4.6 Article

Serum Proteomics and Plasma Fibulin-3 in Differentiation of Mesothelioma From Asbestos-Exposed Controls and Patients With Other Pleural Diseases

Journal

JOURNAL OF THORACIC ONCOLOGY
Volume 16, Issue 10, Pages 1705-1717

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtho.2021.05.018

Keywords

Mesothelioma; SOMAscan; Fibulin-3; Mesothelin; Biomarker

Funding

  1. Chief Scientist Office (Scottish Government) [ETM/285]
  2. SomaLogic Inc.
  3. Glasgow Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre (through Cancer Research UK)
  4. Cancer Research UK Core funding [A17196, A31287, A29801]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study confirms that SOMAscan proteomics may be useful as a future screening test for MPM in asbestos-exposed individuals. However, both fibulin-3 and SOMAscan are not suitable for diagnosis or pathway stratification.
Introduction: Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is difficult to diagnose. An accurate blood biomarker could prompt specialist referral or be deployed in future screening. In earlier retrospective studies, SOMAscan proteomics (Somalogic, Boulder, CO) and fibulin-3 seemed highly accurate, but SOMAscan has not been validated prospectively and subsequent fibulin-3 data have been contradictory. Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was performed in 22 centers, generating a large intention-to-diagnose cohort. Blood sampling, processing, and diagnostic assessment were standardized, including a 1-year follow-up. Plasma fibulin-3 was measured using two enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (CloudClone [used in previous studies] and BosterBio, Pleasanton, CA). Serum proteomics was measured using the SOMAscan assay. Diagnostic performance (sensitivity at 95% specificity, area under the curve [AUC]) was benchmarked against serum mesothelin (Mesomark, Fujirebio Diagnostics, Malvern, PA). Biomarkers were correlated against primary tumor volume, inflammatory markers, and asbestos exposure. Results: A total of 638 patients with suspected pleural malignancy (SPM) and 110 asbestos-exposed controls (AECs) were recruited. SOMAscan reliably differentiated MPM from AECs (75% sensitivity, 88.2% specificity, validation cohort AUC 0.855) but was not useful in patients with differentiating non-MPM SPM. Fibulin-3 (by BosterBio after failed CloudClone validation) revealed 7.4% and 11.9% sensitivity at 95% specificity in MPM versus non-MPM SPM and AECs, respectively (associated AUCs 0.611 [0.557-0.664], p = 0.0015) and 0.516 [0.443-0.589], p = 0.671), both inferior to mesothelin. SOMAscan proteins correlated with inflammatory markers but not with asbestos exposure. Neither biomarker correlated with tumor volume. Conclusions: SOMAscan may prove useful as a future screening test for MPM in asbestos-exposed persons. Neither fibulin-3 nor SOMAscan should be used for diagnosis or pathway stratification. (C) 2021 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available