that time. I’m not sure what your point is. Can you clarify?

]]> By: gadfly http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-90103 gadfly Fri, 07 Mar 2008 09:02:46 +0000 http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-90103 Once again there is confusion between PREVENTING cancer (colonoscopy) and DETECTING it early enough to operate and save a life (fecal tests). Once again there is confusion between PREVENTING cancer (colonoscopy) and DETECTING it early enough to operate and save a life (fecal tests).

]]> By: bruce http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-90030 bruce Fri, 07 Mar 2008 01:22:02 +0000 http://talk.dnadirect.com/2006/12/14/colonoscopies-vs-stool-dna-tests-for-colon-cancer-screening/#comment-90030 where caN A PATIENT OBTAIN DNA STOOL TEST? where caN A PATIENT OBTAIN DNA STOOL TEST?

]]>