PURPOSE: Minimal residual disease (MRD) presents a significant hurdle to curing metastatic neuroblastoma. Biological therapies directed against MRD can improve outcome. Evaluating treatment efficacy requires MRD measurement, which serves as surrogate endpoint. Because of tumor heterogeneity, no single marker will likely be adequate. Genome-wide expression profiling can uncover potential MRD markers differentially expressed in tumors over normal marrow/blood. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Gene expression array was carried out on 48 stage 4 tumors and 9 remission marrows using the Affymetrix U95 gene chip. Thirty-four genes with a tumor-to-marrow expression ratio higher than tyrosine hydroxylase were identified. Quantitative reverse transcription-PCR was done on all 34 genes to study the dynamic range of tumor cell detection and the expression of these genes in normal marrow/blood samples and in stage 4 neuroblastoma tumors. Top ranking markers were then tested for prognostic significance in the marrows of stage 4 patients collected from the same treatment protocol after two cycles of immunotherapy. RESULTS: Based on sensitivity assays, 8 top-ranking markers were identified: CCND1, CRMP1, DDC, GABRB3, ISL1, KIF1A, PHOX2B, and TACC2. They were abundantly expressed in stage IV neuroblastoma tumors (n=20) and had low to no detection in normal marrow/blood samples (n=20). Moreover, expression of CCND1, DDC, GABRB3, ISL1, KIF1A, and PHOX2B in 116 marrows sampled after two treatment cycles was highly prognostic of progression-free and overall survival (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Marker discovery based on differential gene expression profiling, stringent sensitivity and specificity assays, and well-annotated patient samples can rapidly prioritize and identify potential MRD markers of neuroblastoma.
PURPOSE: Minimal residual disease (MRD) presents a significant hurdle to curing metastatic neuroblastoma. Biological therapies directed against MRD can improve outcome. Evaluating treatment efficacy requires MRD measurement, which serves as surrogate endpoint. Because of tumor heterogeneity, no single marker will likely be adequate. Genome-wide expression profiling can uncover potential MRD markers differentially expressed in tumors over normal marrow/blood. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Gene expression array was carried out on 48 stage 4 tumors and 9 remission marrows using the Affymetrix U95 gene chip. Thirty-four genes with a tumor-to-marrow expression ratio higher than tyrosine hydroxylase were identified. Quantitative reverse transcription-PCR was done on all 34 genes to study the dynamic range of tumor cell detection and the expression of these genes in normal marrow/blood samples and in stage 4 neuroblastoma tumors. Top ranking markers were then tested for prognostic significance in the marrows of stage 4 patients collected from the same treatment protocol after two cycles of immunotherapy. RESULTS: Based on sensitivity assays, 8 top-ranking markers were identified: CCND1, CRMP1, DDC, GABRB3, ISL1, KIF1A, PHOX2B, and TACC2. They were abundantly expressed in stage IV neuroblastoma tumors (n=20) and had low to no detection in normal marrow/blood samples (n=20). Moreover, expression of CCND1, DDC, GABRB3, ISL1, KIF1A, and PHOX2B in 116 marrows sampled after two treatment cycles was highly prognostic of progression-free and overall survival (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Marker discovery based on differential gene expression profiling, stringent sensitivity and specificity assays, and well-annotated patient samples can rapidly prioritize and identify potential MRD markers of neuroblastoma.
Authors: S A Burchill; I J Lewis; K R Abrams; R Riley; J Imeson; A D Pearson; R Pinkerton; P Selby Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-03-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Richard D Riley; David Heney; David R Jones; Alex J Sutton; Paul C Lambert; Keith R Abrams; Bridget Young; Alan J Wailoo; Susan A Burchill Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2004-01-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Andrei Tchirkov; Catherine Paillard; Pascale Halle; Frédéric Bernard; Pierre Bordigoni; Philippe Vago; François Deméocq; Justyna Kanold Journal: J Hematother Stem Cell Res Date: 2003-08
Authors: Jan J Molenaar; Peter van Sluis; Kathy Boon; Rogier Versteeg; Huib N Caron Journal: Genes Chromosomes Cancer Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 5.006
Authors: Irene Y Cheung; M Serena Lo Piccolo; Brian H Kushner; Kim Kramer; Nai-Kong V Cheung Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-03-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Miguel Alaminos; Jaume Mora; Nai-Kong V Cheung; Alex Smith; Jing Qin; Lishi Chen; William L Gerald Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2003-08-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Yania Yáñez; David Hervás; Elena Grau; Silvestre Oltra; Gema Pérez; Sarai Palanca; Mar Bermúdez; Catalina Márquez; Adela Cañete; Victoria Castel Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2015-10-24 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Mark A Applebaum; Erin K Barr; Jason Karpus; Diana C West-Szymanski; Meritxell Oliva; Elizabeth A Sokol; Sheng Zhang; Zhou Zhang; Wei Zhang; Alexandre Chlenski; Helen R Salwen; Emma Wilkinson; Marija Dobratic; Robert L Grossman; Lucy A Godley; Barbara E Stranger; Chuan He; Susan L Cohn Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2019-12-18 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Kelly R Ostler; Qiwei Yang; Timothy J Looney; Li Zhang; Aparna Vasanthakumar; Yufeng Tian; Masha Kocherginsky; Stacey L Raimondi; Jessica G DeMaio; Helen R Salwen; Song Gu; Alexandre Chlenski; Arlene Naranjo; Amy Gill; Radhika Peddinti; Bruce T Lahn; Susan L Cohn; Lucy A Godley Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2012-07-18 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Brian H Kushner; Irene Y Cheung; Shakeel Modak; Kim Kramer; Govind Ragupathi; Nai-Kong V Cheung Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2014-02-11 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: K Beiske; S A Burchill; I Y Cheung; E Hiyama; R C Seeger; S L Cohn; A D J Pearson; K K Matthay Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2009-04-28 Impact factor: 7.640