PURPOSE: The detection of pancreatic tumors lacks a sensitive and specific diagnostic tool. Mass spectrometry (MS)-based profiling of serum proteins is a promising approach for discovery of new clinical biomarkers or biomarker signatures. METHODS: Serum samples from pancreatic cancer (PC) patients and control individuals were collected and processed using a standardized protocol. Samples were divided in a calibration set (n = 49 PC and 110 controls) and a validation set (n = 39 PC and 75 controls). Peptide profiles were obtained using a combination of automated solid-phase extraction with reversed-phase C18 paramagnetic beads and matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight MS. RESULTS: Linear discriminant analysis with double cross-validation resulted in a discriminating peptide signature for PC in the calibration set with a sensitivity of 78 % and a specificity of 91 % [area under the curve (AUC) of 92 %]. Classification was validated with a sensitivity of 93 % and a specificity of 100 % (AUC of 98 %), and the results were compared with carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels and currently available clinical imaging techniques. The ten most discriminating peptide peaks were identified as fragments of proteins involved in the clotting cascade, acute phase response and immunologic response. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, it is shown that MS-based serum peptide profiles can discriminate between PC and control samples. The approach has great potential for high-throughput analysis in surveillance programs and appears to be most promising for patients with an inherited risk for PC, who benefit from more frequent screening.
PURPOSE: The detection of pancreatic tumors lacks a sensitive and specific diagnostic tool. Mass spectrometry (MS)-based profiling of serum proteins is a promising approach for discovery of new clinical biomarkers or biomarker signatures. METHODS: Serum samples from pancreatic cancer (PC) patients and control individuals were collected and processed using a standardized protocol. Samples were divided in a calibration set (n = 49 PC and 110 controls) and a validation set (n = 39 PC and 75 controls). Peptide profiles were obtained using a combination of automated solid-phase extraction with reversed-phase C18 paramagnetic beads and matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight MS. RESULTS: Linear discriminant analysis with double cross-validation resulted in a discriminating peptide signature for PC in the calibration set with a sensitivity of 78 % and a specificity of 91 % [area under the curve (AUC) of 92 %]. Classification was validated with a sensitivity of 93 % and a specificity of 100 % (AUC of 98 %), and the results were compared with carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels and currently available clinical imaging techniques. The ten most discriminating peptide peaks were identified as fragments of proteins involved in the clotting cascade, acute phase response and immunologic response. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, it is shown that MS-based serum peptide profiles can discriminate between PC and control samples. The approach has great potential for high-throughput analysis in surveillance programs and appears to be most promising for patients with an inherited risk for PC, who benefit from more frequent screening.
Authors: Shandra Bipat; Saffire S K S Phoa; Otto M van Delden; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Dirk J Gouma; Johan S Laméris; Jaap Stoker Journal: J Comput Assist Tomogr Date: 2005 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: Shannon M Lynch; Alina Vrieling; Jay H Lubin; Peter Kraft; Julie B Mendelsohn; Patricia Hartge; Federico Canzian; Emily Steplowski; Alan A Arslan; Myron Gross; Kathy Helzlsouer; Eric J Jacobs; Andrea LaCroix; Gloria Petersen; Wei Zheng; Demetrius Albanes; Laufey Amundadottir; Sheila A Bingham; Paolo Boffetta; Marie-Christine Boutron-Ruault; Stephen J Chanock; Sandra Clipp; Robert N Hoover; Kevin Jacobs; Karen C Johnson; Charles Kooperberg; Juhua Luo; Catherine Messina; Domenico Palli; Alpa V Patel; Elio Riboli; Xiao-Ou Shu; Laudina Rodriguez Suarez; Gilles Thomas; Anne Tjønneland; Geoffrey S Tobias; Elissa Tong; Dimitrios Trichopoulos; Jarmo Virtamo; Weimin Ye; Kai Yu; Anne Zeleniuch-Jacquette; H Bas Bueno-de-Mesquita; Rachael Z Stolzenberg-Solomon Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2009-06-26 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: John Dewitt; Benedict M Devereaux; Glen A Lehman; Stuart Sherman; Thomas F Imperiale Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2006-05-03 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Carlos Micames; Paul S Jowell; Rebekah White; Erik Paulson; Rendon Nelson; Michael Morse; Herbert Hurwitz; Theodore Pappas; Douglas Tyler; Kevin McGrath Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Kyoko Kojima; Senait Asmellash; Christopher A Klug; William E Grizzle; James A Mobley; John D Christein Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2008-08-15 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Thomas P Potjer; Bart J Mertens; Simone Nicolardi; Yuri E M van der Burgt; Bert A Bonsing; Wilma E Mesker; Rob A E M Tollenaar; Hans F A Vasen Journal: Transl Oncol Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 4.243
Authors: Simone Nicolardi; Bogdan Bogdanov; André M Deelder; Magnus Palmblad; Yuri E M van der Burgt Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2015-11-13 Impact factor: 5.923