From bench to bedside: Discovery of ovarian cancer biomarkers using high-throughput technologies in the past decade

Biomarkers in Medicine

Volumn 6, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 613-625

  Leung, Felix ^a,b   Diamandis, Eleftherios P ^a,b,c   Kulasingam, Vathany ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY HEALTH NETWORK   (Canada)

Author keywords

biomarker; HE4; high throughput technology; OVA1 ; ovarian cancer; Risk of Malignancy Algorithm

Indexed keywords

APOLIPOPROTEIN A1; BETA 2 MICROGLOBULIN; CA 125 ANTIGEN; PREALBUMIN; TRANSFERRIN; TUMOR MARKER;

ALGORITHM; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER GRADING; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; CYTOREDUCTIVE SURGERY; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; GENOMICS; HE4 GENE; HUMAN; MARKER GENE; MASS SPECTROMETRY; MENOPAUSE; MICROARRAY ANALYSIS; OVA1 SCORE; OVARY ADENOCARCINOMA; OVARY CANCER; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PROTEOMICS; REVIEW; RISK OF MALIGNANCY ALGORITHM; SCORING SYSTEM; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SEROUS OVARIAN CARCINOMA; SURFACE ENHANCED LASER DESORPTION IONIZATION TIME OF FLIGHT MASS SPECTROMETRY; TUMOR SUPPRESSOR GENE;

FEMALE; HUMANS; OVARIAN NEOPLASMS; PROTEOMICS; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION;

EID: 84867655788     PISSN: 17520363     EISSN: 17520371     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2217/bmm.12.70     Document Type: Review

References (91)

1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Xu J, Ward E. Cancer statistics, 2010. CA Cancer J. Clin. 60(5), 277-300 (2010).
2. McGuire W P. Maintenance therapy for ovarian cancer: of Helsinki and Hippocrates. J. Clin. Oncol. 27(28), 4633-4634 (2009).
3. Omura G, Blessing JA, Ehrlich CE et al. A randomized trial of cyclophosphamide and doxorubicin with or without cisplatin in advanced ovarian carcinoma. A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Cancer 57(9), 1725-1730 (1986). (Pubitemid 16111979)
4. Coleman MP, Forman D, Bryant H et al. Cancer survival in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and the UK, 1995-2007 (the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership): an analysis of population-based cancer registry data. Lancet 377(9760), 127-138 (2011).
5. Jemal A, Siegel R, Xu J, Ward E. Cancer statistics, 2010. CA Cancer J. Clin. 60(5), 277-300 (2010).
6. Kosary CL. Cancer of the Ovary. In: SEER Survival Monograph: Cancer Survival Among Adults: U.S. SEER Program, 1988-2001, Patient and Tumor Characteristics. Ries LAG, Young JL, Keel GE et al. (Eds). National Cancer Institute, MD, USA (2007).
7. Vaughan S, Coward JI, Bast RC Jr et al. Rethinking ovarian cancer: recommendations for improving outcomes. Nat. Rev. Cancer 11(10), 719-725 (2011).
8. Iwabuchi H, Sakamoto M, Sakunaga H et al. Genetic analysis of benign, low-grade, and high-grade ovarian tumors. Cancer Res. 55(24), 6172-6180 (1995).
9. Risch HA, McLaughlin JR, Cole DE et al. Population BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation frequencies and cancer penetrances: a kin-cohort study in Ontario, Canada. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 98(23), 1694-1706 (2006). (Pubitemid 44942707)
10. Bast RC Jr, Hennessy B, Mills GB. The biology of ovarian cancer: new opportunities for translation. Nat. Rev. Cancer 9(6), 415-428 (2009).
11. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Integrated genomic analyses of ovarian carcinoma. Nature 474(7353), 609-615 (2011).
12. Wright PC, Noirel J, Ow SY, Fazeli A. A review of current proteomics technologies with a survey on their widespread use in reproductive biology investigations. Theriogenology 77(4), 738-765 (2012).
13. Petricoin EF, Ardekani AM, H itt BA et al. Use of proteomic patterns in serum to identify ovarian cancer. Lancet 359(9306), 572-577 (2002). (Pubitemid 34178440)
14. Pearl DC. Proteomic patterns in serum and identifcation of ovarian cancer. Lancet 360(9327), 169-170 (2002).
15. Diamandis EP. Point: proteomic patterns in biological fuids: do they represent the future of cancer diagnostics? Clin. Chem. 49(8), 1272-1275 (2003). (Pubitemid 36900611)
16. Karsan A, Eigl BJ, Flibotte S et al. Analytical and preanalytical biases in serum proteomic pattern analysis for breast cancer diagnosis. Clin. Chem. 51(8), 1525 - 1528 (2005). (Pubitemid 41060893)
17. Banks RE, Stanley AJ, Cairns DA et al. Infuences of blood sample processing on low-molecular-weight proteome identifed by surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry. Clin. Chem. 51(9), 1637-1649 (2005). (Pubitemid 41233099)
18. Ransohoff DF. Lessons from controversy: ovarian cancer screening and serum proteomics. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 97(4), 315-319 (2005). (Pubitemid 40310281)
19. Baggerly KA, Morris JS, Edmonson SR, Coombes KR. Signal in noise: evaluating reported reproducibility of serum proteomic tests for ovarian cancer. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 97(4), 307-309 (2005). (Pubitemid 40310279)
20. Yip P, Chen TH, Seshaiah P et al. Comprehensive serum profling for the discovery of epithelial ovarian cancer biomarkers. PLoS One 6(12), e29533 (2011).
21. Hawkridge AM, Wysocky RB, Petitte JN et al. Measuring the intra-individual variability of the plasma proteome in the chicken model of spontaneous ovarian adenocarcinoma. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 398(2), 737-749 (2010).
22. Gao J, Gao G, Zhang Y, Wang F. Proteomic analysis of human epithelial ovarian cancer xenografts in immunodefcient mice exposed to chronic psychological stress. Sci. China Life Sci. 54(2), 112-120 (2011).
23. Pitteri SJ, JeBailey L, Faca VM et al. Integrated proteomic analysis of human cancer cells and plasma from tumor bearing mice for ovarian cancer biomarker discovery. PLoS One 4(11), e7916 (2009).
24. Haslene-Hox H, Oveland E, Berg KC et al. A new method for isolation of interstitial fuid from human solid tumors applied to proteomic analysis of ovarian carcinoma tissue. PLoS One 6(4), e19217 (2011).
25. Li SL, Ye F, Cai WJ et al. Quantitative proteome analysis of multidrug resistance in human ovarian cancer cell line. J. Cell Biochem. 109(4), 625-633 (2010).
26. Cicchillitti L, Di MM, Urbani A et al. Comparative proteomic analysis of paclitaxel sensitive A2780 epithelial ovarian cancer cell line and its resistant counterpart A2780TC1 by 2D-DIGE: the role of ERp57. J. Proteome Res. 8(4), 1902-1912 (2009).
27. Cadron I, Van Gorp T, Amant F et al. The use of laser microdissection and SELDI-TOF MS in ovarian cancer tissue to identify protein profles. Anticancer Res. 29(4), 1039-1045 (2009).
28. Kulasingam V, Pavlou MP, Diamandis EP. Integrating high-throughput technologies in the quest for effective biomarkers for ovarian cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer 10(5), 371-378 (2010).
29. Pitteri S, Hanash S. A systems approach to the proteomic identifcation of novel cancer biomarkers. Dis. Markers 28(4), 233-239 (2010).
30. Lopez MF, Mikulskis A, Kuzdzal S et al. A novel, high-throughput workfow for discovery and identifcation of serum carrier protein-bound peptide biomarker candidates in ovarian cancer samples. Clin. Chem. 53(6), 1067-1074 (2007). (Pubitemid 46867523)
31. Fredolini C, Meani F, Luchini A et al. Investigation of the ovarian and prostate cancer peptidome for candidate early detection markers using a novel nanoparticle biomarker capture technology. AAPS J. 12(4), 504-518 (2010).
32. Kuzmanov U, Smith CR, Batruch I et al. Separation of kallikrein 6 glycoprotein subpopulations in biological fuids by anion-exchange chromatography coupled to ELISA and identifcation by mass spectrometry. Proteomics 12(6), 799-809 (2012).
33. Di MM, Marcone S, Cicchillitti L et al. Glycoproteomics of paclitaxel resistance in human epithelial ovarian cancer cell lines: towards the identifcation of putative biomarkers. J. Proteomics 73(5), 879-898 (2010).
34. Murphy MA, O'Connell DJ, O'Kane SL et al. Epitope presentation is an important determinant of the utility of antigens identifed from protein arrays in the development of autoantibody diagnostic assays. J. Proteomics. 75(15), 4668-4675 (2012).
35. Casadonte R, Caprioli RM. Proteomic analysis of formalin-fxed paraffn-embedded tissue by MALDI imaging mass spectrometry. Nat. Protoc. 6(11), 1695-1709 (2011).
36. Bast RC Jr, Feeney M, Lazarus H et al. Reactivity of a monoclonal antibody with human ovarian carcinoma. J. Clin. Invest. 68(5), 1331-1337 (1981). (Pubitemid 12235035)
37. Montagnana M, Danese E, Giudici S et al. HE4 in ovarian cancer: from discovery to clinical application. Adv. Clin. Chem. 55, 1-20 (2011).
38. Sturgeon CM, McAllister EJ. Analysis of hCG: clinical applications and assay requirements. Ann. Clin. Biochem. 35(Pt 4), 460-491 (1998). (Pubitemid 28349650)
39. Begent RH. The value of carcinoembryonic antigen measurement in clinical practice. Ann. Clin. Biochem. 2(Pt 4), 231-238 (1984). (Pubitemid 14093372)
40. Sari R, Yildirim B, Sevinc A, Hilmioglu F. Re. Zuckerman et al. Sensitivity of CA-125 in patients with liver cirrhosis in the presence of ascites. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 96(1), 253-254 (2001). (Pubitemid 32104844)
41. Sevinc A, Adli M, Kalender ME, Camci C. Benign causes of increased serum CA-125 concentration. Lancet Oncol. 8(12), 1054-1055 (2007). (Pubitemid 350182965)
42. Sevinc A, Buyukberber S, Sari R et al. Elevated serum CA-125 levels in hemodialysis patients with peritoneal, pleural, or pericardial fuids. Gynecol. Oncol. 77(2), 254-257 (2000). (Pubitemid 30317145)
43. Bast RC Jr. Status of tumor markers in ovarian cancer screening. J. Clin. Oncol. 21(Suppl. 10), 200S-205S (2003).
44. Meinhold-Heerlein I, Bauerschlag D, Zhou Y et al. An integrated clinical-genomics approach identifes a candidate multi-analyte blood test for serous ovarian carcinoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 13(2 Pt 1), 458-466 (2007). (Pubitemid 46225350)
45. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement. Ovarian cancer: screening, treatment, and follow-up. Gynecol. Oncol. 55(3 Pt 2), S4-S14 (1994).
46. Curtin JP. Management of the adnexal mass. Gynecol. Oncol. 55(3 Pt 2), S42-S46 (1994).
47. du BA, Rochon J, Pfsterer J, Hoskins WJ. Variations in institutional infrastructure, physician specialization and experience, and outcome in ovarian cancer: a systematic review. Gynecol. Oncol. 112(2), 422-436 (2009).
48. Vernooij F, Heintz P, Witteveen E, van der Graaf Y. The outcomes of ovarian cancer treatment are better when provided by gynecologic oncologists and in specialized hospitals: a systematic review. Gynecol. Oncol. 105(3), 801-812 (2007). (Pubitemid 46734206)
49. Engelen MJ, Kos HE, Willemse PH et al. Surgery by consultant gynecologic oncologists improves survival in patients with ovarian carcinoma. Cancer 106(3), 589-598 (2006). (Pubitemid 43157622)
50. Mercado C, Zingmond D, Karlan BY et al. Quality of care in advanced ovarian cancer: the importance of provider specialty. Gynecol. Oncol. 117(1), 18-22 (2010).
51. Earle CC, Schrag D, Neville BA et al. Effect of surgeon specialty on processes of care and outcomes for ovarian cancer patients. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 98(3), 172-180 (2006). (Pubitemid 43205479)
52. Olaitan A, Weeks J, Mocroft A et al. The surgical management of women with ovarian cancer in the south west of England. Br. J. Cancer 85(12), 1824-1830 (2001). (Pubitemid 34775316)
53. Tingulstad S, Skjeldestad FE, Hagen B. The effect of centralization of primary surgery on survival in ovarian cancer patients. Obstet. Gynecol. 102(3), 499-505 (2003). (Pubitemid 37311211)
54. Carney ME, Lancaster JM, Ford C, Tsodikov A, Wiggins CL. A population-based study of patterns of care for ovarian cancer: who is seen by a gynecologic oncologist and who is not? Gynecol. Oncol. 84(1), 36-42 (2002). (Pubitemid 34056463)
55. Gershenson DM. Why American women are not receiving state-of-the-art gynecologic cancer care. Cancer J. 7(6), 450-457 (2001).
56. Jacobs I, Oram D, Fairbanks J et al. A risk of malignancy index incorporating CA 125, ultrasound and menopausal status for the accurate preoperative diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 97(10), 922-929 (1990). (Pubitemid 20340625)
57. Ulusoy S, Akbayir O, Numanoglu C et al. The risk of malignancy index in discrimination of adnexal masses. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 96(3), 186-191 (2007). (Pubitemid 46281908)
58. van Trappen PO, Rufford BD, Mills TD et al. Differential diagnosis of adnexal masses: risk of malignancy index, ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, and radioimmunoscintigraphy. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 17(1), 61-67 (2007). (Pubitemid 46213971)
59. Clarke SE, Grimshaw R, Rittenberg P, Kieser K, Bentley J. Risk of malignancy index in the evaluation of patients with adnexal masses. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Can. 31(5), 440-445 (2009).
60. van den Akker PA, Aalders AL, Snijders MP et al. Evaluation of the Risk of Malignancy Index in daily clinical management of adnexal masses. Gynecol. Oncol. 116(3), 384-388 (2010).
61. Raza A, Mould T, Wilson M, Burnell M, Bernhardt L. Increasing the effectiveness of referral of ovarian masses from cancer unit to cancer center by using a higher referral value of the risk of malignancy index. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 20(4), 552-554 (2010).
62. Kirchhoff C, Habben I, Ivell R, Krull N. A major human epididymis-specifc cDNA encodes a protein with sequence homology to extracellular proteinase inhibitors. Biol. Reprod. 45(2), 350-357 (1991).
63. Clauss A, Lilja H, Lundwall A. A locus on human chromosome 20 contains several genes expressing protease inhibitor domains with homology to whey acidic protein. Biochem. J. 368(Pt 1), 233-242 (2002). (Pubitemid 35463426)
64. McMichael JW, Roghanian A, Jiang L, Ramage R, Sallenave JM. The antimicrobial antiproteinase elafn binds to lipopolysaccharide and modulates macrophage responses. Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol. 32(5), 443-452 (2005). (Pubitemid 40629330)
65. Bingle L, Singleton V, Bingle CD. The putative ovarian tumour marker gene HE4 (WFDC2), is expressed in normal tissues and undergoes complex alternative splicing to yield multiple protein isoforms. Oncogene 21(17), 2768-2773 (2002). (Pubitemid 34478335)
66. Schummer M, Ng WV, Bumgarner RE et al. Comparative hybridization of an array of 21, 500 ovarian cDNAs for the discovery of genes overexpressed in ovarian carcinomas. Gene 238(2), 375-385 (1999). (Pubitemid 29446174)
67. Wang K, Gan L, Jeffery E et al. Monitoring gene expression profle changes in ovarian carcinomas using cDNA microarray. Gene 229(1-2), 101-108 (1999). (Pubitemid 29148312)
68. Hough CD, Sherman-Baust CA, Pizer ES et al. Large-scale serial analysis of gene expression reveals genes differentially expressed in ovarian cancer. Cancer Res. 60(22), 6281-6287 (2000).
69. Gilks CB, Vanderhyden BC, Zhu S, van de Rijn M, Longacre TA. Distinction between serous tumors of low malignant potential and serous carcinomas based on global mRNA expression profling. Gynecol. Oncol. 96(3), 684-694 (2005). (Pubitemid 40255487)
70. Drapkin R, von Horsten HH, Lin Y et al. Human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) is a secreted glycoprotein that is overexpressed by serous and endometrioid ovarian carcinomas. Cancer Res. 65(6), 2162-2169 (2005). (Pubitemid 40490123)
71. Hellstrom I, Raycraft J, Hayden-Ledbetter M et al. The HE4 (WFDC2) protein is a biomarker for ovarian carcinoma. Cancer Res. 63(13), 3695-3700 (2003). (Pubitemid 36793054)
72. Moore RG, Brown AK, Miller MC et al. The use of multiple novel tumor biomarkers for the detection of ovarian carcinoma in patients with a pelvic mass. Gynecol. Oncol. 108(2), 402-408 (2008). (Pubitemid 351174295)
73. Moore RG, McMeekin DS, Brown AK et al. A novel multiple marker bioassay utilizing HE4 and CA125 for the prediction of ovarian cancer in patients with a pelvic mass. Gynecol. Oncol. 112(1), 40-46 (2009).
74. Miller RW, Ueland FR. Risk of malignancy in sonographically confrmed ovarian tumors. Clin. Obstet. Gynecol. 55(1), 52-64 (2012).
75. Partheen K, Kristjansdottir B, Sundfeldt K. Evaluation of ovarian cancer biomarkers HE4 and CA-125 in women presenting with a suspicious cystic ovarian mass. J. Gynecol. Oncol. 22(4), 244-252 (2011).
76. Moore RG, Jabre-Raughley M, Brown AK et al. Comparison of a novel multiple marker assay vs the Risk of Malignancy Index for the prediction of epithelial ovarian cancer in patients with a pelvic mass. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 203(3), 228-226 (2010).
77. Van Gorp T, Veldman J, Van Calster B et al Subjective assessment by ultrasound is superior to the Risk of Malignancy Index (RMI) or the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA) in discriminating benign from malignant adnexal masses. Eur. J. Cancer 48(11), 1649-1656 (2012).
78. Bandiera E, Romani C, Specchia C et al. Serum human epididymis protein 4 and risk for ovarian malignancy algorithm as new diagnostic and prognostic tools for epithelial ovarian cancer management. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 20(12), 2496-2506 (2011).
79. Molina R, Escudero JM, Auge JM et al. HE4 a novel tumour marker for ovarian cancer: comparison with CA 125 and ROMA algorithm in patients with gynaecological diseases. Tumour Biol. 32(6), 1087-1095 (2011).
80. Cramer DW, Bast RC Jr, Berg CD et al Ovarian cancer biomarker performance in prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial specimens. Cancer Prev. Res. (Phila.) 4(3), 365-374 (2011).
81. Jacob F, Meier M, Caduff R et a l. No beneft from combining HE4 and CA125 as ovarian tumor markers in a clinical setting. Gynecol Oncol. 121(3), 487-491 (2011).
82. Zhang Z, Bast RC Jr, Yu Y et al. Three biomarkers identifed from serum proteomic analysis for the detection of early stage ovarian cancer. Cancer Res. 64(16), 5882-5890 (2004). (Pubitemid 39095590)
83. Fung ET A recipe for proteomics diagnostic test development: the OVA1 test, from biomarker discovery to FDA clearance. Clin. Chem. 56(2), 327-329 (2010).
84. Bast RC Jr, Skates S, Lokshin A, Moore RG. Differential diagnosis of a pelvic mass: improved algorithms and novel biomarkers. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 22(10 Suppl. 1), S5-S8 (2012).
85. Ware Miller R, Smith A, DeSimone CP et al. Performance of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' ovarian tumor referral guidelines with a multivariate index assay. Obstet. Gynecol. 117(6), 1298-1306 (2011).
86. Ueland FR, DeSimone CP, Seamon LG et al. Effectiveness of a multivariate index assay in the preoperative assessment of ovarian tumors. Obstet. Gynecol. 117(6), 1289-1297 (2011).
87. Zhang Z, Chan DW. The road from discovery to clinical diagnostics: lessons learned from the frst FDA-cleared in vitro diagnostic multivariate index assay of proteomic biomarkers. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 19(12), 2995-2999 (2010).
88. Moore LE, Pfeiffer RM, Zhang Z et al. Proteomic biomarkers in combination with CA 125 for detection of epithelial ovarian cancer using prediagnostic serum samples from the prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian (PLCO) cancer screening trial. Cancer 118(1), 91-100 (2012).
89. Hogdall C, Fung ET, Christensen IJ et al. A novel proteomic biomarker panel as a diagnostic tool for patients with ovarian cancer. Gynecol. Oncol. 123(2), 308-313 (2011).
90. Clarke CH, Yip C, Badgwell D et al. Proteomic biomarkers apolipoprotein A1, truncated transthyretin and connective tissue activating protein III enhance the sensitivity of CA125 for detecting early stage epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecol. Oncol. 122(3), 548-553 (2011).
91. Diamandis EP. Cancer biomarkers: can we turn recent failures into success? J. Natl Cancer Inst. 102(19), 1462-1467 (2010).