J Bayo1, M A Castaño2, F Rivera3, F Navarro4. 1. Oncology Service, Huelva Hospital Complex, Huelva, C/Ronda Norte, s/n, 21005, Huelva, Spain. juanbayo@yahoo.es. 2. Clinical Analysis Service, Huelva Hospital Complex, Huelva, Spain. 3. Behavioural Science Methodology Area, University of Huelva, Huelva, Spain. 4. Department of Integrated Sciences, Cell Biology, Faculty of Experimental Sciences, University of Huelva, Huelva, Spain.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Breast cancer is the most common neoplasm in women and has the highest associated mortality rate. Rapid detection programmes can provide early diagnosis and increase the chances of survival. There are no specific tumor biomarkers for the early phase of the disease. The primary aim of this study was to search a blood biomarker with levels that exceeded the normal range established in the general population that could be used to screen breast cancer. METHODS/PATIENTS: Case-control study. Conventional as well as research (NGAL, EGFR and 8-OHdG) tumor biomarkers were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 126 women were enrolled (cases: 63 patients with local breast cancer; Controls: 63 healthy women). Significant differences were found in patients with higher levels of the conventional markers, Ca15.3, CEA, Cyfra 21.1 and NSE. However, when commercial cut-off values were used, only Ca 15.13 was significant. In the group of research biomarkers, significantly higher levels of EGFR were found in the control group, and of 8-OHdG in the case group. Using logistic regression analysis and a ROC curve, an equation composed of five markers, Ca 15.3, NSE, NGAL, EGFR and 8-OHdG, which yielded a correct diagnostic probability of breast cancer of 91.8% was obtained. CONCLUSIONS: 8-OHdG has been identified as a new potential marker for screening early stage breast cancer. In addition, a model that combines five blood markers that can be used as a diagnostic test in certain groups of patients has been developed. New studies with a larger sample size are needed to verify the results obtained.
PURPOSE:Breast cancer is the most common neoplasm in women and has the highest associated mortality rate. Rapid detection programmes can provide early diagnosis and increase the chances of survival. There are no specific tumor biomarkers for the early phase of the disease. The primary aim of this study was to search a blood biomarker with levels that exceeded the normal range established in the general population that could be used to screen breast cancer. METHODS/PATIENTS: Case-control study. Conventional as well as research (NGAL, EGFR and 8-OHdG) tumor biomarkers were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 126 women were enrolled (cases: 63 patients with local breast cancer; Controls: 63 healthy women). Significant differences were found in patients with higher levels of the conventional markers, Ca15.3, CEA, Cyfra 21.1 and NSE. However, when commercial cut-off values were used, only Ca 15.13 was significant. In the group of research biomarkers, significantly higher levels of EGFR were found in the control group, and of 8-OHdG in the case group. Using logistic regression analysis and a ROC curve, an equation composed of five markers, Ca 15.3, NSE, NGAL, EGFR and 8-OHdG, which yielded a correct diagnostic probability of breast cancer of 91.8% was obtained. CONCLUSIONS:8-OHdG has been identified as a new potential marker for screening early stage breast cancer. In addition, a model that combines five blood markers that can be used as a diagnostic test in certain groups of patients has been developed. New studies with a larger sample size are needed to verify the results obtained.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Early diagnosis; Oxidative stress; Serum tumor biomarkers
Authors: Scott D Ramsey; N Lynn Henry; Julie R Gralow; Dana K Mirick; William Barlow; Ruth Etzioni; David Mummy; Rahber Thariani; David L Veenstra Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-10-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Lyndsay Harris; Herbert Fritsche; Robert Mennel; Larry Norton; Peter Ravdin; Sheila Taube; Mark R Somerfield; Daniel F Hayes; Robert C Bast Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-10-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: James L Khatcheressian; Patricia Hurley; Elissa Bantug; Laura J Esserman; Eva Grunfeld; Francine Halberg; Alexander Hantel; N Lynn Henry; Hyman B Muss; Thomas J Smith; Victor G Vogel; Antonio C Wolff; Mark R Somerfield; Nancy E Davidson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-11-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Marta Falcinelli; Premal H Thaker; Susan K Lutgendorf; Suzanne D Conzen; Renée L Flaherty; Melanie S Flint Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2021-07-15 Impact factor: 12.701