| Literature DB >> 21283676 |
Ramin Radpour1, Zeinab Barekati, Corina Kohler, Qing Lv, Nicole Bürki, Claude Diesch, Johannes Bitzer, Hong Zheng, Seraina Schmid, Xiao Yan Zhong.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aberrant DNA methylation patterns might be used as a biomarker for diagnosis and management of cancer patients. METHODS ANDEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21283676 PMCID: PMC3025923 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0016080
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Clinical characteristics of patients in the two study cohorts.
| Sample type | Total no. of patients | Age mean ± S.D. (range) | Pathologic stage | No. of patients with lymph node involvement | No. of patients with metastasis | Histological grade | ER | PR | |||||
| Early | Late | 1 | 2 | 3 | Positive | Negative | Positive | Negative | |||||
|
| 36 | 67±13.4 (38–89) | 27 | 9 | 19 | 0 | 11 | 18 | 7 | 28 | 8 | 23 | 13 |
|
| 20 | 50±11.7 (33–77) | 12 | 8 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 15 | 16 | 4 | 10 | 10 |
*The pathologic stage
**The pathologic stage III and IV was considered as “Late stage”.
ER: Estrogen receptor; PR: Progesterone receptor.
High-throughput methylation analysis of CpG sites per amplicon for the 10 studied genes.
| Genes | Amplicon size (bp) | Total No. of CpG sites in amplicon | No. of analyzed CpG sites in amplicon | No. of informative CpG sites in amplicon | No. of analyzed CpG sites per amplicons | |
| Single sites | Composite sites | |||||
|
| 420 | 26 | 18 | 12 | 12 | 6 |
|
| 330 | 32 | 18 | 12 | 3 | 15 |
|
| 397 | 37 | 30 | 9 | 11 | 19 |
|
| 413 | 30 | 15 | 7 | 10 | 5 |
|
| 445 | 49 | 27 | 6 | 15 | 12 |
|
| 374 | 30 | 24 | 6 | 7 | 17 |
|
| 381 | 23 | 17 | 8 | 10 | 7 |
|
| 580 | 62 | 36 | 14 | 13 | 23 |
|
| 419 | 30 | 19 | 8 | 10 | 9 |
|
| 441 | 51 | 44 | 14 | 11 | 33 |
The in silico digestion was performed for the T-cleavage assay. The percentage of total CpG sites in the amplicon is divided into single sites (single CpG sites) and composite sites (two or more adjacent CpG sites fall within one fragment, or when fragment masses are overlapping).
Figure 1Methylation profiling of 10 candidate genes in two studied cohorts.
A) An example of high-throughput methylation analysis of CpG sites for the BRCA1 gene for the 60 triple samples (cancerous tissue, matched normal tissue and serum samples). The complete data for the other genes is summarized in Dataset S1. B) Peaks show percentage of methylation extent obtained from an informative CpG site of BRCA1 gene with a significant difference between serum and tumor with normal tissue in a triple case. C) Double dendrogram profiles the mean methylation proportion of all 10 studied genes in plasma samples from breast cancer patients and normal subjects. D) Double dendrogram profiles the mean methylation proportion of all 10 studied genes in triple matched samples. E) PCA mapping of the mean methylation proportion of analyzed genes in plasma samples. F) PCA mapping of the mean methylation proportion of analyzed genes in triple matched samples.
Figure 2Comparison between quantitative methylation analyses of 10 candidate genes.
A) Thirty six plasma samples of breast cancer patients and 30 plasma samples of normal subjects as control. B) Triple matched samples from 20 breast cancer patients. (* significant difference; Mann-Whitney U Test).
Figure 3ROC curve analysis using cfDNA for discriminating between cancerous and normal samples based on methylation patterns of 10 candidate genes.
A) ROC curves of cfDNA to discriminate between plasma sample of breast cancer patients and plasma samples of normal subjects. B) ROC curves of cfDNA to discriminate between serum with and matched normal tissue samples.
ROC curve analysis of plasma and serum samples based on methylation proportion of the 10 genes.
| Sample type | Genes | Specificity (%) | Sensitivity (%) | AUC | Asymptotic 95% confidence interval (Lower - Upper Bound) | Cut-off points |
|
|
| 90 | 50 | 0.824 | 0.720–0.928 | 0.42 |
|
| 90 | 53 | 0.776 | 0.665–0.888 | 0.67 | |
|
| 90 | 30 | 0.631 | 0.493–0.768 | 0.71 | |
|
| 90 | 75 | 0.874 | 0.780–0.967 | 0.57 | |
|
| 90 | 56 | 0.718 | 0.592–0.843 | 0.58 | |
|
| 90 | 31 | 0.611 | 0.471–0.752 | 0.76 | |
|
| 90 | 35 | 0.712 | 0.585–0.838 | 0.66 | |
|
| 90 | 50 | 0.732 | 0.608–0.856 | 0.91 | |
|
| 90 | 88 | 0.965 | 0.915–1.000 | 0.65 | |
|
| 90 | 35 | 0.761 | 0.640–0.882 | 0.68 | |
|
|
| 90 | 25 | 0.814 | 0.676–0.951 | 0.46 |
|
| 90 | 40 | 0.757 | 0.608–0.907 | 0.69 | |
|
| 90 | 45 | 0.795 | 0.647–0.943 | 0.93 | |
|
| 90 | 60 | 0.854 | 0.730–0.977 | 0.70 | |
|
| 90 | 75 | 0.870 | 0.809–0.991 | 0.53 | |
|
| 90 | 30 | 0.595 | 0.409–0.781 | 0.92 | |
|
| 90 | 40 | 0.581 | 0.393–0.769 | 0.43 | |
|
| 90 | 40 | 0.710 | 0.546–0.874 | 0.69 | |
|
| 90 | 25 | 0.709 | 0.540–0.877 | 0.66 | |
|
| 90 | 35 | 0.717 | 0.557–0.878 | 0.48 |
*AUC: area under the curve.
**Cut-off points were calculated according to 90% specificity.
Frequency and coverage of promoter methylation in plasma and serum cfDNA.
| Type of tumor | Promoter methylation frequency in | Promoter methylation frequency in | ||||
| Genes | Methylation frequency | Coverage | Genes | Methylation frequency | Coverage | |
| Samples with early stage |
| 48.1% | 92.6% |
| 25% | 91.7% |
|
| 55.6% |
| 41.7% | |||
|
| 48.1% |
| 58.3% | |||
|
| 55.6% |
| 41.7% | |||
|
| 29.6% |
| 8.4% | |||
|
| 59.2% |
| 41.7% | |||
|
| 40.7% |
| 16.7% | |||
|
| 33.3% |
| 25% | |||
| Samples with late stage |
| 44.4% | 88.9% |
| 25% | 100% |
|
| 44.4% |
| 12.5% | |||
|
| 55.5% |
| 12.5% | |||
|
| 44.4% |
| 12.5% | |||
|
| 22.2% |
| 75% | |||
|
| 22.2% |
| 37.5% | |||
|
| 33.3% |
| 37.5% | |||
|
| 22.2% |
| 62.5% | |||
| All analyzed samples |
| 47.2% | 91.7% |
| 25% | 95% |
|
| 52.8% |
| 30% | |||
|
| 50% |
| 40% | |||
|
| 52.8% |
| 30% | |||
|
| 27.8% |
| 35% | |||
|
| 50% |
| 40% | |||
|
| 38.9% |
| 25% | |||
|
| 30.6% |
| 40% | |||
Coverage: percentage of cases with methylation in at least one gene in the given panel (i.e., coverage of 100% means that all samples had methylation of at least one gene in the panel).
*The pathologic stage
**The pathologic stage III and IV was considered as “Late stage”.
Figure 4Comparison of the mean methylation proportion and approximate position of informative CpG sites in the range of −400 to +200 according to the recognition sites of the transcription factors in the 10 candidate genes.
A) Comparison of methylation proportion in 36 plasma samples of breast cancer patients and 30 plasma samples of normal subjects. B) Comparison of methylation proportion in 60 triple samples (cancerous breast tissue, matched normal tissue and serum samples) from 20 breast cancer patients. (Dots in the map are corresponding to the mean methylation quantity of each CpG site in all analyzed cases).