Diagnosis of suspicious thyroid nodules using four protein biomarkers

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Cerutti, Janete M.
Data de Publicação: 2006
Outros Autores: Latini, Flavia RM, Nakabashi, Claudia, Delcelo, Rosana [UNIFESP], Andrade, Victor P., Amadei, Marcelo Joao, Maciel, Rui MB, Hojaij, Flavio Carneiro [UNIFESP], Hollis, Donna, Shoemaker, Jennifer, Riggins, Gregory J.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
Texto Completo: http://dx.doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-2226
http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/28931
Resumo: Purpose: Fine-needle aspiration (FNA) cytology, a standard method for thyroid nodule diagnosis, cannot distinguish between benign follicular thyroid adenoma (FTA) and malignant follicular thyroid carcinoma (FTC). Previously, using expression profiling, we found that a combination of transcript expression levels from DDIT3, ARGZ C1orf24, and ITM1 distinguished between FTA and FTC. the goal of this study was to determine if antibody markers used alone or in combination could accurately distinguish between a wider variety of benign and malignant thyroid lesions in fixed sections and FNA samples.Experimental Design: Immunohistochemistry was done on 27 FTA, 25 FTC, and 75 other benign and malignant thyroid tissue sections using custom antibodies for chromosome 1 open reading frame 24 (C1orf24) and integral membrane protein 1 (ITM1) and commercial antibodies for DNA damage - inducible transcript 3 (DDIT3) and arginase II (ARG2). FNA samples were also tested using the same antibodies. RNA expression was measured by quantitative PCR in 33 thyroid lesions.Results: C1orf24 and ITM1 antibodies had an estimated sensitivity of 1.00 for distinguishing FTA from FTC. for the expanded analysis of all lesions studied, ITM1 had an estimated sensitivity of 1.00 for detecting malignancy. Because all four cancer biomarkers did well, producing overlapping confidence intervals, not one best marker was distinguished. Transcript levels also reliably predicted malignancy, but immunohistochemistry had a higher sensitivity. Malignant cells were easily detected in FNA samples using these markers.Conclusions: We improved this diagnostic test by adding C1orf24 and ITM1 custom antibodies and showing use on a wider variety of thyroid pathology. We recommend that testing of all four cancer biomarkers now be advanced to larger trials. Use of one or more of these antibodies should improve diagnostic accuracy of suspicious thyroid nodules from both tissue sections and FNA samples.
id UFSP_c8cf2cfebfe49a2984dfaec05d401b7f
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/28931
network_acronym_str UFSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
repository_id_str 3465
spelling Diagnosis of suspicious thyroid nodules using four protein biomarkersPurpose: Fine-needle aspiration (FNA) cytology, a standard method for thyroid nodule diagnosis, cannot distinguish between benign follicular thyroid adenoma (FTA) and malignant follicular thyroid carcinoma (FTC). Previously, using expression profiling, we found that a combination of transcript expression levels from DDIT3, ARGZ C1orf24, and ITM1 distinguished between FTA and FTC. the goal of this study was to determine if antibody markers used alone or in combination could accurately distinguish between a wider variety of benign and malignant thyroid lesions in fixed sections and FNA samples.Experimental Design: Immunohistochemistry was done on 27 FTA, 25 FTC, and 75 other benign and malignant thyroid tissue sections using custom antibodies for chromosome 1 open reading frame 24 (C1orf24) and integral membrane protein 1 (ITM1) and commercial antibodies for DNA damage - inducible transcript 3 (DDIT3) and arginase II (ARG2). FNA samples were also tested using the same antibodies. RNA expression was measured by quantitative PCR in 33 thyroid lesions.Results: C1orf24 and ITM1 antibodies had an estimated sensitivity of 1.00 for distinguishing FTA from FTC. for the expanded analysis of all lesions studied, ITM1 had an estimated sensitivity of 1.00 for detecting malignancy. Because all four cancer biomarkers did well, producing overlapping confidence intervals, not one best marker was distinguished. Transcript levels also reliably predicted malignancy, but immunohistochemistry had a higher sensitivity. Malignant cells were easily detected in FNA samples using these markers.Conclusions: We improved this diagnostic test by adding C1orf24 and ITM1 custom antibodies and showing use on a wider variety of thyroid pathology. We recommend that testing of all four cancer biomarkers now be advanced to larger trials. Use of one or more of these antibodies should improve diagnostic accuracy of suspicious thyroid nodules from both tissue sections and FNA samples.Johns Hopkins Univ, Sch Med, Dept Neurosurg, Baltimore, MD 21231 USAUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Div Genet, São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Div Endocrinol, São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Div Head & Neck, São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Dept Pathol, São Paulo, BrazilDuke Univ, Med Ctr, Durham, NC USAUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Div Genet, São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Div Endocrinol, São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Div Head & Neck, São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Dept Pathol, São Paulo, BrazilWeb of ScienceAmer Assoc Cancer ResearchJohns Hopkins UnivUniversidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)Duke UnivCerutti, Janete M.Latini, Flavia RMNakabashi, ClaudiaDelcelo, Rosana [UNIFESP]Andrade, Victor P.Amadei, Marcelo JoaoMaciel, Rui MBHojaij, Flavio Carneiro [UNIFESP]Hollis, DonnaShoemaker, JenniferRiggins, Gregory J.2016-01-24T12:41:12Z2016-01-24T12:41:12Z2006-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion3311-3318http://dx.doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-2226Clinical Cancer Research. Philadelphia: Amer Assoc Cancer Research, v. 12, n. 11, p. 3311-3318, 2006.10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-22261078-0432http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/28931WOS:000238169800013engClinical Cancer Researchinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESPinstname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)instacron:UNIFESP2016-01-24T10:41:12Zoai:repositorio.unifesp.br/:11600/28931Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://www.repositorio.unifesp.br/oai/requestbiblioteca.csp@unifesp.bropendoar:34652016-01-24T10:41:12Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Diagnosis of suspicious thyroid nodules using four protein biomarkers
title Diagnosis of suspicious thyroid nodules using four protein biomarkers
spellingShingle Diagnosis of suspicious thyroid nodules using four protein biomarkers
Cerutti, Janete M.
title_short Diagnosis of suspicious thyroid nodules using four protein biomarkers
title_full Diagnosis of suspicious thyroid nodules using four protein biomarkers
title_fullStr Diagnosis of suspicious thyroid nodules using four protein biomarkers
title_full_unstemmed Diagnosis of suspicious thyroid nodules using four protein biomarkers
title_sort Diagnosis of suspicious thyroid nodules using four protein biomarkers
author Cerutti, Janete M.
author_facet Cerutti, Janete M.
Latini, Flavia RM
Nakabashi, Claudia
Delcelo, Rosana [UNIFESP]
Andrade, Victor P.
Amadei, Marcelo Joao
Maciel, Rui MB
Hojaij, Flavio Carneiro [UNIFESP]
Hollis, Donna
Shoemaker, Jennifer
Riggins, Gregory J.
author_role author
author2 Latini, Flavia RM
Nakabashi, Claudia
Delcelo, Rosana [UNIFESP]
Andrade, Victor P.
Amadei, Marcelo Joao
Maciel, Rui MB
Hojaij, Flavio Carneiro [UNIFESP]
Hollis, Donna
Shoemaker, Jennifer
Riggins, Gregory J.
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Johns Hopkins Univ
Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
Duke Univ
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Cerutti, Janete M.
Latini, Flavia RM
Nakabashi, Claudia
Delcelo, Rosana [UNIFESP]
Andrade, Victor P.
Amadei, Marcelo Joao
Maciel, Rui MB
Hojaij, Flavio Carneiro [UNIFESP]
Hollis, Donna
Shoemaker, Jennifer
Riggins, Gregory J.
description Purpose: Fine-needle aspiration (FNA) cytology, a standard method for thyroid nodule diagnosis, cannot distinguish between benign follicular thyroid adenoma (FTA) and malignant follicular thyroid carcinoma (FTC). Previously, using expression profiling, we found that a combination of transcript expression levels from DDIT3, ARGZ C1orf24, and ITM1 distinguished between FTA and FTC. the goal of this study was to determine if antibody markers used alone or in combination could accurately distinguish between a wider variety of benign and malignant thyroid lesions in fixed sections and FNA samples.Experimental Design: Immunohistochemistry was done on 27 FTA, 25 FTC, and 75 other benign and malignant thyroid tissue sections using custom antibodies for chromosome 1 open reading frame 24 (C1orf24) and integral membrane protein 1 (ITM1) and commercial antibodies for DNA damage - inducible transcript 3 (DDIT3) and arginase II (ARG2). FNA samples were also tested using the same antibodies. RNA expression was measured by quantitative PCR in 33 thyroid lesions.Results: C1orf24 and ITM1 antibodies had an estimated sensitivity of 1.00 for distinguishing FTA from FTC. for the expanded analysis of all lesions studied, ITM1 had an estimated sensitivity of 1.00 for detecting malignancy. Because all four cancer biomarkers did well, producing overlapping confidence intervals, not one best marker was distinguished. Transcript levels also reliably predicted malignancy, but immunohistochemistry had a higher sensitivity. Malignant cells were easily detected in FNA samples using these markers.Conclusions: We improved this diagnostic test by adding C1orf24 and ITM1 custom antibodies and showing use on a wider variety of thyroid pathology. We recommend that testing of all four cancer biomarkers now be advanced to larger trials. Use of one or more of these antibodies should improve diagnostic accuracy of suspicious thyroid nodules from both tissue sections and FNA samples.
publishDate 2006
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2006-06-01
2016-01-24T12:41:12Z
2016-01-24T12:41:12Z
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://dx.doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-2226
Clinical Cancer Research. Philadelphia: Amer Assoc Cancer Research, v. 12, n. 11, p. 3311-3318, 2006.
10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-2226
1078-0432
http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/28931
WOS:000238169800013
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-2226
http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/28931
identifier_str_mv Clinical Cancer Research. Philadelphia: Amer Assoc Cancer Research, v. 12, n. 11, p. 3311-3318, 2006.
10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-2226
1078-0432
WOS:000238169800013
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Clinical Cancer Research
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv 3311-3318
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Amer Assoc Cancer Research
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Amer Assoc Cancer Research
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
instname:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
instacron:UNIFESP
instname_str Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
instacron_str UNIFESP
institution UNIFESP
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
collection Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP - Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv biblioteca.csp@unifesp.br
_version_ 1814268404689797120