Dataset Information

CLIC1 and CLIC4 complement CA125 as a diagnostic biomarker panel for all subtypes of epithelial ovarian cancer.

ABSTRACT: New plasma and tissue biomarkers of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) could improve early diagnosis and post-diagnosis clinical management. Here we investigated tissue staining and tissue secretion of CLIC1 and CLIC4 across EOC subtypes. CLIC1 and CLIC4 are two promising biomarkers we previously showed were elevated in EOC patient sera. Individually, CLIC1 or CLIC4 stained larger percentages of malignant tumors across all EOC subtypes compared with CA125, particularly early stage and mucinous tumors. CLIC4 also stained benign tumors but staining was limited to nuclei; whereas malignant tumors showed diffuse cellular staining of stromal and tumor cells. Both proteins were shed by all EOC subtypes tumors in short term organ culture at more consistent levels than CA125, supporting their potential as pan-subtype serum and tissue biomarkers. Elevated CLIC4 expression, but not CLIC1 expression, was a negative indicator of patient survival, and CLIC4 knockdown in cultured cells decreased cell proliferation and migration indicating a potential role in tumor progression. These results suggest CLIC1 and CLIC4 are promising serum and tissue biomarkers as well as potential therapeutic targets for all EOC subtypes. This justifies development of high throughput serum/plasma biomarker assays to evaluate utility of a biomarker panel consisting of CLIC1, CLIC4 and CA125.

SUBMITTER: Singha B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6170428 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

CLIC1 and CLIC4 complement CA125 as a diagnostic biomarker panel for all subtypes of epithelial ovarian cancer.

Singha Bipradeb B Harper Sandra L SL Goldman Aaron R AR Bitler Benjamin G BG Aird Katherine M KM Borowsky Mark E ME Cadungog Mark G MG Liu Qin Q Zhang Rugang R Jean Stephanie S Drapkin Ronny R Speicher David W DW

Scientific reports 20181003 1

New plasma and tissue biomarkers of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) could improve early diagnosis and post-diagnosis clinical management. Here we investigated tissue staining and tissue secretion of CLIC1 and CLIC4 across EOC subtypes. CLIC1 and CLIC4 are two promising biomarkers we previously showed were elevated in EOC patient sera. Individually, CLIC1 or CLIC4 stained larger percentages of malignant tumors across all EOC subtypes compared with CA125, particularly early stage and mucinous tumo ...[more]

PMID: 30282979

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveSurvival in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) remains poor. Most patients are diagnosed in late stages. Early diagnosis increases the chance of survival. We used the proximity extension assay from Olink Proteomics to search for new protein biomarkers with the potential to improve the diagnostic performance of CA125 and HE4 in patients with ovarian tumors.Material and methodsPlasma samples were obtained from 180 women with ovarian tumors; 30 cases of benign tumor, 28 cases with borderline tumors, 25 early EOC cases (FIGO stage I) and 97 advanced EOC cases (FIGO stages II-IV). Proteins were measured using the Olink® Oncology II and Inflammation panels. For statistical analyses, patients were categorized into benign tumors versus cancer and benign tumors versus borderline + cancer, respectively.ResultsWe analyzed 177 biomarkers. Thirty-four proteins had ROC AUC > 0.7 for discrimination between benign tumors and cancer. Fifteen proteins had ROC AUC > 0.7 for discrimination between benign tumors and borderline tumors + cancer. HE4 ranked highest for both comparisons. A reference model with HE4, CA125 and age (AUC 0.838 for benign tumors vs. cancer and AUC 0.770 for benign tumors vs. borderline tumors + cancer) was compared to the reference model with the addition of each of the remaining proteins with AUC > 0.7. ITGAV was the only individual biomarker found to improve diagnostic performance of the reference model, to AUC 0.874 for benign tumors vs. cancer and AUC 0.818 for benign tumors vs. borderline tumors + cancer (p < 0.05). Cross-validation and LASSO regression was combined to select multiple biomarker combinations. The best performing model for discrimination between benign tumors and borderline tumors + cancer was a 6-biomarker combination (HE4, CA125, ITGAV, CXCL1, CEACAM1, IL-10RB) and age (AUC 0.868, sensitivity 0.86 and specificity 0.82, p = 0.016 for comparison with the reference model).ConclusionHE4 was the best performing individual biomarker for discrimination between benign ovarian tumors and EOC including borderline tumors. The addition of other carcinogenesis-related biomarkers in a multiplex biomarker panel can improve the diagnostic performance of the established biomarkers HE4 and CA125.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Prior studies suggested that glycans were differentially expressed in patients with ovarian cancer and controls. We hypothesized that glycan-based biomarkers might serve as a diagnostic test for ovarian cancer and evaluated the ability of glycans to distinguish ovarian cancer cases from matched controls. METHODS:Serum samples were obtained from the tissue-banking repository of the Gynecologic Oncology Group, and included healthy female controls (n = 100), women diagnosed with low malignant potential (LMP) tumors (n = 52), and epithelial ovarian cancers (EOC) cases (n = 147). Cases and controls were matched on age at enrollment within ±5 years. Serum samples were analyzed by glycomics analysis to detect abundance differences in glycan expression levels. A two-stage procedure was carried out for biomarker discovery and validation. Candidate classifiers of glycans that separated cases from controls were developed using a training set in the discovery phase and the classification performance of the candidate classifiers was assessed using independent test samples that were not used in discovery. RESULTS:The patterns of glycans showed discriminatory power for distinguishing EOC and LMP cases from controls. Candidate glycan-based biomarkers developed on a training set (sensitivity, 86% and specificity, 95.8% for distinguishing EOC from controls through leave-one-out cross-validation) confirmed their potential use as a detection test using an independent test set (sensitivity, 70% and specificity, 86.5%). CONCLUSION:Formal investigations of glycan biomarkers that distinguish cases and controls show great promise for an ovarian cancer diagnostic test. Further validation of a glycan-based test for detection of ovarian cancer is warranted. IMPACT:An emerging diagnostic test based on the knowledge gained from understanding the glycobiology should lead to an assay that improves sensitivity and specificity and allows for early detection of ovarian cancer.

Project description:Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) combing human epididymis secretary protein 4 (HE4) and CA125 showed better diagnostic accuracy for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) when compared with HE4 or CA125 alone; however, other studies showed no or worse diagnostic accuracy. We aim to conduct a prospective and multicenter clinical trial to compare the diagnostic accuracy of HE4, CA125, and ROMA for EOC.A prospective and multicenter (n?=?9) trial including 2481 individuals was performed in Chinese women. HE4, CA125, and ROMA diagnostic accuracy were evaluated according to different menopausal status and stages of EOC. Their diagnostic values were evaluated by the area under curve (AUC) and compared by the Z scores. Diagnostic specificity of other kinds of participants (n?=?1098) was also evaluated.For discriminating between healthy control (HC) and EOC, only CA125 showed significant difference for discriminating HC and EOC in all the individuals when compared with HE4 and ROMA (P?<?0.001 and P?=?0.02, respectively), at the cutoff value of 31.5, the sensitivity (SN) and specificity (SP) were 88.6% and 97.1%. For discriminating between benign pelvic mass (BPM) and EOC, ROMA showed significant difference for discriminating BPM and EOC in the all individuals (P?=?0.01 and P?=?0.02, respectively) and the postmenopausal individuals (P?=?0.03 and P?=?0.04, respectively), at the cutoff value of 27.3 and 34.5, the SNs were 97.0% and 89.4%, SPs were 81.4% and 82.5%, separately. Within all kinds of diseases, there was no significant difference in specificity between CA125 and HE4.In conclusions, when HE4, CA125, and ROMA were compared with each other according to different menopausal status, and stages. Only CA125 showed significant difference for discriminating HC and EOC in all the individuals, and ROMA for discriminating BPM and EOC in the all individuals and postmenopausal individuals when compared with HE4 or CA125. HE4 has showed no significant difference in specificity with all kinds of diseases when compared with CA125.

Dataset Information

CLIC1 and CLIC4 complement CA125 as a diagnostic biomarker panel for all subtypes of epithelial ovarian cancer.

Publications

CLIC1 and CLIC4 complement CA125 as a diagnostic biomarker panel for all subtypes of epithelial ovarian cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets