Comparison and combination of mutation and methylation-based urine tests for bladder cancer detection

被引:0
|
作者
Gordon, Naheema S. [1 ]
Mcguigan, Elspeth K. [1 ]
Ondasova, Michaela [1 ]
Knight, Jennifer [1 ]
Baxter, Laura A. [2 ]
Ott, Sascha [2 ]
Hastings, Robert K. [3 ]
Zeegers, Maurice P. [4 ]
James, Nicholas D. [5 ]
Cheng, K. K. [6 ]
Goel, Anshita [1 ]
Yu, Minghao [1 ]
Arnold, Roland [1 ]
Bryan, Richard T. [1 ]
Ward, Douglas G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Birmingham, Coll Med & Hlth, Dept Canc & Genom Sci, Bladder Canc Res Ctr, Birmingham B15 2TT, England
[2] Univ Warwick, Bioinformat & Digital Hlth Serv, Res Technol Platforms, Coventry CV4 7AL, England
[3] Nonacus Ltd, Unit 5, Quinton Business Pk, Birmingham B32 1AF, England
[4] Univ Maastricht, Sch Nutr & Translat Res Metab, Dept Epidemiol, Maastricht, Netherlands
[5] Inst Canc Res, London SM2 5NG, England
[6] Univ Birmingham, Coll Med & Hlth, Dept Appl Hlth Sci, Birmingham B15 2TT, England
基金
英国惠康基金;
关键词
Bladder cancer; Urine test; Biomarker; Mutation; Methylation;
D O I
10.1186/s40364-024-00682-x
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
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 (TM) 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.
引用
收藏
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Anticipatory Positive Urine Tests for Bladder Cancer
    Ajay Gopalakrishna
    Joseph J. Fantony
    Thomas A. Longo
    Richmond Owusu
    Wen-Chi Foo
    Rajesh Dash
    Brian T. Denton
    Brant A. Inman
    Annals of Surgical Oncology, 2017, 24 : 1747 - 1753
  • [42] DNA Methylation-based Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer
    Peng, Xintong
    Zheng, Jingfan
    Liu, Tianzi
    Zhou, Ziwen
    Song, Chen
    Zhang, Danyan
    Zhang, Xinlong
    Huang, Yan
    CURRENT CANCER DRUG TARGETS, 2025, 25 (01) : 26 - 37
  • [43] Methylation-Based Biological Age and Breast Cancer Risk
    Kresovich, Jacob K.
    Xu, Zongli
    O'Brien, Katie M.
    Weinberg, Clarice R.
    Sandler, Dale P.
    Taylor, Jack A.
    JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2019, 111 (10): : 1051 - 1058
  • [44] Anticipatory Positive Urine Tests for Bladder Cancer
    Gopalakrishna, Ajay
    Fantony, Joseph J.
    Longo, Thomas A.
    Owusu, Richmond
    Foo, Wen-Chi
    Dash, Rajesh
    Denton, Brian T.
    Inman, Brant A.
    ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2017, 24 (06) : 1747 - 1753
  • [45] Opportunities for Early Cancer Detection: The Rise of ctDNA Methylation-Based Pan-Cancer Screening Technologies
    Constantin, Nicolas
    Sina, Abu Ali Ibn
    Korbie, Darren
    Trau, Matt
    EPIGENOMES, 2022, 6 (01)
  • [46] A prospective comparison of UroVysion FISH and urine cytology in bladder cancer detection
    Lavery, Hugh J.
    Zaharieva, Boriana
    McFaddin, Andrew
    Heerema, Nyla
    Pohar, Kamal S.
    BMC CANCER, 2017, 17
  • [47] Performance of CellDetect for detection of bladder cancer: Comparison with urine cytology and UroVysion
    Shefer, Hila Kreizman
    Masarwe, Ismael
    Bejar, Jacob
    Naamnih, Luna Hijazi
    Gueta-Milshtein, Keren
    Shalata, Adel
    Hadid, Yarin
    Nativ, Omri
    Nativ, Ofer
    UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY-SEMINARS AND ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2023, 41 (06) : 296e1 - 296e8
  • [48] A comparison between microsatellite analysis and cytology of urine for the detection of bladder cancer
    Zhang, JJ
    Zheng, S
    Fan, ZB
    Gao, YN
    Di, XB
    Wang, D
    Xiao, ZJ
    Li, CL
    An, Q
    Cheng, SJ
    CANCER LETTERS, 2001, 172 (01) : 55 - 58
  • [49] A prospective comparison of UroVysion FISH and urine cytology in bladder cancer detection
    Hugh J. Lavery
    Boriana Zaharieva
    Andrew McFaddin
    Nyla Heerema
    Kamal S. Pohar
    BMC Cancer, 17
  • [50] Urine cell-based DNA methylation classifier for monitoring bladder cancer
    Antoine G. van der Heijden
    Lourdes Mengual
    Mercedes Ingelmo-Torres
    Juan J. Lozano
    Cindy C. M. van Rijt-van de Westerlo
    Montserrat Baixauli
    Bogdan Geavlete
    Cristian Moldoveanud
    Cosmin Ene
    Colin P. Dinney
    Bogdan Czerniak
    Jack A. Schalken
    Lambertus A. L. M. Kiemeney
    Maria J. Ribal
    J. Alfred Witjes
    Antonio Alcaraz
    Clinical Epigenetics, 2018, 10