Cell-free DNA concentration and fragment size as a biomarker for prostate cancer

Abstract Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed neoplasm in American men. Although existing biomarkers may detect localized prostate cancer, additional strategies are necessary for improving detection and identifying aggressive disease that may require further intervention. One promising, mi...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Emmalyn Chen, Clinton L. Cario, Lancelote Leong, Karen Lopez, César P. Márquez, Carissa Chu, Patricia S. Li, Erica Oropeza, Imelda Tenggara, Janet Cowan, Jeffry P. Simko, June M. Chan, Terence Friedlander, Alexander W. Wyatt, Rahul Aggarwal, Pamela L. Paris, Peter R. Carroll, Felix Feng, John S. Witte
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Nature Portfolio 2021
Materias:
R
Q
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/3bda01622d5a48dca54ff3356e239cb8
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:3bda01622d5a48dca54ff3356e239cb8
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:3bda01622d5a48dca54ff3356e239cb82021-12-02T13:20:22ZCell-free DNA concentration and fragment size as a biomarker for prostate cancer10.1038/s41598-021-84507-z2045-2322https://doaj.org/article/3bda01622d5a48dca54ff3356e239cb82021-03-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-84507-zhttps://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322Abstract Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed neoplasm in American men. Although existing biomarkers may detect localized prostate cancer, additional strategies are necessary for improving detection and identifying aggressive disease that may require further intervention. One promising, minimally invasive biomarker is cell-free DNA (cfDNA), which consist of short DNA fragments released into circulation by dying or lysed cells that may reflect underlying cancer. Here we investigated whether differences in cfDNA concentration and cfDNA fragment size could improve the sensitivity for detecting more advanced and aggressive prostate cancer. This study included 268 individuals: 34 healthy controls, 112 men with localized prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP), and 122 men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Plasma cfDNA concentration and fragment size were quantified with the Qubit 3.0 and the 2100 Bioanalyzer. The potential relationship between cfDNA concentration or fragment size and localized or mCRPC prostate cancer was evaluated with descriptive statistics, logistic regression, and area under the curve analysis with cross-validation. Plasma cfDNA concentrations were elevated in mCRPC patients in comparison to localized disease (OR5ng/mL = 1.34, P = 0.027) or to being a control (OR5ng/mL = 1.69, P = 0.034). Decreased average fragment size was associated with an increased risk of localized disease compared to controls (OR5bp = 0.77, P = 0.0008). This study suggests that while cfDNA concentration can identify mCRPC patients, it is unable to distinguish between healthy individuals and patients with localized prostate cancer. In addition to PSA, average cfDNA fragment size may be an alternative that can differentiate between healthy individuals and those with localized disease, but the low sensitivity and specificity results in an imperfect diagnostic marker. While quantification of cfDNA may provide a quick, cost-effective approach to help guide treatment decisions in advanced disease, its use is limited in the setting of localized prostate cancer.Emmalyn ChenClinton L. CarioLancelote LeongKaren LopezCésar P. MárquezCarissa ChuPatricia S. LiErica OropezaImelda TenggaraJanet CowanJeffry P. SimkoJune M. ChanTerence FriedlanderAlexander W. WyattRahul AggarwalPamela L. ParisPeter R. CarrollFelix FengJohn S. WitteNature PortfolioarticleMedicineRScienceQENScientific Reports, Vol 11, Iss 1, Pp 1-9 (2021)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic Medicine
R
Science
Q
spellingShingle Medicine
R
Science
Q
Emmalyn Chen
Clinton L. Cario
Lancelote Leong
Karen Lopez
César P. Márquez
Carissa Chu
Patricia S. Li
Erica Oropeza
Imelda Tenggara
Janet Cowan
Jeffry P. Simko
June M. Chan
Terence Friedlander
Alexander W. Wyatt
Rahul Aggarwal
Pamela L. Paris
Peter R. Carroll
Felix Feng
John S. Witte
Cell-free DNA concentration and fragment size as a biomarker for prostate cancer
description Abstract Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed neoplasm in American men. Although existing biomarkers may detect localized prostate cancer, additional strategies are necessary for improving detection and identifying aggressive disease that may require further intervention. One promising, minimally invasive biomarker is cell-free DNA (cfDNA), which consist of short DNA fragments released into circulation by dying or lysed cells that may reflect underlying cancer. Here we investigated whether differences in cfDNA concentration and cfDNA fragment size could improve the sensitivity for detecting more advanced and aggressive prostate cancer. This study included 268 individuals: 34 healthy controls, 112 men with localized prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP), and 122 men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Plasma cfDNA concentration and fragment size were quantified with the Qubit 3.0 and the 2100 Bioanalyzer. The potential relationship between cfDNA concentration or fragment size and localized or mCRPC prostate cancer was evaluated with descriptive statistics, logistic regression, and area under the curve analysis with cross-validation. Plasma cfDNA concentrations were elevated in mCRPC patients in comparison to localized disease (OR5ng/mL = 1.34, P = 0.027) or to being a control (OR5ng/mL = 1.69, P = 0.034). Decreased average fragment size was associated with an increased risk of localized disease compared to controls (OR5bp = 0.77, P = 0.0008). This study suggests that while cfDNA concentration can identify mCRPC patients, it is unable to distinguish between healthy individuals and patients with localized prostate cancer. In addition to PSA, average cfDNA fragment size may be an alternative that can differentiate between healthy individuals and those with localized disease, but the low sensitivity and specificity results in an imperfect diagnostic marker. While quantification of cfDNA may provide a quick, cost-effective approach to help guide treatment decisions in advanced disease, its use is limited in the setting of localized prostate cancer.
format article
author Emmalyn Chen
Clinton L. Cario
Lancelote Leong
Karen Lopez
César P. Márquez
Carissa Chu
Patricia S. Li
Erica Oropeza
Imelda Tenggara
Janet Cowan
Jeffry P. Simko
June M. Chan
Terence Friedlander
Alexander W. Wyatt
Rahul Aggarwal
Pamela L. Paris
Peter R. Carroll
Felix Feng
John S. Witte
author_facet Emmalyn Chen
Clinton L. Cario
Lancelote Leong
Karen Lopez
César P. Márquez
Carissa Chu
Patricia S. Li
Erica Oropeza
Imelda Tenggara
Janet Cowan
Jeffry P. Simko
June M. Chan
Terence Friedlander
Alexander W. Wyatt
Rahul Aggarwal
Pamela L. Paris
Peter R. Carroll
Felix Feng
John S. Witte
author_sort Emmalyn Chen
title Cell-free DNA concentration and fragment size as a biomarker for prostate cancer
title_short Cell-free DNA concentration and fragment size as a biomarker for prostate cancer
title_full Cell-free DNA concentration and fragment size as a biomarker for prostate cancer
title_fullStr Cell-free DNA concentration and fragment size as a biomarker for prostate cancer
title_full_unstemmed Cell-free DNA concentration and fragment size as a biomarker for prostate cancer
title_sort cell-free dna concentration and fragment size as a biomarker for prostate cancer
publisher Nature Portfolio
publishDate 2021
url https://doaj.org/article/3bda01622d5a48dca54ff3356e239cb8
work_keys_str_mv AT emmalynchen cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT clintonlcario cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT lanceloteleong cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT karenlopez cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT cesarpmarquez cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT carissachu cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT patriciasli cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT ericaoropeza cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT imeldatenggara cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT janetcowan cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT jeffrypsimko cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT junemchan cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT terencefriedlander cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT alexanderwwyatt cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT rahulaggarwal cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT pamelalparis cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT peterrcarroll cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT felixfeng cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
AT johnswitte cellfreednaconcentrationandfragmentsizeasabiomarkerforprostatecancer
_version_ 1718393204225605632