| Literature DB >> 23091368 |
Nai-Jun Fan1, Chun-Fang Gao, Xiu-Li Wang, Guang Zhao, Qing-Yin Liu, Yuan-Yao Zhang, Bao-Guo Cheng.
Abstract
Background. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers in the world, identification of biomarkers for early detection of CRC represents a relevant target. The present study aims to determine serum peptidome patterns for CRC diagnosis. Methods. The present work focused on serum proteomic analysis of 32 health volunteers and 38 CRC by ClinProt Kit combined with mass spectrometry. This approach allowed the construction of a peptide patterns able to differentiate the studied populations. An independent group of serum (including 33 health volunteers, 34 CRC, 16 colorectal adenoma, 36 esophageal carcinoma, and 31 gastric carcinoma samples) was used to verify the diagnostic and differential diagnostic capability of the peptidome patterns blindly. An immunoassay method was used to determine serum CEA of CRC and controls. Results. A quick classifier algorithm was used to construct the peptidome patterns for identification of CRC from controls. Two of the identified peaks at m/z 741 and 7772 were used to construct peptidome patterns, achieving an accuracy close to 100% (>CEA, P < 0.05). Furthermore, the peptidome patterns could differentiate validation group with high accuracy. Conclusions. These results suggest that the ClinProt Kit combined with mass spectrometry yields significantly higher accuracy for the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of CRC.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23091368 PMCID: PMC3469310 DOI: 10.1155/2012/985020
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Biomed Biotechnol ISSN: 1110-7243
Clinical characteristics of colorectal cancer patients recruited in model construction group and external evaluation group.
| Clinical characteristics | Model construction group ( | External evaluation group ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender: female/male | 23/15 | 19/15 | 0.690 |
| Age (years, | 62.00 ± 10.95 | 61.74 ± 11.61 | 0.854 |
| TNM stage | 0.858 | ||
| I | 5 | 5 | |
| II | 18 | 15 | |
| III | 11 | 12 | |
| IV | 4 | 2 | |
| Tumor localization | 0.292 | ||
| Colon | 24 | 21 | |
| Rectum | 14 | 13 |
Figure 1View of the aligned mass spectra of the serum protein profile of model construction group (red: 10 health subjects, blue: 10 colorectal cancer patients) obtained by MALDI-TOF after purification with WCX magnetic beads.
Statistic of the 2 candidate biomarkers signals selected for the diagnostic model for identifying colorectal cancer from health individuals.
| Mass | PW1 | PAD2 | Ave(C)3 | Ave(N)4 | SD(C)5 | SD(N)6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7772.38 | <0.000001 | <0.000001 | 232.5 | 6.75 | 111.94 | 10.39 |
| 741.43 | <0.000001 | <0.000001 | 43.32 | 214.97 | 32.09 | 57.61 |
1 P value calculated with the Wilcoxon test; values lower than 0.05 suggest statistical relevance.
2 P value calculated with the Anderson-Darling test, values lower than 0.05 suggest statistical relevance.
3Average area of peaks for colorectal cancer subjects.
4Average area of peaks for health subjects.
5Standard deviation of peaks for colorectal cancer subjects.
6Standard deviation of peaks for health subjects.
Figure 2Zoom of the mass range for the two signals (MALDI-TOF linear mode) used in the cluster to differentiate colorectal cancer (CRC) from healthy volunteers (H).
Figure 3The receiver operating characteristic curve of two signals selected for the diagnostic model. AUC, areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve.
Figure 4Box-and-whiskers plot calculated from the areas of the two signals used in the cluster for the two studied populations. Red represents colorectal cancer, green represents healthy volunteers.
The predicted results of peptidome pattern distinguishing colorectal cancer patients from controls.
| Group | Colorectal cancer | Controls | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Youden's index | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Health | Colorectal adenoma | Esophageal carcinoma | Gastric cancer | |||||
| Model construction | 38 | 32 | — | — | — | 94.74% (36/38) | 100% (32/32) | 0.95 |
| External validation | ||||||||
| I | 34 | 33 | — | — | — | 94.12% (32/34) | 100% (33/33) | 0.94 |
| II | 34 | — | 16 | — | — | 94.12% (32/34) | 100% (16/16) | 0.94 |
| III | 34 | — | — | 36 | — | 94.12% (32/34) | 100% (36/36) | 0.94 |
| IV | 34 | — | — | — | 31 | 94.12% (32/34) | 100% (31/31) | 0.94 |
Figure 5Two-dimensional peak distribution view of the two peaks selected for the diagnostic model. The peak area and the m/z values are indicated on the x- and y-axes. The ellipses represent the standard deviation of the class average of the peak areas/intensities. Red represents colorectal cancer patients and green represents healthy volunteers.