4.3 Article

Detection of EpCAM-positive microparticles in pleural fluid: A new approach to mini-invasively identify patients with malignant pleural effusions

Journal

ONCOTARGET
Volume 7, Issue 3, Pages 3347-3356

Publisher

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.6581

Keywords

extracellular vesicles; microparticles; pleural effusion; pleural neoplasia; EpCAM

Funding

  1. Aix-Marseille University
  2. INSERM, France

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Pleural biomarkers allowing to mini-invasively discriminate benign from malignant pleural effusions are needed. Among potential candidates, microparticles (MPs) are extracellular vesicles that vectorize antigen derived from the parent cell. We hypothesized that tumor-derived MPs could be present in the pleural liquid and help to identify patients with malignant pleural effusions. Using highly sensitive flow cytometry and cryo-electron microscopy, we showed that large amounts of MPs from hematopoetic and vascular origin could be detectable in pleural fluids. Their level did not differ between benign (n = 14) and malignant (n = 71) pleural effusions. Analysis of selected tumoral associated antigens (podoplanin, mucin 1 and EpCAM, epithelial-cell-adhesion-molecule) evidenced for the first time the presence of tumor-derived MPs expressing EpCAM in malignant pleural fluids only (Specificity = 93%, Sensitivity = 49% and 45% for flow cytometry and ELISA, respectively). The detection of EpCAM-positive-MPs (EpCAM+ MPs) by flow cytometry showed a better specificity and sensitivity than ELISA to distinguish between pleural carcinoma and the others malignant pleural effusions (MPE; Sp: 96% vs 89%; Se: 79% vs 66%). Combining EpCAM+ MPs and cytology improved the diagnosis of MPE compared to cytology alone. This study establishes the basis for using EpCAM+ MPs as a promising new biomarker that could be added to the armamentarium to mini-invasively identify patients with malignant pleural effusions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available