Naheema S Gordon, Elspeth K McGuigan, Michaela Ondasova, Jennifer Knight, Laura A Baxter, Sascha Ott, Robert K Hastings, Maurice P Zeegers, Nicholas D James, K K Cheng, Anshita Goel, Minghao Yu, Roland Arnold, Richard T Bryan, Douglas G Ward
{"title":"膀胱癌检测中基于突变和甲基化的尿液检验的比较与组合。","authors":"Naheema S Gordon, Elspeth K McGuigan, Michaela Ondasova, Jennifer Knight, Laura A Baxter, Sascha Ott, Robert K Hastings, Maurice P Zeegers, Nicholas D James, K K Cheng, Anshita Goel, Minghao Yu, Roland Arnold, Richard T Bryan, Douglas G Ward","doi":"10.1186/s40364-024-00682-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Several non-invasive tests for detecting bladder cancer (BC) are commercially available and are based on detecting small panels of BC-associated mutations and/or methylation changes in urine DNA. However, it is not clear which type of biomarker is best, or if a combination of the two is needed. In this study we address this question by taking a 23-gene mutation panel (GALEAS™ Bladder, GB) and testing if adding a panel of methylation markers improves the sensitivity of BC detection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-three methylation markers were assessed in urine DNA by bisulphite conversion, multiplex PCR, and next generation sequencing in 118 randomly selected haematuria patients with pre-existing GB data (56 BCs and 62 non-BCs), split into training and test sets. We also analysed an additional 16 GB false-negative urine DNAs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The methylation panel detected bladder cancer in haematuria patients with 69% sensitivity at 96% specificity (test set results, 95% CIs 52-87% and 80-99%, respectively). Corresponding sensitivity and specificity for GB were 92% and 89%. Methylation and mutation markers were highly concordant in urine, with all GB false-negative samples also negative for methylation markers.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and limitations: </strong>Our data show that, with a comprehensive mutation panel, any gains from adding methylation markers are, at best, marginal. It is likely that low tumour content is the commonest cause of false-negative urine test results. Our study does have a limited sample size and other methylation markers might behave differently to the those studied here.</p>","PeriodicalId":54225,"journal":{"name":"Biomarker Research","volume":"12 1","pages":"133"},"PeriodicalIF":9.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11542462/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison and combination of mutation and methylation-based urine tests for bladder cancer detection.\",\"authors\":\"Naheema S Gordon, Elspeth K McGuigan, Michaela Ondasova, Jennifer Knight, Laura A Baxter, Sascha Ott, Robert K Hastings, Maurice P Zeegers, Nicholas D James, K K Cheng, Anshita Goel, Minghao Yu, Roland Arnold, Richard T Bryan, Douglas G Ward\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40364-024-00682-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Several non-invasive tests for detecting bladder cancer (BC) are commercially available and are based on detecting small panels of BC-associated mutations and/or methylation changes in urine DNA. However, it is not clear which type of biomarker is best, or if a combination of the two is needed. In this study we address this question by taking a 23-gene mutation panel (GALEAS™ Bladder, GB) and testing if adding a panel of methylation markers improves the sensitivity of BC detection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-three methylation markers were assessed in urine DNA by bisulphite conversion, multiplex PCR, and next generation sequencing in 118 randomly selected haematuria patients with pre-existing GB data (56 BCs and 62 non-BCs), split into training and test sets. We also analysed an additional 16 GB false-negative urine DNAs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The methylation panel detected bladder cancer in haematuria patients with 69% sensitivity at 96% specificity (test set results, 95% CIs 52-87% and 80-99%, respectively). Corresponding sensitivity and specificity for GB were 92% and 89%. Methylation and mutation markers were highly concordant in urine, with all GB false-negative samples also negative for methylation markers.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and limitations: </strong>Our data show that, with a comprehensive mutation panel, any gains from adding methylation markers are, at best, marginal. It is likely that low tumour content is the commonest cause of false-negative urine test results. Our study does have a limited sample size and other methylation markers might behave differently to the those studied here.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54225,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biomarker Research\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"133\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11542462/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biomarker Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40364-024-00682-x\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomarker Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40364-024-00682-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景和目的:目前市面上有几种用于检测膀胱癌(BC)的非侵入性检测方法,它们都是基于检测尿液 DNA 中与膀胱癌相关的小范围突变和/或甲基化变化。然而,目前还不清楚哪种生物标志物最好,或者是否需要将两者结合起来。在本研究中,我们通过采用 23 个基因突变面板(GALEAS™ Bladder,GB)来解决这一问题,并测试添加甲基化标记物面板是否能提高 BC 检测的灵敏度:通过亚硫酸氢盐转换、多重 PCR 和新一代测序技术,对随机挑选的 118 名已有 GB 数据的血尿患者(56 例 BC 和 62 例非 BC)的尿液 DNA 中的 23 个甲基化标记进行了评估,并将其分为训练集和测试集。我们还分析了另外16个GB假阴性尿液DNA:甲基化面板检测血尿患者膀胱癌的灵敏度为 69%,特异性为 96%(测试集结果,95% CI 分别为 52-87% 和 80-99%)。GB的相应灵敏度和特异度分别为92%和89%。尿液中的甲基化和突变标记物高度一致,所有国标假阴性样本的甲基化标记物也均为阴性:我们的数据表明,在有全面突变面板的情况下,添加甲基化标记物最多只能起到微不足道的作用。肿瘤含量低可能是导致尿检结果假阴性的最常见原因。我们的研究样本量有限,其他甲基化标记物的表现可能与本文研究的标记物不同。
Comparison and combination of mutation and methylation-based urine tests for bladder cancer detection.
Background and aims: Several non-invasive tests for detecting bladder cancer (BC) are commercially available and are based on detecting small panels of BC-associated mutations and/or methylation changes in urine DNA. However, it is not clear which type of biomarker is best, or if a combination of the two is needed. In this study we address this question by taking a 23-gene mutation panel (GALEAS™ Bladder, GB) and testing if adding a panel of methylation markers improves the sensitivity of BC detection.
Methods: Twenty-three methylation markers were assessed in urine DNA by bisulphite conversion, multiplex PCR, and next generation sequencing in 118 randomly selected haematuria patients with pre-existing GB data (56 BCs and 62 non-BCs), split into training and test sets. We also analysed an additional 16 GB false-negative urine DNAs.
Results: The methylation panel detected bladder cancer in haematuria patients with 69% sensitivity at 96% specificity (test set results, 95% CIs 52-87% and 80-99%, respectively). Corresponding sensitivity and specificity for GB were 92% and 89%. Methylation and mutation markers were highly concordant in urine, with all GB false-negative samples also negative for methylation markers.
Conclusions and limitations: Our data show that, with a comprehensive mutation panel, any gains from adding methylation markers are, at best, marginal. It is likely that low tumour content is the commonest cause of false-negative urine test results. Our study does have a limited sample size and other methylation markers might behave differently to the those studied here.
Biomarker ResearchBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Molecular Medicine
CiteScore
15.80
自引率
1.80%
发文量
80
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍:
Biomarker Research, an open-access, peer-reviewed journal, covers all aspects of biomarker investigation. It seeks to publish original discoveries, novel concepts, commentaries, and reviews across various biomedical disciplines. The field of biomarker research has progressed significantly with the rise of personalized medicine and individual health. Biomarkers play a crucial role in drug discovery and development, as well as in disease diagnosis, treatment, prognosis, and prevention, particularly in the genome era.