Cargando…

Consistency of the S5 DNA methylation classifier in formalin‐fixed biopsies versus corresponding exfoliated cells for the detection of pre‐cancerous cervical lesions

Methylation biomarkers are promising tools for diagnosis and disease prevention. The S5 classifier is aimed at the prevention of cervical cancer by the early detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). S5 is based on pyrosequencing a promoter region of EPB41L3 and five late regions of HPV...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Reuter, Caroline, Preece, Matthew, Banwait, Rawinder, Boer, Sabrina, Cuzick, Jack, Lorincz, Attila, Nedjai, Belinda
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8026949/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33710792
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3849
_version_ 1783675732283621376
author Reuter, Caroline
Preece, Matthew
Banwait, Rawinder
Boer, Sabrina
Cuzick, Jack
Lorincz, Attila
Nedjai, Belinda
author_facet Reuter, Caroline
Preece, Matthew
Banwait, Rawinder
Boer, Sabrina
Cuzick, Jack
Lorincz, Attila
Nedjai, Belinda
author_sort Reuter, Caroline
collection PubMed
description Methylation biomarkers are promising tools for diagnosis and disease prevention. The S5 classifier is aimed at the prevention of cervical cancer by the early detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). S5 is based on pyrosequencing a promoter region of EPB41L3 and five late regions of HPV types 16, 18, 31, and 33 following bisulfite conversion of DNA. Good biomarkers should perform well in a variety of sample types such as exfoliated cells, fresh frozen or formalin‐fixed paraffin‐embedded (FFPE) materials. Here, we tested the performance of S5 on 315 FFPE biopsies with paired exfoliated cervical samples using four different conversion kits (Epitect Bisulfite, Epitect Fast Bisulfite, EZ DNA Methylation, and EZ DNA Methylation‐Lightning). The S5 values from FFPE biopsies for all kits were significantly correlated with those obtained from their paired exfoliated cells. For the EZ DNA Methylation kit, we observed an average increased methylation of 4.4% in FFPE. This was due to incomplete conversion of DNA (73% for FFPE vs. 95% for cells). The other kits had a DNA conversion rate in FFPE similar to the cells (95%–97%). S5 performed well at discriminating <CIN2 lesions from CIN2+ lesions on the FFPE with all kits given optimized adjustments to the cut‐off. The area under the curve (AUC) for S5 on FFPE was not significantly different from the paired cells (0.74–0.79 vs. 0.81). The best sensitivity and specificity were obtained for EZ DNA Methylation after the adjustment of the cut‐off to reflect its lower conversion rate. Consistent methylation results can be obtained from FFPE material regardless of the conversion kit used. The S5 classifier performed as well on FFPE material as on exfoliated cells with adjusted cut‐off allowing easier clinical implementation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8026949
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80269492021-04-13 Consistency of the S5 DNA methylation classifier in formalin‐fixed biopsies versus corresponding exfoliated cells for the detection of pre‐cancerous cervical lesions Reuter, Caroline Preece, Matthew Banwait, Rawinder Boer, Sabrina Cuzick, Jack Lorincz, Attila Nedjai, Belinda Cancer Med Clinical Cancer Research Methylation biomarkers are promising tools for diagnosis and disease prevention. The S5 classifier is aimed at the prevention of cervical cancer by the early detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). S5 is based on pyrosequencing a promoter region of EPB41L3 and five late regions of HPV types 16, 18, 31, and 33 following bisulfite conversion of DNA. Good biomarkers should perform well in a variety of sample types such as exfoliated cells, fresh frozen or formalin‐fixed paraffin‐embedded (FFPE) materials. Here, we tested the performance of S5 on 315 FFPE biopsies with paired exfoliated cervical samples using four different conversion kits (Epitect Bisulfite, Epitect Fast Bisulfite, EZ DNA Methylation, and EZ DNA Methylation‐Lightning). The S5 values from FFPE biopsies for all kits were significantly correlated with those obtained from their paired exfoliated cells. For the EZ DNA Methylation kit, we observed an average increased methylation of 4.4% in FFPE. This was due to incomplete conversion of DNA (73% for FFPE vs. 95% for cells). The other kits had a DNA conversion rate in FFPE similar to the cells (95%–97%). S5 performed well at discriminating <CIN2 lesions from CIN2+ lesions on the FFPE with all kits given optimized adjustments to the cut‐off. The area under the curve (AUC) for S5 on FFPE was not significantly different from the paired cells (0.74–0.79 vs. 0.81). The best sensitivity and specificity were obtained for EZ DNA Methylation after the adjustment of the cut‐off to reflect its lower conversion rate. Consistent methylation results can be obtained from FFPE material regardless of the conversion kit used. The S5 classifier performed as well on FFPE material as on exfoliated cells with adjusted cut‐off allowing easier clinical implementation. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-03-12 /pmc/articles/PMC8026949/ /pubmed/33710792 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3849 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Cancer Research
Reuter, Caroline
Preece, Matthew
Banwait, Rawinder
Boer, Sabrina
Cuzick, Jack
Lorincz, Attila
Nedjai, Belinda
Consistency of the S5 DNA methylation classifier in formalin‐fixed biopsies versus corresponding exfoliated cells for the detection of pre‐cancerous cervical lesions
title Consistency of the S5 DNA methylation classifier in formalin‐fixed biopsies versus corresponding exfoliated cells for the detection of pre‐cancerous cervical lesions
title_full Consistency of the S5 DNA methylation classifier in formalin‐fixed biopsies versus corresponding exfoliated cells for the detection of pre‐cancerous cervical lesions
title_fullStr Consistency of the S5 DNA methylation classifier in formalin‐fixed biopsies versus corresponding exfoliated cells for the detection of pre‐cancerous cervical lesions
title_full_unstemmed Consistency of the S5 DNA methylation classifier in formalin‐fixed biopsies versus corresponding exfoliated cells for the detection of pre‐cancerous cervical lesions
title_short Consistency of the S5 DNA methylation classifier in formalin‐fixed biopsies versus corresponding exfoliated cells for the detection of pre‐cancerous cervical lesions
title_sort consistency of the s5 dna methylation classifier in formalin‐fixed biopsies versus corresponding exfoliated cells for the detection of pre‐cancerous cervical lesions
topic Clinical Cancer Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8026949/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33710792
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3849
work_keys_str_mv AT reutercaroline consistencyofthes5dnamethylationclassifierinformalinfixedbiopsiesversuscorrespondingexfoliatedcellsforthedetectionofprecancerouscervicallesions
AT preecematthew consistencyofthes5dnamethylationclassifierinformalinfixedbiopsiesversuscorrespondingexfoliatedcellsforthedetectionofprecancerouscervicallesions
AT banwaitrawinder consistencyofthes5dnamethylationclassifierinformalinfixedbiopsiesversuscorrespondingexfoliatedcellsforthedetectionofprecancerouscervicallesions
AT boersabrina consistencyofthes5dnamethylationclassifierinformalinfixedbiopsiesversuscorrespondingexfoliatedcellsforthedetectionofprecancerouscervicallesions
AT cuzickjack consistencyofthes5dnamethylationclassifierinformalinfixedbiopsiesversuscorrespondingexfoliatedcellsforthedetectionofprecancerouscervicallesions
AT lorinczattila consistencyofthes5dnamethylationclassifierinformalinfixedbiopsiesversuscorrespondingexfoliatedcellsforthedetectionofprecancerouscervicallesions
AT nedjaibelinda consistencyofthes5dnamethylationclassifierinformalinfixedbiopsiesversuscorrespondingexfoliatedcellsforthedetectionofprecancerouscervicallesions