DOCSLIB.ORG

Biomarkers for Early Detection of Cancer: a Systematic Review Towards the Identification of True Cancer Biomarkers for Early Detection

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biomarkers for Early Detection of Cancer: a Systematic Review Towards the Identification of True Cancer Biomarkers for Early Detection Biomarkers for Early Detection of Cancer: A Systematic Review Towards the identification of true cancer biomarkers for early detection Louis-Philippe Fermon Student number: 01304166 Promotor: Prof. Inge Huybrechts Copromotor: Prof. Dr. Veronique Cocquyt A dissertation submitted to Ghent University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Medicine in Medicine. Academic year: 2017 – 2018 2 | P a g e Deze pagina is niet beschikbaar omdat ze persoonsgegevens bevat. Universiteitsbibliotheek Gent, 2021. This page is not available because it contains personal information. Ghent Universit , Librar , 2021. 4 | P a g e VOORWOORD “Sic parvis magna” “Greatness from small beginnings” After two years of intensive labour, I’m happy to finally present this dissertation. I would not have been able to do this without the help of my family, friends and of course, my promotor Prof. Dr. Inge Huybrechts. She was always eager to lend support, especially during though moments, and was available when I had any questions or needed any help. Furthermore, I would like to thank a few special people that aided me throughout this process. Firstly, my parents, without whom I would not have been able to bring it home. Secondly, I would like to thank my girlfriend Kimberley and all- time best friend Thomas, who’s advice and support were deeply appreciated. Lastly, I won’t forget all others who were there when I needed them the most. Thank you. 5 | P a g e 6 | P a g e Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................................ 1 Abstract ........................................................................................................................................ 3 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Cancer as major health issue............................................................................................... 4 1.2 Early detection of cancer ..................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Biomarkers in screening for cancer ...................................................................................... 6 1.3.1 Definitions ..................................................................................................................... 6 1.3.2 Classification of Biomarkers .......................................................................................... 8 1.3.3 The Five Phases of Biomarker Development ................................................................ 9 1.4 Modern biomarkers obstacles ............................................................................................ 11 1.5 Searching reliable biomarkers............................................................................................ 12 2. Methods .................................................................................................................................. 13 2.1 Data sources and search strategy ..................................................................................... 13 2.2 Eligibility criteria ................................................................................................................. 13 2.3 Exclusion Criteria ............................................................................................................... 13 2.4 Data extraction .................................................................................................................. 14 2.5 Outcome Measures ........................................................................................................... 14 2.6 Results .............................................................................................................................. 14 2.7 Flow diagram ..................................................................................................................... 15 Identification ............................................................................................................................ 15 Screening ................................................................................................................................ 15 Eligibility .................................................................................................................................. 15 Included ................................................................................................................................... 15 3. Results .................................................................................................................................... 16 3.1 Colorectal cancer ............................................................................................................... 16 3.2 Hepatocellular cancer ........................................................................................................ 25 3.3 Lung cancer ....................................................................................................................... 33 3.4 Ovarian cancer .................................................................................................................. 39 3.5 Prostate Cancer ................................................................................................................. 46 3.6 Pancreatic cancer .............................................................................................................. 51 3.7 Breast Cancer .................................................................................................................... 58 3.8 Gastric Cancer ................................................................................................................... 63 3.9 Renal Cancer ..................................................................................................................... 68 7 | P a g e 3.10 Gynecologic cancer ......................................................................................................... 70 3.11 Bladder Cancer ................................................................................................................ 72 3.12 Oral Cancer ..................................................................................................................... 76 3.13 Esophageal Cancer ......................................................................................................... 79 3.14 Skin Cancer ..................................................................................................................... 80 3.15 Osteosarcoma ................................................................................................................. 81 3.16 Thyroid Cancer ................................................................................................................ 82 3.17 Leukemia ......................................................................................................................... 83 3.18 Various types of cancer ................................................................................................... 84 4. Discussion .............................................................................................................................. 87 4.1 Colorectal Cancer .............................................................................................................. 87 4.2 Hepatocellular cancer ........................................................................................................ 97 4.3 Lung cancer ..................................................................................................................... 103 4.4 Ovarian cancer ................................................................................................................ 110 4.5 Prostate cancer ............................................................................................................... 116 4.6 Pancreatic cancer ............................................................................................................ 120 4.7 Breast Cancer .................................................................................................................. 126 4.8 Gastric cancer ................................................................................................................. 130 4.9 Renal Cancer ................................................................................................................... 134 4.10 Gynecologic Cancer ...................................................................................................... 136 4.11 Bladder Cancer .............................................................................................................. 138 4.12 Oral Cancer ................................................................................................................... 141 4.13 Esophageal Cancer ....................................................................................................... 144 4.14 Skin Cancer ................................................................................................................... 145 4.15 Osteosarcoma ............................................................................................................... 145 4.16 Thyroid Cancer .............................................................................................................. 146 4.17 Leukemia ......................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Potential High-Impact Interventions Report Priority Area 02: Cancer
    AHRQ Healthcare Horizon Scanning System – Potential High-Impact Interventions Report Priority Area 02: Cancer Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 540 Gaither Road Rockville, MD 20850 www.ahrq.gov Contract No. HHSA290201000006C Prepared by: ECRI Institute 5200 Butler Pike Plymouth Meeting, PA 19462 December 2012 Statement of Funding and Purpose This report incorporates data collected during implementation of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Healthcare Horizon Scanning System by ECRI Institute under contract to AHRQ, Rockville, MD (Contract No. HHSA290201000006C). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its content, and do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. No statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. This report’s content should not be construed as either endorsements or rejections of specific interventions. As topics are entered into the System, individual topic profiles are developed for technologies and programs that appear to be close to diffusion into practice in the United States. Those reports are sent to various experts with clinical, health systems, health administration, and/or research backgrounds for comment and opinions about potential for impact. The comments and opinions received are then considered and synthesized by ECRI Institute to identify interventions that experts deemed, through the comment process, to have potential for high impact. Please see the methods section for more details about this process. This report is produced twice annually and topics included may change depending on expert comments received on interventions issued for comment during the preceding 6 months.
    [Show full text]
  • Glycosylation: Rising Potential for Prostate Cancer Evaluation
    cancers Review Glycosylation: Rising Potential for Prostate Cancer Evaluation Anna Kałuza˙ * , Justyna Szczykutowicz and Mirosława Ferens-Sieczkowska Department of Chemistry and Immunochemistry, Wroclaw Medical University, Sklodowskiej-Curie 48/50, 50-369 Wroclaw, Poland; [email protected] (J.S.); [email protected] (M.F.-S.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +48-71-770-30-66 Simple Summary: Aberrant protein glycosylation is a well-known hallmark of cancer and is as- sociated with differential expression of enzymes such as glycosyltransferases and glycosidases. The altered expression of the enzymes triggers cancer cells to produce glycoproteins with specific cancer-related aberrations in glycan structures. Increasing number of data indicate that glycosylation patterns of PSA and other prostate-originated proteins exert a potential to distinguish between benign prostate disease and cancer as well as among different stages of prostate cancer development and aggressiveness. This review summarizes the alterations in glycan sialylation, fucosylation, truncated O-glycans, and LacdiNAc groups outlining their potential applications in non-invasive diagnostic procedures of prostate diseases. Further research is desired to develop more general algorithms exploiting glycobiology data for the improvement of prostate diseases evaluation. Abstract: Prostate cancer is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer among men. Alterations in protein glycosylation are confirmed to be a reliable hallmark of cancer. Prostate-specific antigen is the biomarker that is used most frequently for prostate cancer detection, although its lack of sensitivity and specificity results in many unnecessary biopsies. A wide range of glycosylation alterations in Citation: Kałuza,˙ A.; Szczykutowicz, prostate cancer cells, including increased sialylation and fucosylation, can modify protein function J.; Ferens-Sieczkowska, M.
    [Show full text]
  • Genitourinary Pathology (Including Renal Tumors)
    LABORATORY INVESTIGATION THE BASIC AND TRANSLATIONAL PATHOLOGY RESEARCH JOURNAL LI VOLUME 99 | SUPPLEMENT 1 | MARCH 2019 2019 ABSTRACTS GENITOURINARY PATHOLOGY (INCLUDING RENAL TUMORS) (776-992) MARCH 16-21, 2019 PLATF OR M & 2 01 9 ABSTRACTS P OSTER PRESENTATI ONS EDUCATI ON C O M MITTEE Jason L. Hornick , C h air Ja mes R. Cook R h o n d a K. Y a nti s s, Chair, Abstract Revie w Board S ar a h M. Dr y and Assign ment Co m mittee Willi a m C. F a q ui n Laura W. La mps , Chair, C ME Subco m mittee C ar ol F. F ar v er St e v e n D. Billi n g s , Interactive Microscopy Subco m mittee Y uri F e d ori w Shree G. Shar ma , Infor matics Subco m mittee Meera R. Ha meed R aj a R. S e et h al a , Short Course Coordinator Mi c h ell e S. Hir s c h Il a n W ei nr e b , Subco m mittee for Unique Live Course Offerings Laksh mi Priya Kunju D a vi d B. K a mi n s k y ( Ex- Of ici o) A n n a M ari e M ulli g a n Aleodor ( Doru) Andea Ri s h P ai Zubair Baloch Vi nita Parkas h Olca Bast urk A nil P ar w a ni Gregory R. Bean , Pat h ol o gist-i n- Trai ni n g D e e p a P atil D a ni el J.
    [Show full text]
  • Development and Clinical Testing of Individual Immunoassays for the Quantification of Serum Glycoproteins to Diagnose Prostate Cancer
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Development and clinical testing of individual immunoassays for the quantification of serum glycoproteins to diagnose prostate cancer Kathrin Endt1, Jens Goepfert2, Aurelius Omlin3, Alcibiade Athanasiou1, Pierre Tennstedt4, Anna Guenther2, Maurizio Rainisio5, Daniel S. Engeler3, Thomas Steuber4, Silke Gillessen3, Thomas Joos2, Ralph Schiess1* a1111111111 a1111111111 1 ProteoMediX Inc., Schlieren, Switzerland, 2 NMI TuÈbingen, Reutlingen, Germany, 3 Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland, 4 Martini-Klinik, Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany, 5 Abanovus LLC, a1111111111 Sanremo, Italy a1111111111 a1111111111 * [email protected] Abstract OPEN ACCESS Prostate Cancer (PCa) diagnosis is currently hampered by the high false-positive rate of Citation: Endt K, Goepfert J, Omlin A, Athanasiou PSA evaluations, which consequently may lead to overtreatment. Non-invasive methods A, Tennstedt P, Guenther A, et al. (2017) with increased specificity and sensitivity are needed to improve diagnosis of significant Development and clinical testing of individual immunoassays for the quantification of serum PCa. We developed and technically validated four individual immunoassays for cathepsin glycoproteins to diagnose prostate cancer. PLoS D (CTSD), intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (ICAM1), olfactomedin 4 (OLFM4), and throm- ONE 12(8): e0181557. https://doi.org/10.1371/ bospondin 1 (THBS1). These glycoproteins, previously identified by mass spectrometry journal.pone.0181557 using a Pten mouse model, were measured in clinical serum samples for testing the capabil- Editor: Salvatore V Pizzo, Duke University School ity of discriminating PCa positive and negative samples. The development yielded 4 individ- of Medicine, UNITED STATES ual immunoassays with inter and intra-variability (CV) <15% and linearity on dilution of the Received: March 8, 2017 analytes. In serum, ex vivo protein stability (<15% loss of analyte) was achieved for a dura- Accepted: July 3, 2017 tion of at least 24 hours at room temperature and 2 days at 4ÊC.
    [Show full text]
  • Prostate Prostate Cancer Overview and Recent Advances: Overview
    Prostate Cancer Overview and Recent Advances: How Can a Common Disease Be So Controversial? Howard I. Scher, M.D. D. Wayne Calloway Chair in Urologic Oncology Chie f, Gen itouri nary Oncol ogy Servi ce Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center March 27, 2010 Prostate Cancer Overview and Recent Advances: How Can a Common Disease Be So Controversial? 1. The statistics : The pendulum is swinging. 2. A framework: 3. Risk adapted diagnostics: 4. Risk adapted prognostics to guide treatment: Page 1 2009 Cancer Statistics Estimated New Cases Estimated Deaths Jemal A, et al. CA Cancer J Clin. 2009;59:225-249. Cancer Incidence and Mortality Rates age adjusted, standardized over time Thun MJ et al. Cancer Statistics 2009. CA Cancer J Clin2009;59;225. Page 2 In an Aging Population, the Implications of “Detecting” And “Diagnosing” All Prostate Cancers Is Clear From Scardino and Kelman. Dr. Peter Scardino’s Prostate Book. Avery Press, 2005 (www.theprostatebook.com) The prostate produces seminal fluid that protects sperm. External Urinary Sphincter From Scardino and Kelman. Avery Press, 2005 (www.theprostatebook.com) Page 3 The Disease Usually Starts in the Peripheral Zone and is Often Multifocal, That May Limit the Role for Therapies That Do Not Treat the Whole Gland From Scardino and Kelman. Dr. Peter Scardino’s Prostate Book. Avery Press, 2005 (www.theprostatebook.com) Screening, Early Detection and Diagnosis: The Harder You Look, the More You Will Find From Scardino and Kelman. The Prostate Book. Avery Press, 2005 (www.theprostatebook.com) Page 4 TNM Staging 1. Characterizes disease at the time of diagnosis: Localized disease: TNM (+PSA) 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Predicting Prostate Biopsy Outcome Using a PCA3-Based Nomogram in a Polish Cohort
    ANTICANCER RESEARCH 33: 553-558 (2013) Predicting Prostate Biopsy Outcome Using a PCA3-based Nomogram in a Polish Cohort MACIEJ SALAGIERSKI1, PETER MULDERS2 and JACK A. SCHALKEN2 1Urology Department, Medical University of Łódź, Poland; 2Department of Urology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands Abstract. Background: Prostate Cancer Gene-3 (PCA3) is prostate tissues (1). As a consequence, the PCA3 gene, being highly prostate cancer (PCa)-specific and its application highly overexpressed in specific PCa cell lines and prostatic holds promise in identifying men with PCa. Aim: To tumors, constitutes today the most PCa-specific marker (2). determine whether the PCA3 score can be used relative to The urine Progensa PCA3 test (Gen-Probe, San Diego, PCa clinical variables to predict biopsy outcome. Patients CA, USA) has been clinically available since 2006. The and Methods: PCA3 scores were assessed in a group of 80 Progensa PCA3 assay is a non-invasive and highly specific patients using the Progensa assay (Gen-Probe, San Diego, test, which measures the expression of the PCA3 gene and CA, USA). The logistic regression algorithm was used to PSA mRNA concentrations in post-DRE urine. In many combine PCA3 results with the established biopsy risk factors studies, the PCA3 test was superior to PSA for the early including: age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), digital rectal detection of PCa. The assay has been shown to be examination (DRE) and prostate volume (Pvol). Results: In particularly useful in patients with a previous negative univariate analyses, the Progensa PCA3 score outperformed biopsies and persistently elevated PSA levels (3, 4).
    [Show full text]
  • Cancer Genetics-Guided Discovery of Serum Biomarker Signatures for Diagnosis and Prognosis of Prostate Cancer
    Cancer genetics-guided discovery of serum biomarker signatures for diagnosis and prognosis of prostate cancer Igor Cimaa,1, Ralph Schiessb,1, Peter Wildc, Martin Kaelind, Peter Schüfflere, Vinzenz Langeb, Paola Picottib, Reto Ossolab, Arnoud Templetond, Olga Schuberta, Thomas Fuchse, Thomas Leippoldf, Stephen Wylerf, Jens Zehetnera, Wolfram Jochumg, Joachim Buhmanne, Thomas Cernyd, Holger Mochc,2, Silke Gillessend,2, Ruedi Aebersoldb,h,2, and Wilhelm Kreka,2 aInstitute of Cell Biology and bInstitute of Molecular Systems Biology, Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zurich, 8093 Zurich, Switzerland; cInstitute of Surgical Pathology, University Hospital Zurich, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland; dDepartment of Medical Oncology, fDepartment of Urology, and gInstitute of Pathology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, 9007 St. Gallen, Switzerland; eDepartment of Computer Science, Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zurich, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland; and hFaculty of Science, University of Zurich, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland Edited by Owen N. Witte, The Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, and approved January 12, 2011 (received for review September 25, 2010) A key barrier to the realization of personalized medicine for cancer breast cancer, and prostate cancer (5). An established conse- is the identification of biomarkers. Here we describe a two-stage quence of PTEN inactivation is the constitutive aberrant activa- strategy for the discovery of serum biomarker signatures corre- tion of the PI3K-signaling pathway that drives uncontrolled cell sponding to specific cancer-causing mutations and its application growth, proliferation, and survival (6, 7). It is expected that specific to prostate cancer (PCa) in the context of the commonly occurring signaling pathway-activating mutations such as PTEN loss will PTEN phosphatase and tensin homolog ( ) tumor-suppressor gene produce changes in the surface and secreted proteomes of the fi fi inactivation.
    [Show full text]
  • Diagnostic and Prognostic Potential of Biomarkers CYFRA 21.1, ERCC1, P53, FGFR3 and TATI in Bladder Cancers
    International Journal of Molecular Sciences Review Diagnostic and Prognostic Potential of Biomarkers CYFRA 21.1, ERCC1, p53, FGFR3 and TATI in Bladder Cancers Milena Matuszczak and Maciej Salagierski * Department of Urology, Collegium Medicum, University of Zielona Góra, 65-046 Zielona Góra, Poland; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 16 April 2020; Accepted: 5 May 2020; Published: 9 May 2020 Abstract: The high occurrence of bladder cancer and its tendency to recur in combination with a lifelong surveillance make the treatment of superficial bladder cancer one of the most expensive and time-consuming. Moreover, carcinoma in situ often leads to muscle invasion with an unfavorable prognosis. Currently, invasive methods including cystoscopy and cytology remain a gold standard. The aim of this study was to explore urine-based biomarkers to find the one with the best specificity and sensitivity, which would allow optimizing the treatment plan. In this review, we sum up the current knowledge about Cytokeratin fragments (CYFRA 21.1), Excision Repair Cross-Complementation 1 (ERCC1), Tumour Protein p53 (Tp53), Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor 3 (FGFR3), Tumor-Associated Trypsin Inhibitor (TATI) and their potential applications in clinical practice. Keywords: biomarkers; bladder cancer; tumor markers; prognosis 1. Introduction: Bladder Cancer Issues and Biomarkers Bladder cancer is the most common urinary site of malignancy and the second most common reason of cancer deaths from the genitourinary tract after prostate cancer in the United States, with 81,400 new cases and 17,980 deaths in the year 2020 [1]. Globally there are about 430,000 new cases diagnosed each year [2].
    [Show full text]
  • NMP22) As a Tumour Marker in Bladder Cancer Patients
    NOWOTWORY Journal of Oncology • 2005 • volume 55 Number 4 • 300–302 Evaluation of the urinary nuclear matrix protein (NMP22) as a tumour marker in bladder cancer patients Maria Kowalska1, Janina Kamiƒska1, Beata Kotowicz1, Ma∏gorzata Fuksiewicz1, Alicja Rysiƒska1, Tomasz Demkow 2, Tomasz Kalinowski 2 Introduction. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical use of the urinary nuclear matrix protein 22 (NMP22) assessment in bladder cancer patients. Patients and methods. 98 patients with bladder cancer were examined. All tumours were verified histopathologically. Urine samples were collected before cystoscopy and assayed for NMP22 levels with Diagnostic Products Corporation tests. Urine samples of 15 healthy volunteers served as controls. For the statistical analysis the Mann-Whitney test was employed. Results. Urine NMP22 concentrations were significantly higher (p<0.0003) in patients with bladder cancer than in controls. No significant differences between the NMP22 concentrations in patients with complete remission and patients with recurrent disease were found. Conclusions. Urinary NMP22 is a potential marker for the diagnosis of bladder cancer, but not for the differentiation between disease-free patients and those with recurrent disease. Ocena przydatnoÊci oznaczania NMP22 w moczu jako markera nowotworowego u chorych na raka p´cherza Ws t ´ p. Celem pracy by∏o zbadanie, czy oznaczanie markera nowotworowego NMP22 mo˝e byç pomocne w monitorowa- niu chorych na raka p´cherza. Pacjenci i metody. Do badania zakwalifikowano 98 chorych z potwierdzonym histologicznie rakiem p´cherza. Próbki moczu pobierano przed cystoskopià. St´˝enie NMP22 w moczu oznaczano zestawami firmy DPC. W∏asne normy ustalono w oparciu o oznaczenia st´˝eƒ NMP22 w grupie 15 zdrowych osób.
    [Show full text]
  • Liquid Biopsy Biomarkers in Urine: a Route Towards Molecular Diagnosis and Personalized Medicine of Bladder Cancer
    Journal of Personalized Medicine Review Liquid Biopsy Biomarkers in Urine: A Route towards Molecular Diagnosis and Personalized Medicine of Bladder Cancer Matteo Ferro 1,† , Evelina La Civita 2,†, Antonietta Liotti 2, Michele Cennamo 2, Fabiana Tortora 3 , Carlo Buonerba 4,5, Felice Crocetto 6 , Giuseppe Lucarelli 7 , Gian Maria Busetto 8 , Francesco Del Giudice 9 , Ottavio de Cobelli 1,10, Giuseppe Carrieri 9, Angelo Porreca 11, Amelia Cimmino 12,* and Daniela Terracciano 2,* 1 Department of Urology of European Institute of Oncology (IEO), IRCCS, Via Ripamonti 435, 20141 Milan, Italy; [email protected] (M.F.); [email protected] (O.d.C.) 2 Department of Translational Medical Sciences, University of Naples “Federico II”, 80131 Naples, Italy; [email protected] (E.L.C.); [email protected] (A.L.); [email protected] (M.C.) 3 Institute of Protein Biochemistry, National Research Council, 80131 Naples, Italy; [email protected] 4 CRTR Rare Tumors Reference Center, AOU Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy; [email protected] 5 Environment & Health Operational Unit, Zoo-Prophylactic Institute of Southern Italy, 80055 Portici, Italy 6 Department of Neurosciences, Sciences of Reproduction and Odontostomatology, University of Naples Federico II, 80131 Naples, Italy; [email protected] 7 Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, Urology, Andrology and Kidney Transplantation Unit, University of Bari, 70124 Bari, Italy; [email protected] 8 Department of Urology and Organ Transplantation,
    [Show full text]
  • Markers for Detection of Prostate Cancer
    Cancers 2010, 2, 1125-1154; doi:10.3390/cancers2021125 OPEN ACCESS cancers ISSN 2072-6694 www.mdpi.com/journal/cancers Review Markers for Detection of Prostate Cancer Raymond A. Clarke 1, Horst J. Schirra 2, James W. Catto 3, Martin F. Lavin 4,5 and Robert A. Gardiner 5,* 1 Prostate Cancer Institute, Cancer Care Centre, St George Hospital Clinical School of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Kogarah, NSW 2217, Australia; E-Mail: [email protected] 2 School of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane QLD, 4072, Australia; E-Mail: [email protected] 3 Academic Urology Unit and Institute for Cancer Studies, University of Sheffield, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield S10 2JF, UK; E-Mail: [email protected] 4 Queensland Institute of Medical Research, Radiation Biology and Oncology, Brisbane, QLD 4029, Australia; E-Mail: [email protected] 5 University of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research, Brisbane, Australia * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: [email protected]. Received: 22 March 2010; in revised form: 2 June 2010 / Accepted: 3 June 2010 / Published: 4 June 2010 Abstract: Early detection of prostate cancer is problematic, not just because of uncertainly whether a diagnosis will benefit an individual patient, but also as a result of the imprecise and invasive nature of establishing a diagnosis by biopsy. Despite its low sensitivity and specificity for identifying patients harbouring prostate cancer, serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) has become established as the most reliable and widely-used diagnostic marker for this condition. In its wake, many other markers have been described and evaluated.
    [Show full text]
  • Labinvest201321.Pdf
    190A ANNUAL MEETING ABSTRACTS Sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative predictive value, and the odds ratio of the SCC (0/33) by FISH. No difference of overall survival time was observed between 2 markers were summarized in Table 1. There was no difference in p16 expression amplified and non-amplified groups in EAC patients. between the DG and control group. Conclusions: ALK amplification was present in 7% of EAC cases, but ALK Table 1. Summary of sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and OR. rearrangement and expression was not present. No ALK amplification, rearrangement Sensitivity (%) Specificity (%) PPV (%) NPV (%) OR and expression were detected in SCC. ALK amplification is not associated with EAC beta-catenin 92.3 76.9 80.0 90.9 40.0 patients’ overall survival. c-met 69.2 61.5 64.3 66.7 3.6 Either 100.0 53.8 68.4 100.0 13.9* Both 61.5 92.3 88.9 70.6 19.2 785 Mitosis-Specific Marker PHH3 Immunostain Is a More Sensitive NPV, negative predictive value; PPV, positive predictive value; OR, odds ratio. *, estimated OR. and Efficient Method To Evaluate the Mitotic Activity in Gastrointestinal Conclusions: The combination of c-met and beta-catenin provides a relatively specific Stromal Tumor (GIST) panel to identify patients with BE who are at increased risk for future development S Zhu, F Lin, ZE Chen. Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, PA. of dysplasia. Background: Mitotic activity is an important prognostic factor in GIST. The accurate identification of mitotic figures on the H&E stained slides could be challenging due to 783 Microfibrillar Associated Protein 5 (MFAP 5): A Marker for processing artifact, degeneration, apoptosis, or lymphocytic infiltration.
    [Show full text]