Global hypomethylation (LINE-1) and gene-specific hypermethylation (GSTP1) on initial negative prostate biopsy as markers of prostate cancer on a rebiopsy

Clinical Cancer Research

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 984-992

  Zelic, Renata ^a   Fiano, Valentina ^a   Zugna, Daniela ^a   Grasso, Chiara ^a   Delsedime, Luisa ^b   Daniele, Lorenzo ^b   Galliano, Diego ^b   Pettersson, Andreas ^c   Gillio Tos, Anna ^a   Merletti, Franco ^a   Richiardi, Lorenzo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TURIN   (Italy)

^b AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza University Hospital   (Italy)

^c KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GENOMIC DNA; GLUTATHIONE TRANSFERASE P1; GSTP1 PROTEIN, HUMAN; TUMOR MARKER;

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; ARTICLE; BIOPSY TECHNIQUE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER GRADING; CANCER RISK; CASE CONTROL STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; DISEASE MARKER; DNA METHYLATION; GENE; GENE SPECIFIC HYPERMETHYLATION; GLEASON SCORE; GLOBAL HYPOMETHYLATION; GSTP1 GENE; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; ITALY; LINE 1 GENE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PYROSEQUENCING; REBIOPSY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; BIOPSY; GENETICS; LONG INTERSPERSED REPEAT; PATHOLOGY; PROSTATE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

BIOMARKERS, TUMOR; BIOPSY; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; DNA METHYLATION; GLUTATHIONE S-TRANSFERASE PI; HUMANS; LONG INTERSPERSED NUCLEOTIDE ELEMENTS; MALE; NEOPLASM GRADING; PROSTATE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84964504917     PISSN: 10780432     EISSN: 15573265     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-0606     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Eskew LA, Bare RL, McCullough DL. Systematic 5 region prostate biopsy is superior to sextantmethod for diagnosing carcinoma of the prostate. JUrol 1997;157:199-203.
2. Dominguez-Escrig JL, McCracken SR, Greene D. Beyond diagnosis: evolving prostate biopsy in the era of focal therapy. Prostate Cancer 2011;2011: 386207.
3. Haas GP, Delongchamps NB, Jones RF, Chandan V, Serio AM, Vickers AJ, et al. Needle biopsies on autopsy prostates: sensitivity of cancer detection based on true prevalence. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007;99:1484-9.
4. Rudzinski JK, Kawakami J. Incidence of infectious complications following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in Calgary, Alberta, Canada: A retrospective population-based analysis. Can Urol Assoc J 2014;8: e301-5.
5. Ankerst DP, Till C, Boeck A, Goodman P, Tangen CM, Feng Z, et al. The impact of prostate volume, number of biopsy cores and American Urological Association symptom score on the sensitivity of cancer detection using the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator. J Urol 2013;190:70-6.
6. Gann PH, Fought A, Deaton R, Catalona WJ, Vonesh E. Risk factors for prostate cancer detection after a negative biopsy: a novel multivariable longitudinal approach. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:1714-20.
7. Ploussard G, Nicolaiew N, Marchand C, Terry S, Allory Y, Vacherot F, et al. Risk of repeat biopsy and prostate cancer detection after an initial extended negative biopsy: longitudinal follow-up from a prospective trial. BJU Int 2013;111:988-96.
8. Satoh A, Matsumoto K, Nakamura S. Is interval from an initial biopsy a significant predictor of prostate cancer at repeat biopsies? Int J Urol 2006;13:224-7.
9. Scattoni V, Raber M, Capitanio U, Abdollah F, Roscigno M, Angiolilli D, et al. The optimal rebiopsy prostatic scheme depends on patient clinical characteristics: results of a recursive partitioning analysis based on a 24-core systematic scheme. Eur Urol 2011;60:834-41.
10. Chun FK, Briganti A, Graefen M, Porter C, Montorsi F, Haese A, et al. Development and external validation of an extended repeat biopsy nomogram. J Urol 2007;177:510-5.
11. Benecchi L, Pieri AM, Melissari M, Potenzoni M, Pastizzaro CD. A novel nomogram to predict the probability of prostate cancer on repeat biopsy. J Urol 2008;180:146-9.
12. Van Neste L, Herman JG, Otto G, Bigley JW, Epstein JI, Van Criekinge W. The epigenetic promise for prostate cancer diagnosis. Prostate 2012;72: 1248-61.
13. Ehrlich M. DNA hypomethylation in cancer cells. Epigenomics 2009;1: 239-59.
14. Zelic R, Fiano V, Grasso C, Zugna D, Pettersson A, Gillio-Tos A, et al. Global DNA hypomethylation in prostate cancer development and progression: a systematic review. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2014; 18:1-12.
15. Yegnasubramanian S, Haffner MC, Zhang Y, Gurel B, Cornish TC, Wu Z, et al.DNAhypomethylation arises later in prostate cancer progression than CpG island hypermethylation and contributes to metastatic tumor heterogeneity. Cancer Res 2008;68:8954-67.
16. Yang B, Bhusari S, Kueck J, Weeratunga P, Wagner J, Leverson G, et al. Methylation profiling defines an extensive field defect in histologically normal prostate tissues associated with prostate cancer. Neoplasia 2013;15:399-408.
17. Nonn L, Ananthanarayanan V, Gann PH. Evidence for field cancerization of the prostate. Prostate 2009;69:1470-9.
18. Richiardi L, Fiano V, Grasso C, Zugna D, Delsedime L, Gillio-Tos A, et al. Methylation of APC and GSTP1 in non-neoplastic tissue adjacent to prostate tumour and mortality from prostate cancer. PLoS One 2013;8: e68162.
19. Tokumaru Y, Harden SV, Sun DI, Yamashita K, Epstein JI, Sidransky D. Optimal use of a panel ofmethylationmarkers with GSTP1 hypermethylation in the diagnosis of prostate adenocarcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 2004;10:5518-22.
20. Stewart GD, Van Neste L, Delvenne P, Delree P, Delga A, McNeill SA, et al. Clinical utility of an epigenetic assay to detect occult prostate cancer in histopathologically negative biopsies: results of the MATLOC study. J Urol 2013;189:1110-6.
21. Troyer DA, Lucia MS, de Bruine AP, Mendez-Meza R, Baldewijns MM, Dunscomb N, et al. Prostate cancer detected by methylated gene markers in histopathologically cancer-negative tissues from men with subsequent positive biopsies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009;18:2717-22.
22. Trock BJ, Brotzman MJ, Mangold LA, Bigley JW, Epstein JI, McLeod D, et al. Evaluation of GSTP1 and APC methylation as indicators for repeat biopsy in a high-risk cohort ofmen with negative initial prostate biopsies. BJU Int 2011;110:56-62.
23. Mikeska T, Felsberg J, Hewitt CA, Dobrovic A. Analysing DNA methylation using bisulphite pyrosequencing. Methods Mol Biol 2011;791:33-53.
24. Akaike H. Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In:Csaki F, Petrov BN, editors. Proceedings of the second international symposium on information theory; Akademiai Kiado, Budapest. Hungary. New York, NY: Springer; 1973. p. 267-81
25. Amin A, Partin A, Epstein JI. Gleason score 7 prostate cancer on needle biopsy: relation of primary pattern 3 or 4 to pathological stage and progression after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2011;186:1286-90.
26. Stark JR, Perner S, Stampfer MJ, Sinnott JA, Finn S, Eisenstein AS, et al. Gleason score and lethal prostate cancer: does 3 + 4 = 4 + 3? J Clin Oncol 2009;27:3459-64.
27. Cho NY, Kim BH, Choi M, Yoo EJ, Moon KC, Cho YM, et al. Hypermethylation of CpG island loci and hypomethylation of LINE-1 and Alu repeats in prostate adenocarcinoma and their relationship to clinicopathological features. J Pathol 2007;211:269-77.
28. Campos-Fernandes JL, Bastien L, Nicolaiew N, Robert G, Terry S, Vacherot F, et al. Prostate cancer detection rate in patients with repeated extended 21- sample needle biopsy. Eur Urol 2009;55:600-6.
29. Havik AB, Brandal P, Honne H, Dahlback HS, Scheie D, Hektoen M, et al. MGMT promoter methylation in gliomas-assessment by pyrosequencing and quantitative methylation-specific PCR. J Transl Med 2012;10:36.
30. Quillien V, Lavenu A, Karayan-Tapon L, Carpentier C, Labussiere M, Lesimple T, et al. Comparative assessment of 5 methods (methylation- specific polymerase chain reaction, MethyLight, pyrosequencing, methylation-sensitive high-resolution melting, and immunohistochemistry) to analyze O6-methylguanine-DNA-methyltranferase in a series of 100 glioblastoma patients. Cancer 2012;118: 4201-11.
31. Gillio-Tos A, De Marco L, Fiano V, Garcia-Bragado F, Dikshit R, Boffetta P, et al. EfficientDNAextraction from 25-year-old paraffin-embedded tissues: study of 365 samples. Pathology 2007;39:345-8.