Literature DB >> 33530402

Comparison of Proteomic Technologies for Blood-Based Detection of Colorectal Cancer.

Megha Bhardwaj1,2, Tobias Terzer3, Petra Schrotz-King1, Hermann Brenner1,2,4.   

Abstract

Blood-based protein biomarkers are increasingly being explored as supplementary or efficient alternatives for population-based screening of colorectal cancer (CRC). The objective of the current study was to compare the diagnostic potential of proteins measured with different proteomic technologies. The concentrations of protein biomarkers were measured using proximity extension assays (PEAs), liquid chromatography/multiple reaction monitoring-mass spectrometry (LC/MRM-MS) and quantibody microarrays (QMAs) in plasma samples of 56 CRC patients and 99 participants free of neoplasms. In another approach, proteins were measured in serum samples of 30 CRC cases and 30 participants free of neoplasm using immunome full-length functional protein arrays (IpAs). From all the measurements, 9, 6, 35 and 14 protein biomarkers overlapped for comparative evaluation of (a) PEA and LC/MRM-MS, (b) PEA and QMA, (c) PEA and IpA, and (d) LC/MRM-MS and IpA measurements, respectively. Correlation analysis was performed, along with calculation of the area under the curve (AUC) for assessing the diagnostic potential of each biomarker. DeLong's test was performed to assess the differences in AUC. Evaluation of the nine biomarkers measured with PEA and LC/MRM-MS displayed correlation coefficients >+0.6, similar AUCs and DeLong's p-values indicating no differences in AUCs for biomarkers like insulin-like growth factor binding protein 2 (IGFBP2), matrix metalloproteinase 9 (MMP9) and serum paraoxonase lactonase 3 (PON3). Comparing six proteins measured with PEA and QMA showed good correlation and similar diagnostic performance for only one protein, growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF15). The comparison of 35 proteins measured with IpA and PEA and 14 proteins analyzed with IpA and LC/MRM-MS revealed poor concordance and comparatively better AUCs when measured with PEA and LC/MRM-MS. The comparison of different proteomic technologies suggests the superior performance of novel technologies like PEA and LC/MRM-MS over the assessed array-based technologies in blood-protein-based early detection of CRC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  LC/MRM-MS; biomarkers; colorectal cancer; diagnosis; microarray; plasma proteins; proximity extension assays

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33530402      PMCID: PMC7865621          DOI: 10.3390/ijms22031189

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Mol Sci        ISSN: 1422-0067            Impact factor:   5.923


  40 in total

1.  Multiple reaction monitoring-based, multiplexed, absolute quantitation of 45 proteins in human plasma.

Authors:  Michael A Kuzyk; Derek Smith; Juncong Yang; Tyra J Cross; Angela M Jackson; Darryl B Hardie; N Leigh Anderson; Christoph H Borchers
Journal:  Mol Cell Proteomics       Date:  2009-05-01       Impact factor: 5.911

Review 2.  Current status of urinary diagnostic biomarkers for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Hiroyasu Iwasaki; Takaya Shimura; Hiromi Kataoka
Journal:  Clin Chim Acta       Date:  2019-08-14       Impact factor: 3.786

3.  Fecal MicroRNAs as novel biomarkers for colon cancer screening.

Authors:  Alexander Link; Francesc Balaguer; Yan Shen; Takeshi Nagasaka; Juan José Lozano; C Richard Boland; Ajay Goel
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2010-06-15       Impact factor: 4.254

4.  Comparative evaluation of immunochemical fecal occult blood tests for colorectal adenoma detection.

Authors:  Sabrina Hundt; Ulrike Haug; Hermann Brenner
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2009-02-03       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 5.  Colorectal Cancer Blood-Based Biomarkers.

Authors:  Nina Hauptman; Damjan Glavač
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2017-09-25       Impact factor: 2.260

6.  Fibroblast growth factor 21 as a circulating biomarker at various stages of colorectal carcinogenesis.

Authors:  Jing Qian; Kaja Tikk; Korbinian Weigl; Yesilda Balavarca; Hermann Brenner
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2018-11-14       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 7.  Systematic review of blood diagnostic markers in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Stella Nikolaou; Shengyang Qiu; Francesca Fiorentino; Shahnawaz Rasheed; Paris Tekkis; Christos Kontovounisios
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2018-07-18       Impact factor: 3.781

8.  Novel DNA methylation biomarkers show high sensitivity and specificity for blood-based detection of colorectal cancer-a clinical biomarker discovery and validation study.

Authors:  Sarah Østrup Jensen; Nadia Øgaard; Mai-Britt Worm Ørntoft; Mads Heilskov Rasmussen; Jesper Bertram Bramsen; Helle Kristensen; Peter Mouritzen; Mogens Rørbæk Madsen; Anders Husted Madsen; Kåre Gotschalck Sunesen; Lene Hjerrild Iversen; Søren Laurberg; Ib Jarle Christensen; Hans Jørgen Nielsen; Claus Lindbjerg Andersen
Journal:  Clin Epigenetics       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 6.551

9.  Chemical signature of colorectal cancer: case-control study for profiling the breath print.

Authors:  D F Altomare; A Picciariello; M T Rotelli; M De Fazio; A Aresta; C G Zambonin; L Vincenti; P Trerotoli; N De Vietro
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2020-09-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.