Ning Li1, Jie Ma1, Maria A Guarnera1, HongBin Fang2, Ling Cai2, Feng Jiang1. 1. Department of Pathology, The University of Maryland Greenebaum Cancer Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine, 10 South Pine Street, MSTF 7th Floor, Baltimore, MD 21201-1192, USA. 2. Division of Biostatistics, The University of Maryland Greenebaum Cancer Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: MicroRNAs (miRNAs) play important roles in the initiation and progression of lung cancer. Measuring miRNA expression levels in sputum could provide a potential approach for the diagnosis of lung cancer. The emerging digital PCR is a straightforward technique for precise, direct, and absolute quantification of nucleic acids. The objective of the study was to investigate whether digital PCR could be used to quantify miRNAs in sputum for lung cancer diagnosis. METHODS: We first determined and compared dynamic ranges of digital PCR and conventional quantitative reverse transcriptase PCR (qRT-PCR) for miRNA quantification using RNA isolated from sputum of five healthy individuals. We then used digital PCR to quantify copy number of two lung cancer-associated miRNAs (miR-31 and miR-210) in 35 lung cancer patients and 40 cancer-free controls. RESULTS: Copy number of the miRNAs measured by digital PCR displayed a linear response to input cDNA amount in a twofold dilution series over seven orders of magnitude. miRNA quantification determined by digital PCR assay was in good agreement with that obtained from qRT-PCR analysis in sputum. Furthermore, combined quantification of miR-31 and miR-210 copy number by using digital PCR in sputum of the cases and controls provided 65.71 % sensitivity and 85.00 % specificity for lung cancer diagnosis. CONCLUSION: As digital PCR becomes more established, it would be a robust tool for quantitative assessment of miRNA copy number in sputum for lung cancer diagnosis.
PURPOSE: MicroRNAs (miRNAs) play important roles in the initiation and progression of lung cancer. Measuring miRNA expression levels in sputum could provide a potential approach for the diagnosis of lung cancer. The emerging digital PCR is a straightforward technique for precise, direct, and absolute quantification of nucleic acids. The objective of the study was to investigate whether digital PCR could be used to quantify miRNAs in sputum for lung cancer diagnosis. METHODS: We first determined and compared dynamic ranges of digital PCR and conventional quantitative reverse transcriptase PCR (qRT-PCR) for miRNA quantification using RNA isolated from sputum of five healthy individuals. We then used digital PCR to quantify copy number of two lung cancer-associated miRNAs (miR-31 and miR-210) in 35 lung cancerpatients and 40 cancer-free controls. RESULTS: Copy number of the miRNAs measured by digital PCR displayed a linear response to input cDNA amount in a twofold dilution series over seven orders of magnitude. miRNA quantification determined by digital PCR assay was in good agreement with that obtained from qRT-PCR analysis in sputum. Furthermore, combined quantification of miR-31 and miR-210 copy number by using digital PCR in sputum of the cases and controls provided 65.71 % sensitivity and 85.00 % specificity for lung cancer diagnosis. CONCLUSION: As digital PCR becomes more established, it would be a robust tool for quantitative assessment of miRNA copy number in sputum for lung cancer diagnosis.
Authors: Ruiyun Li; Nevins W Todd; Qi Qiu; Tao Fan; Richard Y Zhao; William H Rodgers; Hong-Bin Fang; Ruth L Katz; Sanford A Stass; Feng Jiang Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2007-01-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Nicholas J Heredia; Phillip Belgrader; Shenglong Wang; Ryan Koehler; Jack Regan; Angela M Cosman; Serge Saxonov; Benjamin Hindson; Stephanie C Tanner; Alexandra S Brown; George Karlin-Neumann Journal: Methods Date: 2012-10-02 Impact factor: 3.608
Authors: Nozomu Yanaihara; Natasha Caplen; Elise Bowman; Masahiro Seike; Kensuke Kumamoto; Ming Yi; Robert M Stephens; Aikou Okamoto; Jun Yokota; Tadao Tanaka; George Adrian Calin; Chang-Gong Liu; Carlo M Croce; Curtis C Harris Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Benjamin J Hindson; Kevin D Ness; Donald A Masquelier; Phillip Belgrader; Nicholas J Heredia; Anthony J Makarewicz; Isaac J Bright; Michael Y Lucero; Amy L Hiddessen; Tina C Legler; Tyler K Kitano; Michael R Hodel; Jonathan F Petersen; Paul W Wyatt; Erin R Steenblock; Pallavi H Shah; Luc J Bousse; Camille B Troup; Jeffrey C Mellen; Dean K Wittmann; Nicholas G Erndt; Thomas H Cauley; Ryan T Koehler; Austin P So; Simant Dube; Klint A Rose; Luz Montesclaros; Shenglong Wang; David P Stumbo; Shawn P Hodges; Steven Romine; Fred P Milanovich; Helen E White; John F Regan; George A Karlin-Neumann; Christopher M Hindson; Serge Saxonov; Bill W Colston Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2011-10-28 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Christopher M Hindson; John R Chevillet; Hilary A Briggs; Emily N Gallichotte; Ingrid K Ruf; Benjamin J Hindson; Robert L Vessella; Muneesh Tewari Journal: Nat Methods Date: 2013-09-01 Impact factor: 28.547
Authors: Lingxiao Xing; Jian Su; Maria A Guarnera; Howard Zhang; Ling Cai; Rixin Zhou; Sanford A Stass; Feng Jiang Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2015-01-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Agnieszka Zmienko; Anna Samelak-Czajka; Michal Goralski; Ewa Sobieszczuk-Nowicka; Piotr Kozlowski; Marek Figlerowicz Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-02-27 Impact factor: 3.240