Sharad Purohit1, Daron G Ferris2, Manual Alvarez3, Paul M H Tran4, Lynn K H Tran4, David P Mysona5, Diane Hopkins4, Wenbo Zhi6, Boying Dun6, John J Wallbillich2, Richard D Cummings7, Peng George Wang8, Jin-Xiong She9. 1. Center for Biotechnology and Genomic Medicine, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical College of, Georgia; Department of Undergraduate Health Professionals, College of Allied Health Sciences, Augusta University, 1120 15th Street, Augusta, GA 30912, USA. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical College of, Georgia. 3. Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Neoplasicas, Lima, Peru. 4. Center for Biotechnology and Genomic Medicine, USA. 5. University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 6. Center for Biotechnology and Genomic Medicine, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical College of, Georgia. 7. Department of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA. 8. Department of Chemistry, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA 30303, USA. 9. Center for Biotechnology and Genomic Medicine, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical College of, Georgia. Electronic address: jshe@augusta.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To measure anti-glycan antibodies (AGA) in cervical cancer (CC) patient sera and assess their effect on therapeutic outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Serum AGA was measured in 276 stage II and 292 stage III Peruvian CC patients using a high content and throughput Luminex multiplex glycan array (LMGA) containing 177 glycans. Association with disease-specific survival (DSS) and progression free survival (PFS) were analyzed using Cox regression. RESULTS: AGAs were detected against 50 (28.3%) of the 177 glycans assayed. Of the 568 patients, 84.5% received external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) plus brachytherapy (BT), while 15.5% only received EBRT. For stage-matched patients (Stage III), receiving EBRT alone was significantly associated with worse survival (HR 6.4, p < 0.001). Stage III patients have significantly worse survival than Stage II patients after matching for treatment (HR = 2.8 in EBRT+BT treatment group). Furthermore, better PFS and DSS were observed in patients positive for AGA against multiple glycans belonging to the blood group H, Lewis, Ganglio, Isoglobo, lacto and sialylated tetrarose antigens (best HR = 0.49, best p = 0.0008). CONCLUSIONS: Better PFS and DSS are observed in cervical cancer patients that are positive for specific antiglycan antibodies and received brachytherapy.
OBJECTIVE: To measure anti-glycan antibodies (AGA) in cervical cancer (CC) patient sera and assess their effect on therapeutic outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Serum AGA was measured in 276 stage II and 292 stage III Peruvian CC patients using a high content and throughput Luminex multiplex glycan array (LMGA) containing 177 glycans. Association with disease-specific survival (DSS) and progression free survival (PFS) were analyzed using Cox regression. RESULTS: AGAs were detected against 50 (28.3%) of the 177 glycans assayed. Of the 568 patients, 84.5% received external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) plus brachytherapy (BT), while 15.5% only received EBRT. For stage-matched patients (Stage III), receiving EBRT alone was significantly associated with worse survival (HR 6.4, p < 0.001). Stage III patients have significantly worse survival than Stage II patients after matching for treatment (HR = 2.8 in EBRT+BT treatment group). Furthermore, better PFS and DSS were observed in patients positive for AGA against multiple glycans belonging to the blood group H, Lewis, Ganglio, Isoglobo, lacto and sialylated tetrarose antigens (best HR = 0.49, best p = 0.0008). CONCLUSIONS: Better PFS and DSS are observed in cervical cancerpatients that are positive for specific antiglycan antibodies and received brachytherapy.
Authors: Francis Jacob; Darlene R Goldstein; Nicolai V Bovin; Tatiana Pochechueva; Marianne Spengler; Rosemarie Caduff; Daniel Fink; Marko I Vuskovic; Margaret E Huflejt; Viola Heinzelmann-Schwarz Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2011-04-25 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: J Torrado; M Plummer; J Vivas; J Garay; G Lopez; S Peraza; E Carillo; W Oliver; N Muñoz Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2000-07 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Christopher T Campbell; James L Gulley; Oyindasola Oyelaran; James W Hodge; Jeffrey Schlom; Jeffrey C Gildersleeve Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2013-01-29 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Wui-Jin Koh; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Sarah Bean; Kristin Bradley; Susana M Campos; Kathleen R Cho; Hye Sook Chon; Christina Chu; Rachel Clark; David Cohn; Marta Ann Crispens; Shari Damast; Oliver Dorigo; Patricia J Eifel; Christine M Fisher; Peter Frederick; David K Gaffney; Ernest Han; Warner K Huh; John R Lurain; Andrea Mariani; David Mutch; Christa Nagel; Larissa Nekhlyudov; Amanda Nickles Fader; Steven W Remmenga; R Kevin Reynolds; Todd Tillmanns; Stefanie Ueda; Emily Wyse; Catheryn M Yashar; Nicole R McMillian; Jillian L Scavone Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 12.693
Authors: Tatiana Pochechueva; Shahidul Alam; Andreas Schötzau; Alexander Chinarev; Nicolai V Bovin; Neville F Hacker; Francis Jacob; Viola Heinzelmann-Schwarz Journal: J Ovarian Res Date: 2017-02-10 Impact factor: 4.234