4.6 Article

CD44, TGM2 and EpCAM as novel plasma markers in endometrial cancer diagnosis

期刊

BMC CANCER
卷 19, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-5556-x

关键词

Endometrial cancer; CD44; EpCAM; TGM2; Novel plasma markers; Endometriosis

类别

资金

  1. Medical University of Lublin [DS 204]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundEndometrial cancer (EC) is the most common malignancy of the female reproductive tract. Despite years of research, the accurate screening strategy is still not available in this disease and it is usually diagnosed only after the clinical signs are present. The recent technological advances in analytical methodologies enabled detection of multiple molecules in one, small sample of biological materials. Such approach was undertaken in the presented study.MethodsConcentrations of aldehyde dehydrogenase 1 family, member A1 (ALDH1A1), carbonic anhydrase IX (CA9), CD44, epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM), hepsin, kallikrein-6, mesothelin, midkine, neural cell adhesion molecule L1 (L1CAM), and transglutaminase 2 (TGM2) were measured using MAGPIX (R) System in plasma samples of 45 EC, 20 healthy controls and 11 patients with endometriosis.ResultsSignificantly increased concentration in EC as compared to healthy controls were found in case of CD44 (p<0.001), EpCAM (p=0.033) and TGM2 (p<0.001). EpCAM and mesothelin concentrations differed based on FIGO stages. Regression analysis revealed marker panels with high accuracy in detection of EC. The highest AUC 0.937 was attributed to the 3-marker panel of CD44/TGM2/EpCAM (84% sensitivity, 100% specificity), FIGO IA samples were discriminated from more advanced stages of EC with the mesothelin/grade 1 model featuring AUC of 0.911 (95.24% sensitivity, 78.26% specificity).ConclusionsNovel plasma biomarkers presenting good accuracy in diagnosing EC were found with TGM2 reported for the first time as plasma marker. It was also revealed that endometriosis may share similarities in the pattern of markers alterations characteristic for EC.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据