OBJECTIVE: To develop a plasma-based microRNA (miRNA) diagnostic assay specific for colorectal neoplasms, building upon our prior work. BACKGROUND: Colorectal neoplasms [colorectal cancer (CRC) and colorectal advanced adenoma (CAA)] frequently develop in individuals at ages when other common cancers also occur. Current screening methods lack sensitivity, specificity, and have poor patient compliance. METHODS: Plasma was screened for 380 miRNAs using microfluidic array technology from a "Training" cohort of 60 patients, (10 each) control, CRC, CAA, breast cancer, pancreatic cancer, and lung cancer. We identified uniquely dysregulated miRNAs specific for colorectal neoplasia (P < 0.05, false discovery rate: 5%, adjusted α = 0.0038). These miRNAs were evaluated using single assays in a "Test" cohort of 120 patients. A mathematical model was developed to predict blinded sample identity in a 150 patient "Validation" cohort using repeat-sub-sampling validation of the testing dataset with 1000 iterations each to assess model detection accuracy. RESULTS: Seven miRNAs (miR-21, miR-29c, miR-122, miR-192, miR-346, miR-372, and miR-374a) were selected based upon P value, area under the curve (AUC), fold change, and biological plausibility. Area under the curve (±95% confidence interval) for "Test" cohort comparisons were 0.91 (0.85-0.96) between all neoplasia and controls, 0.79 (0.70-0.88) between colorectal neoplasia and other cancers, and 0.98 (0.96-1.0) between CRC and colorectal adenomas. In our "Validation" cohort, our mathematical model predicted blinded sample identity with 69% to 77% accuracy, 67% to 76% accuracy, and 86% to 90% accuracy for each comparison, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our plasma miRNA assay and prediction model differentiate colorectal neoplasia from patients with other neoplasms and from controls with higher sensitivity and specificity compared with current clinical standards.
OBJECTIVE: To develop a plasma-based microRNA (miRNA) diagnostic assay specific for colorectal neoplasms, building upon our prior work. BACKGROUND:Colorectal neoplasms [colorectal cancer (CRC) and colorectal advanced adenoma (CAA)] frequently develop in individuals at ages when other common cancers also occur. Current screening methods lack sensitivity, specificity, and have poor patient compliance. METHODS: Plasma was screened for 380 miRNAs using microfluidic array technology from a "Training" cohort of 60 patients, (10 each) control, CRC, CAA, breast cancer, pancreatic cancer, and lung cancer. We identified uniquely dysregulated miRNAs specific for colorectal neoplasia (P < 0.05, false discovery rate: 5%, adjusted α = 0.0038). These miRNAs were evaluated using single assays in a "Test" cohort of 120 patients. A mathematical model was developed to predict blinded sample identity in a 150 patient "Validation" cohort using repeat-sub-sampling validation of the testing dataset with 1000 iterations each to assess model detection accuracy. RESULTS: Seven miRNAs (miR-21, miR-29c, miR-122, miR-192, miR-346, miR-372, and miR-374a) were selected based upon P value, area under the curve (AUC), fold change, and biological plausibility. Area under the curve (±95% confidence interval) for "Test" cohort comparisons were 0.91 (0.85-0.96) between all neoplasia and controls, 0.79 (0.70-0.88) between colorectal neoplasia and other cancers, and 0.98 (0.96-1.0) between CRC and colorectal adenomas. In our "Validation" cohort, our mathematical model predicted blinded sample identity with 69% to 77% accuracy, 67% to 76% accuracy, and 86% to 90% accuracy for each comparison, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our plasma miRNA assay and prediction model differentiate colorectal neoplasia from patients with other neoplasms and from controls with higher sensitivity and specificity compared with current clinical standards.
Authors: Ziad Kanaan; Henry Roberts; M Robert Eichenberger; Adrian Billeter; Gairy Ocheretner; Jianmin Pan; Shesh N Rai; Jeffery Jorden; Anna Williford; Susan Galandiuk Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Luke A Selth; Scott Townley; Joanna L Gillis; Aleksandra M Ochnik; Krisna Murti; Robyn J Macfarlane; Kim N Chi; Villis R Marshall; Wayne D Tilley; Lisa M Butler Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2011-11-03 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: J D Hardcastle; J O Chamberlain; M H Robinson; S M Moss; S S Amar; T W Balfour; P D James; C M Mangham Journal: Lancet Date: 1996-11-30 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Thomas F Imperiale; David F Ransohoff; Steven H Itzkowitz; Theodore R Levin; Philip Lavin; Graham P Lidgard; David A Ahlquist; Barry M Berger Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-03-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Norman James Galbraith; James Burton; Mathew Brady Ekman; Joseph Kenney; Samuel Patterson Walker; Stephen Manek; Campbell Bishop; Jane Victoria Carter; Sarah Appel Gardner; Hiram C Polk Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-09-14 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jane V Carter; Norman J Galbraith; Dongyan Yang; James F Burton; Samuel P Walker; Susan Galandiuk Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2017-02-02 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Uri Netz; Jane Carter; M Robert Eichenberger; Kayla Feagins; Norman J Galbraith; Gerald W Dryden; Jianmin Pan; Shesh N Rai; Susan Galandiuk Journal: Inflamm Bowel Dis Date: 2017-12-19 Impact factor: 5.325