| Literature DB >> 28362321 |
Chih-Jung Chen1,2,3, Wen-Wei Sung4,5,6,7,8, Hung-Chang Chen9, Yi-Jye Chern10, Hui-Ting Hsu11, Yueh-Min Lin12,13, Shu-Hui Lin14,15,16, Konan Peck17, Kun-Tu Yeh18,19.
Abstract
Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in peripheral blood is an indication of poor prognosis for patients with different cancer types. However, most of the available technologies for detecting CTCs show low sensitivity and specificity. Therefore, we attempted to find an alternative marker for CTCs of colorectal cancer. We have directly extracted RNA from CTCs contained in 1.5 mL peripheral blood from 90 colorectal cancer patients and 151 healthy donors, and screened these samples for candidate marker genes by nested real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR). From genes selected from a public database of microarray analyses, we successfully identified epithelial cell transforming sequence 2 oncogene (ECT2) as a gene that exhibits high differential expression ratios (p < 0.01). ECT2 displays good sensitivity and specificity, with an area under the curve (AUC) value of 0.821. This marker gene also has a high detection rate in patients with serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) concentrations below the diagnostic threshold of 5 ng/mL. The expression of ECT2 can therefore serve as an alternative measurement that can compensate for the inadequacy of the current CEA test in the diagnosis and monitoring of colorectal cancer patients.Entities:
Keywords: CEA; ECT2; biomarker; circulating tumor cell; colorectal cancer
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28362321 PMCID: PMC5412328 DOI: 10.3390/ijms18040743
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Characteristics of colorectal patients and healthy controls.
| Patients ( | Control ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Characteristic | No. | % | No. | % |
| Age, year | ||||
| Mean | 66.45 | 36.29 | ||
| Range | 36–90 | 22–69 | ||
| Gender | ||||
| Female | 45 | 50 | 101 | 67 |
| Male | 45 | 50 | 50 | 33 |
| Primary Tumor | ||||
| Colon | 59 | 61 | N/A | |
| Rectal | 33 | 34 | ||
| Rectosigmoid | 3 | 3 | ||
| Others | 2 | 2 | ||
| Stage | ||||
| I | 6 | 6 | N/A | |
| II | 11 | 12 | ||
| III | 30 | 33 | ||
| IV | 43 | 47 | ||
| Differentiation | ||||
| Well | 2 | 2 | N/A | |
| Moderate | 81 | 90 | ||
| Poor | 5 | 6 | ||
| Unspecified | 2 | 2 | ||
| CEA, ng/mL | ||||
| ≥5 | 46 | 51 | N/A | |
| <5 | 44 | 49 | ||
N/A: not applicable; CEA: carcinoembryonic antigen.
Figure 1mRNA expression of candidate marker genes of peripheral blood cells for detecting circulating tumor cells in colorectal cancer patients. (A) This scatter plot shows that the relative expression of the tested gene is linearly correlated with cancer cell numbers. The curve was generated by taking the mean of triplicates of each data point. (B) The 3D scatter plot shows the distribution of three evaluation criteria: p-value, area under the curve (AUC), and gene expression ratio (Patients vs. Normal) for 29 tested marker genes. The epithelial cell transforming sequence 2 oncogene (ECT2) gene had the highest differential gene expression ratio, largest area under the curve, and the most significant p-value among all tested genes. (C) The three heatmaps show the individual ranking of each tested marker gene for the three evaluation criteria.
Figure 2Identification of ECT2 as a candidate marker gene for quantifying circulating tumor cells in colorectal cancer patients. Comparison of the detection sensitivity of CEA and ECT2, singly and in combination, as markers in colorectal cancer patients at different stages. (A) A box plot showing differential expression ratios of ECT2 in colorectal cancer patients and a normal control group. The p value of a two-tailed unpaired t-test was 1.42 × 10−15. The whiskers of the boxes indicate 1.5 interquartile range (IQR) of the lower and higher quartile. (B) Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis of ECT2 expression in cells from peripheral blood of colorectal cancer patients and normal donors. The area under curve (AUC) was 0.821. (C) A total of 90 colorectal cancer patients were included in this study. CEA had a detection sensitivity of 29%, 50%, and 60%, while ECT2 had a sensitivity of 59%, 57%, and 63%, in patients with stage I/II, stage III, and stage IV cancers, respectively. (D) In patients with serum CEA lower than the diagnostic threshold of 5 ng/mL, the ECT2 quantification sensitivity in patients with stage I/ II, stage III, and stage IV were 75%, 67%, and 59%.
Figure 3Increasing expression of ECT2 in colorectal cancer patients with serum CEA levels greater than 5 ng/mL and advancing disease. The box plot shows differential expression ratios of ECT2 in patients with detectable serum CEA levels (more than 5 ng/mL). The p-value of a Kruskal-Wallis (KW) test was less than 0.05.
Proportion of elevated ECT2 and CEA detected in serum in different combination of patients with colorectal cancer.
| CEA/ECT Expression | Stage I and II, | Stage III, | Stage IV, | All, |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CEA+ECT2− | 4 (24) | 9 (30) | 9 (21) | 22 (24) |
| CEA−ECT2+ | 9 (53) | 11 (37) | 10 (23) | 30 (33) |
| CEA+ECT2+ | 1 (6) | 6 (20) | 6 (20) | 24 (27) |
| CEA+ and/or ECT2+ | 14 (82) | 26 (87) | 26 (84) | 76 (84) |
| CEA−ECT2− | 3 (18) | 4 (13) | 7 (16) | 14 (16) |
Cut-off level for CEA is 5 ng/mL and for ECT2 is 1.79 ng/mL.