| Literature DB >> 19662197 |
Kuvaja Paula1, Talvensaari-Mattila Anne, Turpeenniemi-Hujanen Taina.
Abstract
New potential tumor markers such as matrix metalloproteinases and their inhibitors have been extensively studied during the last decades. The aim is to find prognostic markers that are measurable in easily available samples, such as serum or plasma. The proper sample type to use when measuring the levels of gelatinases and their inhibitors from blood samples is currently under critical evaluation. In this study, the effect of sample type is studied in 26 healthy controls, and the result is confirmed in a series of 80 breast carcinoma patients.Sample type had the most evident effect on the levels of TIMP-1 and MMP-9. Serum samples gave about two-fold levels of TIMP-1 compared to plasma samples (p < 0.001), with a strong linear correlation between these two (r = 0.79). Pro-MMP-9 levels were significantly affected by the presence of a blood coagulation activator in the serum sample, or a different anticoagulant in the plasma sample. The serum and plasma values had only a weak correlation (r = 0.37).In conclusion, sample type should be carefully considered, especially when measuring proMMP-9, and plasma should be preferred for this measurement. For TIMP-1 the correlation of serum and plasma values is good; the use of serum samples can therefore be justified as long as the generally higher levels in the serum are acknowledged.Entities:
Keywords: ELISA; gelatinases; preanalytical aspects; tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases
Year: 2007 PMID: 19662197 PMCID: PMC2717846
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomark Insights ISSN: 1177-2719
Clinico-pathological parameters and patient characteristics of breast carcinoma patients.
| Tumor parameter | n | % of patients | Patient characteristics | n | % of patients | median (range) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Histological type | ||||||
| ductal | 57 | 71.3 | Menopausal status | |||
| lobular | 13 | 16.3 | pre | 26 | 35.1 | |
| DC in situ | 4 | 5.0 | post | 48 | 64.9 | |
| tubular | 3 | 3.8 | Surgery | |||
| papillar | 1 | 1.3 | mastectomy | 38 | 47.5 | |
| mucinous | 1 | 1.3 | breast | |||
| Size of the tumor | conserving | 42 | 52.5 | |||
| <2cm | 51 | 66.2 | Chemotherapy | |||
| 2–5cm | 24 | 31.2 | yes | 31 | 38.8 | |
| >5cm | 2 | 2.6 | no | 49 | 61.3 | |
| Nodal status | Radiotherapy | |||||
| negative | 50 | 62.5 | yes | 70 | 87.5 | |
| ≤2 positive nodes | 19 | 23.8 | no | 10 | 12.5 | |
| >2 positive nodes | 11 | 13.8 | Endocrine | |||
| Stage | therapy | |||||
| 1 | 36 | 47.4 | yes | 30 | 37.5 | |
| 2A | 23 | 30.3 | no | 50 | 62.5 | |
| 2B | 16 | 21.5 | Age at diagnosis | 56 (28–87) | ||
| 3A | 1 | 1.3 | ||||
| Histological grade | ||||||
| 1 | 9 | 12.3 | ||||
| 2 | 35 | 47.9 | ||||
| 3 | 29 | 39.7 | ||||
| Hormone receptor status | ||||||
| ER positive | 61 | 81.3 | ||||
| ER negative | 14 | 18.7 | ||||
| PR positive | 45 | 60.0 | ||||
| PR negative | 30 | 40.0 | ||||
according to UICC TNM classification.
Protein concentrations according to sample type in healthy controls.
| Protein | Sample type | Mean/median (ng/ml) | Range (ng/ml) | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TIMP-1 | ||||
| Native serum | 462.7 | 288.9–754.6 | ||
| Serum + | 486.5 | 340.1–680.3 | ||
| LiHe | 259.7 | 163.7–344.0 | ||
| EDTA | 243.9 | 147.9–395.1 | p < 0.001 | |
| TIMP-2 | ||||
| Native serum | 201.8 | 144.0–311.1 | ||
| Serum + | 197.7 | 167.1–317.2 | ||
| LiHe | 187.2 | 125.6–347.3 | ||
| EDTA | 199.8 | 141.1–307.1 | N. S | |
| MMP2-TIMP2 | ||||
| Native serum | 1456.4 | 749.8–2168.7 | ||
| Serum + | 1436.7 | 805.2–2087.7 | ||
| LiHe | 1384.2 | 854.8–2198.3 | ||
| EDTA | 1119.1 | 641.6–1780.6 | p < 0.001 | |
| ProMMP-9 | ||||
| Native serum | 30.4 | 10.7–107.3 | ||
| Serum + | 124.8 | 51.4–410.9 | ||
| LiHe | 7.3 | 3.8–40.6 | ||
| EDTA | 24.3 | 5.5–66.5 | p < 0.001 | |
| ProMMP-2 | ||||
| Native serum | 1259.9 | 793.9–1881.9 | ||
| Serum + | 1197.3 | 777.3–1790.3 | ||
| LiHe | 1224.7 | 783.0–1894.2 | ||
| EDTA | 1195.5 | 770.6–1791.2 | N. S | |
| Active MMP-2 | ||||
| Native serum | 29.4 | 10.8–68.1 | ||
| Serum + | 33.5 | 10.0–78.7 | ||
| LiHe | 8.51 | 5.67–14.7 | p < 0.001 | |
Serum + indicating serum with coagulation activator.
Figure 1Protein concentrations according to sample type for A) TIMP-1, B) proMMP-9 in healthy controls (n = 26).
Protein concentrations according to sample type in breast carcinoma patients.
| Protein | Sample type | Mean/median (ng/ml) | Range (ng/ml) | p-value | Pearson r | R-squared |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TIMP-1 | ||||||
| Serum + | 408.4 | 118.6–842.5 | ||||
| EDTA | 237.8 | 139.8–669.0 | p < 0.001 | 0.79 | 0.61 | |
| TIMP-2 | ||||||
| Serum + | 170.4 | 100.5–293.8 | ||||
| EDTA | 170.8 | 115.6–259.8 | N.S. | 0.73 | 0.53 | |
| MMP2-TIMP-2 | ||||||
| Serum + | 1296.9 | 743.0–2616.4 | ||||
| EDTA | 960.9 | 662.7–1975.2 | p < 0.001 | 0.89 | 0.79 | |
| MMP-9 | ||||||
| Serum + | 63.3 | 13.3–216.4 | ||||
| EDTA | 11.8 | 4.0–106.2 | p < 0.001 | 0.37 | 0.13 | |
Significance of the sample type effect (plasma/serum).
Figure 2Linear regression models for serum A) TIMP-1, B) MMP-9, C) proMMP2-TIMP2 complex, D) TIMP-2 in breast cancer patient material.
Figure 3Corresponding protein concentrations according to sample type for A) TIMP-1 and B) proMMP-9 in breast carcinoma patients and healthy controls.