4.7 Article

Aberrant Methylation Status of Tumour Suppressor Genes in Ovarian Cancer Tissue and Paired Plasma Samples

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms20174119

关键词

liquid biopsy; pyrosequencing; ovarian cancer; CDH1; PTEN; PAX1; RASSF1; cfDNA

资金

  1. Slovak Research and Development Agency [APVV-14-0815]
  2. VEGA Grant of the Scientific Grant Agency of the Ministry of Education of the Slovak Republic [1/0199/17]
  3. Operational Programme Research and Innovation - ERDF [ITMS: 26220220113]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ovarian cancer is a highly heterogeneous disease and its formation is affected by many epidemiological factors. It has typical lack of early signs and symptoms, and almost 70% of ovarian cancers are diagnosed in advanced stages. Robust, early and non-invasive ovarian cancer diagnosis will certainly be beneficial. Herein we analysed the regulatory sequence methylation profiles of the RASSF1, PTEN, CDH1 and PAX1 tumour suppressor genes by pyrosequencing in healthy, benign and malignant ovarian tissues, and corresponding plasma samples. We recorded statistically significant higher methylation levels (p < 0.05) in the CDH1 and PAX1 genes in malignant tissues than in controls (39.06 +/- 18.78 versus 24.22 +/- 6.93; 13.55 +/- 10.65 versus 5.73 +/- 2.19). Higher values in the CDH1 gene were also found in plasma samples (22.25 +/- 14.13 versus 46.42 +/- 20.91). A similar methylation pattern with positive correlation between plasma and benign lesions was noted in the CDH1 gene (r = 0.886, p = 0.019) and malignant lesions in the PAX1 gene (r = 0.771, p < 0.001). The random forest algorithm combining methylation indices of all four genes and age determined 0.932 AUC (area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve) prediction power in the model classifying malignant lesions and controls. Our study results indicate the effects of methylation changes in ovarian cancer development and suggest that the CDH1 gene is a potential candidate for non-invasive diagnosis of ovarian cancer.

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

4.7
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