scholarly journals Identification and Validation of Potential New Biomarkers for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Prognosis Using 2D-DIGE and MS

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cordelia Geisler ◽  
Nadine T. Gaisa ◽  
David Pfister ◽  
Susanne Fuessel ◽  
Glen Kristiansen ◽  
...  

This study was designed to identify and validate potential new biomarkers for prostate cancer and to distinguish patients with and without biochemical relapse. Prostate tissue samples analyzed by 2D-DIGE (two-dimensional difference in gel electrophoresis) and mass spectrometry (MS) revealed downregulation of secernin-1 (P< 0.044) in prostate cancer, while vinculin showed significant upregulation (P< 0.001). Secernin-1 overexpression in prostate tissue was validated using Western blot and immunohistochemistry while vinculin expression was validated using immunohistochemistry. These findings indicate that secernin-1 and vinculin are potential new tissue biomarkers for prostate cancer diagnosis and prognosis, respectively. For validation, protein levels in urine were also examined by Western blot analysis. Urinary vinculin levels in prostate cancer patients were significantly higher than in urine from nontumor patients (P= 0.006). Using multiple reaction monitoring-MS (MRM-MS) analysis, prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP) showed significant higher levels in the urine of prostate cancer patients compared to controls (P= 0.012), while galectin-3 showed significant lower levels in the urine of prostate cancer patients with biochemical relapse, compared to those without relapse (P= 0.017). Three proteins were successfully differentiated between patients with and without prostate cancer and patients with and without relapse by using MRM. Thus, this technique shows promise for implementation as a noninvasive clinical diagnostic technique.

2015 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael L. Blute ◽  
Nathan A. Damaschke ◽  
David F. Jarrard

BMC Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yngvar Nilssen ◽  
Odd Terje Brustugun ◽  
Morten Tandberg Eriksen ◽  
Erik Skaaheim Haug ◽  
Bjørn Naume ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Cancer patient pathways (CPPs) were implemented in 2015 to reduce waiting time, regional variation in waiting time, and to increase the predictability of cancer care for the patients. The aims of this study were to see if the national target of 70% of all cancer patients being included in a CPP was met, and to identify factors associated with CPP inclusion. Methods All patients registered with a colorectal, lung, breast or prostate cancer diagnosis at the Cancer Registry of Norway in the period 2015–2016 were linked with the Norwegian Patient Registry for CPP information and with Statistics Norway for sociodemographic variables. Multivariable logistic regression examined if the odds of not being included in a CPP were associated with year of diagnosis, age, sex, tumour stage, marital status, education, income, region of residence and comorbidity. Results From 2015 to 2016, 30,747 patients were diagnosed with colorectal, lung, breast or prostate cancer, of whom 24,429 (79.5%) were included in a CPP. Significant increases in the probability of being included in a CPP were observed for colorectal (79.1 to 86.2%), lung (79.0 to 87.3%), breast (91.5 to 97.2%) and prostate cancer (62.2 to 76.2%) patients (p < 0.001). Increasing age was associated with an increased odds of not being included in a CPP for lung (p < 0.001) and prostate cancer (p < 0.001) patients. Colorectal cancer patients < 50 years of age had a two-fold increase (OR = 2.23, 95% CI: 1.70–2.91) in the odds of not being included in a CPP. The odds of no CPP inclusion were significantly increased for low income colorectal (OR = 1.24, 95%CI: 1.00–1.54) and lung (OR = 1.52, 95%CI: 1.16–1.99) cancer patients. Region of residence was significantly associated with CPP inclusion (p < 0.001) and the probability, adjusted for case-mix ranged from 62.4% in region West among prostate cancer patients to 97.6% in region North among breast cancer patients. Conclusions The national target of 70% was met within 1 year of CPP implementation in Norway. Although all patients should have equal access to CPPs, a prostate cancer diagnosis, older age, high level of comorbidity or low income were significantly associated with an increased odds of not being included in a CPP.


2019 ◽  
Vol 65 (07/2019) ◽  
Author(s):  
Noha Ibrahim ◽  
Mona Abdellateif ◽  
Gamal Thabet ◽  
Samar Kassem ◽  
Mohamed El-Salam ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael A. Kiebish ◽  
Jennifer Cullen ◽  
Albert Dobi ◽  
Amina Ali ◽  
Leonardo O. Rodrigues ◽  
...  

The Prostate ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 74 (12) ◽  
pp. 1171-1182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadia Ashour ◽  
Javier C. Angulo ◽  
Guillermo Andrés ◽  
Raúl Alelú ◽  
Ana González-Corpas ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 172
Author(s):  
N. Ashour ◽  
R. Alelú ◽  
A. González-Corpas ◽  
J. González ◽  
C. Nuñez ◽  
...  

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 3295-3295
Author(s):  
Rong Wang ◽  
Amer M. Zeidan ◽  
Pamela R Soulos ◽  
James B. Yu ◽  
Amy J. Davidoff ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Radiation is a known risk factor for myeloid malignancies. Approximately 1.4% of prostate cancer patients who undergo radiotherapy and survive >10 years will develop a secondary cancer. However, the impact of radiotherapy on the development of second myeloid malignancies among prostate cancer patients is unclear. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of elderly prostate cancer patients (diagnosed with clinical stages T1-T3 at the age of 66-99 years during 1999-2009) using the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) - Medicare database. Patients who received chemotherapy after prostate cancer diagnosis or had radiotherapy for prostate cancer recurrence were excluded. We searched Medicare claims and SEER records to identify incident myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) diagnoses after prostate cancer diagnosis. Patients were followed from the diagnosis of prostate cancer through the diagnosis of a second malignancy, death or end of study (12/31/2010 for prostate cancer patients diagnosed in 1999-2003, and 12/31/2012 for those diagnosed in 2004-2011), whichever came first. Competing risk analysis was conducted to assess the impact of radiotherapy on the development of second MDS/AML, compared with surgery. Death and developing a second malignancy other than MDS/AML were considered competing events. Competing risks regression models were performed using the Fine and Gray method to provide estimates of hazard ratios (HRs). Age at prostate diagnosis, race, Elixhauser comorbidity score excluding anemia, history of anemia, disability function score (in quartiles), stage of prostate cancer, and year of prostate cancer diagnosis were adjusted for in the multivariate model. Results: A total of 32,212 prostate cancer patients were included, with a median follow-up of 4.91 years. Patients who received surgery (n = 17,503) were younger than those who underwent radiotherapy (n = 14,709). Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) was the most common type of radiotherapy received (n = 8,813, 59.9%; median follow-up: 3.91 years), followed by brachytherapy (n = 3,201, 21.8%; median follow-up: 5.67 years) and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT, n = 2,695, 18.3%; median follow-up: 7.84 years). We observed 158 incident cases of MDS/AML (123 MDS cases and 35 AML cases) after the diagnosis of prostate cancer. The median time to develop MDS/AML was 3.30 (range: 0.20-9.77) years. In the multivariate model, compared with prostate cancer patients who received surgery only, patients who underwent radiotherapy had a significantly increased risk of developing second MDS/AML (HR = 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09-2.11). When the analysis was stratified by specific radiation modality, increased risk of second MDS/AML was observed in each group, but the increase only reached statistical significance in the IMRT group (HR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.09-2.52) (Table). We also conducted a separate analysis of the 123 patients who developed MDS. In the unadjusted model, compared with prostate cancer patients who received surgery only, patients who underwent any type of radiotherapy, EBRT, or IMRT had significantly increased risk of MDS. However, after adjusting for other factors, the magnitude of the effect diminished, and the effect was no longer statistically significant (Table). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that radiotherapy for prostate cancer increases the risk of MDS/AML, and the impact may differ by radiation modality. Additional studies with longer follow-up are needed to further clarify the role of radiotherapy in the development of subsequent myeloid malignancies. Table 1. Risk of Second MDS/AML after Radiotherapy among Prostate Cancer Patients Second cancerof interest Unadjusted Adjusted n (%) HR (95% CI) p HR (95% CI) p MDS/AML (n=158) Surgery 60 (0.34) 1.00 1.00 Radiotherapy 98 (0.67) 1.94 (1.41-2.68) <.01 1.54 (1.09-2.17) 0.01 Brachytherapy 19 (0.59) 1.58 (0.94-2.64) 0.08 1.35 (0.80-2.27) 0.26 EBRT 29 (1.08) 2.13 (1.36-3.34) <.01 1.51 (0.91-2.50) 0.11 IMRT 50 (0.57) 2.02 (1.39-2.93) <.01 1.66 (1.09-2.52) 0.02 MDS (n=123) Surgery 49 (0.28) 1.00 1.00 Radiotherapy 74 (0.50) 1.80 (1.25-2.58) <.01 1.43 (0.97-2.12) 0.07 Brachytherapy 15 (0.47) 1.53 (0.86-2.73) 0.20 1.32 (0.74-2.35) 0.35 EBRT 24 (0.89) 2.17 (1.33-3.54) <.01 1.53 (0.87-2.70) 0.14 IMRT 35 (0.40) 1.72 (1.11-2.65) 0.01 1.43 (0.88-2.33) 0.15 Disclosures Yu: 21st-Century Oncology LLC: Research Funding. Davidoff:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gore:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gross:21st-Century Oncology LLC: Research Funding; Medtronic: Research Funding; Johnson and Johnson: Research Funding. Ma:Incyte Corp: Consultancy; Celgene Corp: Consultancy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document