4.7 Article

Detection of Promoter DNA Methylation in Urine and Plasma Aids the Detection of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 26, 期 16, 页码 4339-4348

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-2896

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. University of Illinois at Chicago Cancer Center
  2. DOD [W81XWH12-1-0323]
  3. Pennsylvania Department of Health
  4. EDRN [U01CA214165-03]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Low-dose CT screening can reduce lung cancer-related mortality. However, CT screening has an FDR of nearly 96%. We sought to assess whether urine samples can be a source for DNA methylation-based detection of non-small cell lung cancer(NSCLC). Experimental Design: This nested case-control study of subjects with suspicious nodules on CT imaging obtained plasma and urine samples preoperatively. Cases (n = 74) had pathologic confirmation of NSCLC. Controls (n = 27) had a noncancer diagnosis. We detected promoter methylation in plasma and urine samples using methylation on beads and quantitative methylation-specific real-time PCR for cancer-specific genes (CDO1, TAC1, HOXA7, HOXA9, SOX17, and ZFP42). Results: DNA methylation at cancer- specific loci was detected in both plasma and urine, and was more frequent in patients with cancer compared with controls for all six genes in plasma and in CDO1, TAC1, HOXA9, and SOX17 in urine. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that methylation detection in each one of six genes in plasma and CDO1, TAC1, HOXA9, and SOX17 in urine were significantly associated with the diagnosis of NSCLC, independent of age, race, and smoking pack-years. When methylation was detected for three or more genes in both plasma and urine, the sensitivity and specificity for lung cancer diagnosis were 73% and 92%, respectively. Conclusions: DNA methylation-based biomarkers in plasma and urine could be useful as an adjunct to CT screening to guide decision-making regarding further invasive procedures in patients with pulmonary nodules.

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