PURPOSE: Efforts to validate ovarian cancer early detection biomarkers with immunoassays are challenged by the limited specimen volumes available. We sought to develop a specimen-efficient assay to measure CA125 in serum, assess its reproducibility, validity, and performance, and test its potential for multiplexing and combining with human epididymis protein 4 (HE4), a promising novel ovarian cancer marker. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Four pairs of commercially available anti-CA125 antibodies and one pair of anti-HE4 antibodies were evaluated for accuracy in measuring known concentrations of antigen on a bead-based platform. The two best pairs were further assessed for reproducibility, validity, and the ability to discriminate between blinded serum samples obtained from ovarian cancer cases (n = 66) and women without ovarian cancer (n = 125). RESULTS: Suitability for use in a bead-based assay varied across CA125 antibody pairs. Two CA125 bead-based assays were highly reproducible (overall correlations between replicates >/= 0.95; coefficients of variation < 0.2) and strongly correlated with the research standard CA125II RIA (correlations >/= 0.9). Their ability to distinguish ovarian cancer cases from non-cases based on receiver operating characteristic analyses (area under the curve, AUC, of 0.85 and 0.84) was close to that of the CA125II RIA (AUC, 0.87). The HE4 bead-based assay showed lower reproducibility but yielded an AUC of 0.89 in receiver operating characteristics analysis. Multiplexing was not possible but a composite marker including CA125 and HE4 achieved an AUC of 0.91. CONCLUSION: Optimization procedures yielded two bead-based assays for CA125 that perform comparably to the standard CA125II RIA, which could be combined with an HE4 bead-based assay to improve diagnostic performance, and requires only 15 muL of sample each.
PURPOSE: Efforts to validate ovarian cancer early detection biomarkers with immunoassays are challenged by the limited specimen volumes available. We sought to develop a specimen-efficient assay to measure CA125 in serum, assess its reproducibility, validity, and performance, and test its potential for multiplexing and combining with humanepididymis protein 4 (HE4), a promising novel ovarian cancer marker. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Four pairs of commercially available anti-CA125 antibodies and one pair of anti-HE4 antibodies were evaluated for accuracy in measuring known concentrations of antigen on a bead-based platform. The two best pairs were further assessed for reproducibility, validity, and the ability to discriminate between blinded serum samples obtained from ovarian cancer cases (n = 66) and women without ovarian cancer (n = 125). RESULTS: Suitability for use in a bead-based assay varied across CA125 antibody pairs. Two CA125 bead-based assays were highly reproducible (overall correlations between replicates >/= 0.95; coefficients of variation < 0.2) and strongly correlated with the research standard CA125II RIA (correlations >/= 0.9). Their ability to distinguish ovarian cancer cases from non-cases based on receiver operating characteristic analyses (area under the curve, AUC, of 0.85 and 0.84) was close to that of the CA125II RIA (AUC, 0.87). The HE4 bead-based assay showed lower reproducibility but yielded an AUC of 0.89 in receiver operating characteristics analysis. Multiplexing was not possible but a composite marker including CA125 and HE4 achieved an AUC of 0.91. CONCLUSION: Optimization procedures yielded two bead-based assays for CA125 that perform comparably to the standard CA125II RIA, which could be combined with an HE4 bead-based assay to improve diagnostic performance, and requires only 15 muL of sample each.
Authors: D K Pauler; U Menon; M McIntosh; H L Symecko; S J Skates; I J Jacobs Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Gary E Goodman; Mark D Thornquist; John Balmes; Mark R Cullen; Frank L Meyskens; Gilbert S Omenn; Barbara Valanis; James H Williams Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2004-12-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Daniel G Rosen; Lin Wang; J Neeley Atkinson; Yinhua Yu; Karen H Lu; Eleftherios P Diamandis; Ingegerd Hellstrom; Samuel C Mok; Jinsong Liu; Robert C Bast Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2005-08-02 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: William R Alley; Jacqueline A Vasseur; John A Goetz; Martin Svoboda; Benjamin F Mann; Daniela E Matei; Nancy Menning; Ahmed Hussein; Yehia Mechref; Milos V Novotny Journal: J Proteome Res Date: 2012-03-07 Impact factor: 4.466
Authors: Nathalie Scholler; Kimberly A Lowe; Lindsay A Bergan; Archana V Kampani; Vivian Ng; Robin M Forrest; Jason D Thorpe; Jenny A Gross; Barbara M Garvik; Ronny Drapkin; Garnet L Anderson; Nicole Urban Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2008-05-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Garnet L Anderson; Martin McIntosh; Lieling Wu; Matt Barnett; Gary Goodman; Jason D Thorpe; Lindsay Bergan; Mark D Thornquist; Nathalie Scholler; Nam Kim; Kathy O'Briant; Charles Drescher; Nicole Urban Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2009-12-30 Impact factor: 13.506