Cargando…
Effects of Blood Collection Conditions on Ovarian Cancer Serum Markers
BACKGROUND: Evaluating diagnostic and early detection biomarkers requires comparing serum protein concentrations among biosamples ascertained from subjects with and without cancer. Efforts are generally made to standardize blood processing and storage conditions for cases and controls, but blood sam...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2007
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2093996/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18060075 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0001281 |
_version_ | 1782138207484248064 |
---|---|
author | Thorpe, Jason D. Duan, Xiaobo Forrest, Robin Lowe, Kimberly Brown, Lauren Segal, Elliot Nelson, Brad Anderson, Garnet L. McIntosh, Martin Urban, Nicole |
author_facet | Thorpe, Jason D. Duan, Xiaobo Forrest, Robin Lowe, Kimberly Brown, Lauren Segal, Elliot Nelson, Brad Anderson, Garnet L. McIntosh, Martin Urban, Nicole |
author_sort | Thorpe, Jason D. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Evaluating diagnostic and early detection biomarkers requires comparing serum protein concentrations among biosamples ascertained from subjects with and without cancer. Efforts are generally made to standardize blood processing and storage conditions for cases and controls, but blood sample collection conditions cannot be completely controlled. For example, blood samples from cases are often obtained from persons aware of their diagnoses, and collected after fasting or in surgery, whereas blood samples from some controls may be obtained in different conditions, such as a clinic visit. By measuring the effects of differences in collection conditions on three different markers, we investigated the potential of these effects to bias validation studies. METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPLE FINDINGS: We analyzed serum concentrations of three previously studied putative ovarian cancer serum biomarkers–CA 125, Prolactin and MIF–in healthy women, women with ovarian cancer undergoing gynecologic surgery, women undergoing surgery for benign ovary pathology, and women undergoing surgery with pathologically normal ovaries. For women undergoing surgery, a blood sample was collected either in the clinic 1 to 39 days prior to surgery, or on the day of surgery after anesthesia was administered but prior to the surgical procedure, or both. We found that one marker, prolactin, was dramatically affected by collection conditions, while CA 125 and MIF were unaffected. Prolactin levels were not different between case and control groups after accounting for the conditions of sample collection, suggesting that sample ascertainment could explain some or all of the previously reported results about its potential as a biomarker for ovarian cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Biomarker validation studies should use standardized collection conditions, use multiple control groups, and/or collect samples from cases prior to influence of diagnosis whenever feasible to detect and correct for potential biases associated with sample collection. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2093996 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2007 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-20939962007-12-05 Effects of Blood Collection Conditions on Ovarian Cancer Serum Markers Thorpe, Jason D. Duan, Xiaobo Forrest, Robin Lowe, Kimberly Brown, Lauren Segal, Elliot Nelson, Brad Anderson, Garnet L. McIntosh, Martin Urban, Nicole PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Evaluating diagnostic and early detection biomarkers requires comparing serum protein concentrations among biosamples ascertained from subjects with and without cancer. Efforts are generally made to standardize blood processing and storage conditions for cases and controls, but blood sample collection conditions cannot be completely controlled. For example, blood samples from cases are often obtained from persons aware of their diagnoses, and collected after fasting or in surgery, whereas blood samples from some controls may be obtained in different conditions, such as a clinic visit. By measuring the effects of differences in collection conditions on three different markers, we investigated the potential of these effects to bias validation studies. METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPLE FINDINGS: We analyzed serum concentrations of three previously studied putative ovarian cancer serum biomarkers–CA 125, Prolactin and MIF–in healthy women, women with ovarian cancer undergoing gynecologic surgery, women undergoing surgery for benign ovary pathology, and women undergoing surgery with pathologically normal ovaries. For women undergoing surgery, a blood sample was collected either in the clinic 1 to 39 days prior to surgery, or on the day of surgery after anesthesia was administered but prior to the surgical procedure, or both. We found that one marker, prolactin, was dramatically affected by collection conditions, while CA 125 and MIF were unaffected. Prolactin levels were not different between case and control groups after accounting for the conditions of sample collection, suggesting that sample ascertainment could explain some or all of the previously reported results about its potential as a biomarker for ovarian cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Biomarker validation studies should use standardized collection conditions, use multiple control groups, and/or collect samples from cases prior to influence of diagnosis whenever feasible to detect and correct for potential biases associated with sample collection. Public Library of Science 2007-12-05 /pmc/articles/PMC2093996/ /pubmed/18060075 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0001281 Text en Thorpe et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Thorpe, Jason D. Duan, Xiaobo Forrest, Robin Lowe, Kimberly Brown, Lauren Segal, Elliot Nelson, Brad Anderson, Garnet L. McIntosh, Martin Urban, Nicole Effects of Blood Collection Conditions on Ovarian Cancer Serum Markers |
title | Effects of Blood Collection Conditions on Ovarian Cancer Serum Markers |
title_full | Effects of Blood Collection Conditions on Ovarian Cancer Serum Markers |
title_fullStr | Effects of Blood Collection Conditions on Ovarian Cancer Serum Markers |
title_full_unstemmed | Effects of Blood Collection Conditions on Ovarian Cancer Serum Markers |
title_short | Effects of Blood Collection Conditions on Ovarian Cancer Serum Markers |
title_sort | effects of blood collection conditions on ovarian cancer serum markers |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2093996/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18060075 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0001281 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT thorpejasond effectsofbloodcollectionconditionsonovariancancerserummarkers AT duanxiaobo effectsofbloodcollectionconditionsonovariancancerserummarkers AT forrestrobin effectsofbloodcollectionconditionsonovariancancerserummarkers AT lowekimberly effectsofbloodcollectionconditionsonovariancancerserummarkers AT brownlauren effectsofbloodcollectionconditionsonovariancancerserummarkers AT segalelliot effectsofbloodcollectionconditionsonovariancancerserummarkers AT nelsonbrad effectsofbloodcollectionconditionsonovariancancerserummarkers AT andersongarnetl effectsofbloodcollectionconditionsonovariancancerserummarkers AT mcintoshmartin effectsofbloodcollectionconditionsonovariancancerserummarkers AT urbannicole effectsofbloodcollectionconditionsonovariancancerserummarkers |