Shu-Ling Liang1, Daniel W Chan. 1. Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, 600 N. Wolfe St., Baltimore, Maryland 21287, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The discovery of cancer biomarkers has become a major focus of cancer research, which holds promising future for early detection, diagnosis, monitoring disease recurrence and therapeutic treatment efficacy to improve long-term survival of cancer patients. Most of the functional information of the cancer-associated genes resides in the proteome. Since cancer is a complex disease, it might require a panel of multiple biomarkers in order to achieve sufficient clinical efficacy. METHODS: Serum/plasma is the most accessible biological specimen collected from patients. Therefore, serum proteomic diagnostics would be the most promising new test for cancer. With the advent of new and improved proteomic technologies, such as protein chips and mass spectrometry coupled with advanced bioinformatic tools, it is possible to develop potential cancer biomarkers. However, specimen collection, handling, study design and data analysis are essential components for successful biomarker discovery and validation. Multi-center case control study should be conducted with extensive clinical validation to minimize the impact of possible confounding variables (non-biological). CONCLUSIONS: Enzymes and related proteins, such as inhibitors, are promising candidates for cancer diagnostics.
BACKGROUND: The discovery of cancer biomarkers has become a major focus of cancer research, which holds promising future for early detection, diagnosis, monitoring disease recurrence and therapeutic treatment efficacy to improve long-term survival of cancerpatients. Most of the functional information of the cancer-associated genes resides in the proteome. Since cancer is a complex disease, it might require a panel of multiple biomarkers in order to achieve sufficient clinical efficacy. METHODS: Serum/plasma is the most accessible biological specimen collected from patients. Therefore, serum proteomic diagnostics would be the most promising new test for cancer. With the advent of new and improved proteomic technologies, such as protein chips and mass spectrometry coupled with advanced bioinformatic tools, it is possible to develop potential cancer biomarkers. However, specimen collection, handling, study design and data analysis are essential components for successful biomarker discovery and validation. Multi-center case control study should be conducted with extensive clinical validation to minimize the impact of possible confounding variables (non-biological). CONCLUSIONS: Enzymes and related proteins, such as inhibitors, are promising candidates for cancer diagnostics.
Authors: O John Semmes; Ziding Feng; Bao-Ling Adam; Lionel L Banez; William L Bigbee; David Campos; Lisa H Cazares; Daniel W Chan; William E Grizzle; Elzbieta Izbicka; Jacob Kagan; Gunjan Malik; Dale McLerran; Judd W Moul; Alan Partin; Premkala Prasanna; Jason Rosenzweig; Lori J Sokoll; Shiv Srivastava; Sudhir Srivastava; Ian Thompson; Manda J Welsh; Nicole White; Marcy Winget; Yutaka Yasui; Zhen Zhang; Liu Zhu Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Jin Song; Manisha Patel; C Nicole Rosenzweig; Yee Chan-Li; Lori J Sokoll; Eric T Fung; Nam-Ho Choi-Miura; Michael Goggins; Daniel W Chan; Zhen Zhang Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2006-03-30 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Lori J Sokoll; Daniel W Chan; Stephen D Mikolajczyk; Harry G Rittenhouse; Cindy L Evans; Harry J Linton; Leslie A Mangold; Phaedre Mohr; Georg Bartsch; Helmut Klocker; Wolfgang Horninger; Alan W Partin Journal: Urology Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Zhen Zhang; Robert C Bast; Yinhua Yu; Jinong Li; Lori J Sokoll; Alex J Rai; Jason M Rosenzweig; Bonnie Cameron; Young Y Wang; Xiao-Ying Meng; Andrew Berchuck; Carolien Van Haaften-Day; Neville F Hacker; Henk W A de Bruijn; Ate G J van der Zee; Ian J Jacobs; Eric T Fung; Daniel W Chan Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2004-08-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Miguel de la Fuente; Iñaki Rodríguez-Agirretxe; Elena Vecino; Egoitz Astigarraga; Arantxa Acera; Gabriel Barreda-Gómez Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2022-05-18 Impact factor: 6.208
Authors: Eric Stern; Aleksandar Vacic; Nitin K Rajan; Jason M Criscione; Jason Park; Bojan R Ilic; David J Mooney; Mark A Reed; Tarek M Fahmy Journal: Nat Nanotechnol Date: 2009-12-13 Impact factor: 39.213
Authors: Cordelia Geisler; Nadine T Gaisa; David Pfister; Susanne Fuessel; Glen Kristiansen; Till Braunschweig; Sonja Gostek; Birte Beine; Hanna C Diehl; Angela M Jackson; Christoph H Borchers; Axel Heidenreich; Helmut E Meyer; Ruth Knüchel; Corinna Henkel Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2015-01-15 Impact factor: 3.246