Cargando…

Identification of proteomic biomarkers predicting prostate cancer aggressiveness and lethality despite biopsy-sampling error

BACKGROUND: Key challenges of biopsy-based determination of prostate cancer aggressiveness include tumour heterogeneity, biopsy-sampling error, and variations in biopsy interpretation. The resulting uncertainty in risk assessment leads to significant overtreatment, with associated costs and morbidit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shipitsin, M, Small, C, Choudhury, S, Giladi, E, Friedlander, S, Nardone, J, Hussain, S, Hurley, A D, Ernst, C, Huang, Y E, Chang, H, Nifong, T P, Rimm, D L, Dunyak, J, Loda, M, Berman, D M, Blume-Jensen, P
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4453845/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25032733
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2014.396
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Key challenges of biopsy-based determination of prostate cancer aggressiveness include tumour heterogeneity, biopsy-sampling error, and variations in biopsy interpretation. The resulting uncertainty in risk assessment leads to significant overtreatment, with associated costs and morbidity. We developed a performance-based strategy to identify protein biomarkers predictive of prostate cancer aggressiveness and lethality regardless of biopsy-sampling variation. METHODS: Prostatectomy samples from a large patient cohort with long follow-up were blindly assessed by expert pathologists who identified the tissue regions with the highest and lowest Gleason grade from each patient. To simulate biopsy-sampling error, a core from a high- and a low-Gleason area from each patient sample was used to generate a ‘high' and a ‘low' tumour microarray, respectively. RESULTS: Using a quantitative proteomics approach, we identified from 160 candidates 12 biomarkers that predicted prostate cancer aggressiveness (surgical Gleason and TNM stage) and lethal outcome robustly in both high- and low-Gleason areas. Conversely, a previously reported lethal outcome-predictive marker signature for prostatectomy tissue was unable to perform under circumstances of maximal sampling error. CONCLUSIONS: Our results have important implications for cancer biomarker discovery in general and development of a sampling error-resistant clinical biopsy test for prediction of prostate cancer aggressiveness.