Effects of personal characteristics on serum CA125, mesothelin, and HE4 levels in healthy postmenopausal women at high-risk for ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if serum levels of candidate ovarian cancer biomarkers vary with individual characteristics of healthy women who are likely candidates for an ovarian cancer screening program. METHODS: We analyzed serum CA125, mesothelin, and HE4 levels in a sample of 155 healthy postmenopausal women at increased risk for developing ovarian cancer based on personal and family cancer history. Information on reproductive, family and medical histories, lifestyle factors, and anthropometry was collected by self-report. Twenty-two factors were examined using univariate and multiple linear regression models for the three biomarker levels. RESULTS: In the multivariate models, CA125 levels were significantly higher in women who had used talcum powder (P = 0.02) and were lower in women who were parous (P = 0.05). Mesothelin levels were significantly higher in older women (P = 0.01) and lower in heavier women (P = 0.03). HE4 levels were higher in older women (P = 0.001) and in women who began menstruating at an older age (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: CA125, mesothelin, and HE4 levels in healthy, postmenopausal women at increased risk for ovarian cancer are significantly associated with a few ovarian cancer risk factors. Since the effects of these personal characteristics on these serum markers are not large, their incorporation in screening algorithms may be unnecessary. This is true especially if a longitudinal algorithm is used because the marker level at the previous screen reflects personal characteristics such as age, body mass index, and age of menarche. Understanding the influence of personal factors on levels of novel early detection markers in healthy, unaffected women may have clinical utility in interpreting biomarker levels

Systematic Evaluation of Candidate Blood Markers for Detecting Ovarian Cancer

Epithelial ovarian cancer is a significant cause of mortality both in the United States and worldwide, due largely to the high proportion of cases that present at a late stage, when survival is extremely poor. Early detection of epithelial ovarian cancer, and of the serous subtype in particular, is a promising strategy for saving lives. The low prevalence of ovarian cancer makes the development of an adequately sensitive and specific test based on blood markers very challenging. We evaluated the performance of a set of candidate blood markers and combinations of these markers in detecting serous ovarian cancer.We selected 14 candidate blood markers of serous ovarian cancer for which assays were available to measure their levels in serum or plasma, based on our analysis of global gene expression data and on literature searches. We evaluated the performance of these candidate markers individually and in combination by measuring them in overlapping sets of serum (or plasma) samples from women with clinically detectable ovarian cancer and women without ovarian cancer. Based on sensitivity at high specificity, we determined that 4 of the 14 candidate markers--MUC16, WFDC2, MSLN and MMP7--warrant further evaluation in precious serum specimens collected months to years prior to clinical diagnosis to assess their utility in early detection. We also reported differences in the performance of these candidate blood markers across histological types of epithelial ovarian cancer.By systematically analyzing the performance of candidate blood markers of ovarian cancer in distinguishing women with clinically apparent ovarian cancer from women without ovarian cancer, we identified a set of serum markers with adequate performance to warrant testing for their ability to identify ovarian cancer months to years prior to clinical diagnosis. We argued for the importance of sensitivity at high specificity and of magnitude of difference in marker levels between cases and controls as performance metrics and demonstrated the importance of stratifying analyses by histological type of ovarian cancer. Also, we discussed the limitations of studies (like this one) that use samples obtained from symptomatic women to assess potential utility in detection of disease months to years prior to clinical detection

Evaluating Serum Markers for Hormone Receptor-Negative Breast Cancer.

IntroductionBreast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer death in females worldwide. Death rates have been declining, largely as a result of early detection through mammography and improved treatment, but mammographic screening is controversial because of over-diagnosis of breast disease that might not require treatment, and under-diagnosis of cancer in women with dense breasts. Breast cancer screening could be improved by pairing mammography with a tumor circulating marker, of which there are currently none. Given genomic similarities between the basal breast cancer subtype and serous ovarian cancer, and given our success in identifying circulating markers for ovarian cancer, we investigated the performance in hormone receptor-negative breast cancer detection of both previously identified ovarian serum markers and circulating markers associated with transcripts that were differentially expressed in breast cancer tissue compared to healthy breast tissue from reduction mammaplasties.MethodsWe evaluated a total of 15 analytes (13 proteins, 1 miRNA, 1 autoantibody) in sera drawn at or before breast cancer surgery from 43 breast cancer cases (28 triple-negative-TN-and 15 hormone receptor-negative-HRN-/ HER2-positive) and 87 matched controls.ResultsIn the analysis of our whole cohort of breast cancer cases, autoantibodies to TP53 performed significantly better than the other selected 14 analytes showing 25.6% and 34.9% sensitivity at 95% and 90% specificity respectively with AUC: 0.7 (pConclusionNone of the 13 serum proteins nor miRNA 135b identified women with HRN or TN breast cancer. TP53 autoantibodies identified women with HRN breast cancer and may have potential for early detection, confirming earlier reports. TP53 autoantibodies are long lasting in serum but may be affected by storage duration. Autoantibodies to TP53 might correlate with Body-Mass-Index

Use of a Symptom Index, CA125, and HE4 to predict ovarian cancer

Background. Prior studies suggest that combining the Symptom Index (SI) with a serum HE4 test or a CA125 test may improve prediction of ovarian cancer. However, these three tests have not been evaluated in combination. Methods. A prospective case-control study design including 74 women with ovarian cancer and 137 healthy women was used with logistic regression analysis to evaluate the independent contributions of HE4 and CA125, and the SI to predict ovarian cancer status in a multivariate model. The diagnostic performance of various decision rules for combinations of these tests was assessed to evaluate potential use in predicting ovarian cancer. Results. The SI, HE4, and CA125 all made significant independent contributions to ovarian cancer prediction. A decision rule based on any one of the three tests being positive had a sensitivity of 95% with specificity of 80%. A rule based on any two of the three tests being positive had a sensitivity of 84% with a specificity of 98.5%. The SI alone had sensitivity of 64% with specificity of 88%. If the SI index is used to select women for CA125 and HE4 testing, specificity is 98.5% and sensitivity is 58% using the 2-of-3-positive decision rule. Conclusions. A 2-of-3-positive decision rule yields acceptable specificity, and higher sensitivity when all 3 tests are performed than when the SI is used to select women for screening by CA125 and HE4. If positive predictive value is a high priority, testing by CA125 and HE4 prior to imaging may be warranted for women with ovarian cancer symptoms

Autoantibodies to TP53 discriminate breast cancer sera from control sera.

<p>ROC curves showing the 43 HRN cases (black) and the 28 TN subset (blue) vs. 87 matched healthy controls.</p

Selection of 15 analytes and their sensitivity/specificity as serum markers.

<p>Data from 43 cases and 87 controls. Marker selection criteria: (1) serum marker potential in high-grade serous ovarian cancer and involvement in breast cancer; (2) transcript involved in breast cancer; (3) association with poor breast cancer outcome; (4) protein decreased in breast cancer tissue compared to normal breast.</p><p>Selection of 15 analytes and their sensitivity/specificity as serum markers.</p