Search

Blood-based diagnostics for lung cancer support the diagnosis, estimation of prognosis, prediction, and monitoring of therapy response in lung cancer patients. The clinical utility of serum tumor markers has considerably increased due to developments in serum protein tumor markers analytics and clinical biomarker studies, the exploration of preanalytical and influencing conditions, the interpretation of biomarker combinations and individual biomarker kinetics, as well as the implementation of biostatistical models. In addition, circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and other liquid biopsy markers are playing an increasingly prominent role in the molecular tumor characterization and the monitoring of tumor evolution over time. Thus, modern lung cancer biomarkers may considerably contribute to an individualized companion diagnostics and provide a sensitive guidance for patients throughout the course of their disease. In this special edition on Tumor Markers in Lung Cancer, experts summarize recent developments in clinical laboratory diagnostics of lung cancer and give an outlook on future challenges and opportunities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tumor marker determinations are valuable tools for the guidance of breast cancer patients during the course of disease. They are assessed on diverse analytical platforms that may be associated with differences according to the methods applied and the clinical performance. To investigate the method dependency and clinical significance of breast cancer protein tumor markers, CEA, CA 15-3, CA 125, CA 19-9 and AFP were measured in a total of 154 biobanked samples from 77 patients with breast cancer, 10 with DCIS, 31 with benign breast diseases and 36 healthy controls using a Millipore multiplex biomarker panel (MP) and an automized version of the routinely used Vista LOCI technology. The markers were compared between methods and investigated for diagnostic performance. CEA, CA 15-3 and AFP showed good correlations between both platforms with correlation coefficients of R = 0.85, 0.85 and 0.92, respectively, in all samples, but similarly also in the various subgroups. CA 125 and CA 19-9 showed only moderate correlations (R = 0.71 and 0.56, respectively). Absolute values were significantly higher for CEA, CA 15-3, CA 125 and AFP in the Vista LOCI as compared with the MP method and vice versa for CA 19-9. The diagnostic performance for discrimination of breast cancer from healthy controls was similar for both methods with AUCs in ROC curves for CEA (MP 0.81, 95% CI 0.72–0.91; LOCI 0.81; 95% CI 0.72–0.91) and CA-15-3 (MP 0.75, 95% CI 0.65–0.86; LOCI 0.67, 95% CI 0.54–0.79). Similar results were obtained for the comparison of breast cancer with benign breast diseases regarding CEA (AUC MP 0.62, 95% CI 0.51–0.73; LOCI 0.64, 95% CI 0.53–0.74) and CA-15-3 (MP 0.70, 95% CI 0.6–0.81; LOCI 0.66, 95% CI 0.54–0.77). Both platforms show moderate to good method comparability for tumor markers with similar clinical performance. However, absolute levels in individual patients should be interpreted with care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bei NT-proBNP zeigt sich eine besonders ausgeprägte Altersabhängigkeit der Referenzintervalle im Kindesalter. Kontinuierliche Referenzintervalle und ein NT-proBNP-spezifischer zlog-Wert ermöglichen in der Kinderkardiologie erstmals Verlaufskontrollen und unterstützen die Risikostratifizierung bei schwerwiegenden kardialen Ereignissen. Dies erhöht den Stellenwert dieses Biomarkers für den klinischen Einsatz deutlich. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Blood-based biomarkers are valuable diagnostic tools for the management of lung cancer patients. They support not only differential diagnosis and histological subtyping, but are also applied for estimation of prognosis, stratification for specific therapies, monitoring of therapy response, surveillance monitoring and early detection of residual or progressive disease. Early diagnosis of lung cancer in high risk populations (screening) is a promising future indication but poses high medical and economic challenges to marker performance. The five mostly used classical 'tumor markers' show characteristic profiles of sensitivity and specificity for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) like cytokeratin 19-fragments (CYFRA 21-1), carcino-embryonic antigen (CEA) and squamous cancer cell antigen (SCCA) as well as for small cell lung cancer (SCLC) like progastrin-releasing peptide (ProGRP) and neuron-specific enolase (NSE). Combined use and pattern recognition approaches enable highly accurate diagnosis, subtyping and therapy monitoring. For the interpretation of serial measurements on an individual level, markerspecific algorithms have to be developed. So-called companion diagnostics identify druggable molecular changes in signaling pathways of tumor tissue that can be addressed by targeted therapies. New highly sensitive technologies enable the convenient and serial molecular characterization on circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in the blood, too. This approach is helpful when biopsies are not available and to overcome tumor molecular heterogeneity and plasticity. As only a portion of patients have such druggable molecular changes, future strategies will imply the combined use of classical and new ctDNA-based biomarkers to optimize the management of lung cancer patients during the course of disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Differential diagnosis of suspicious lung masses is essential for the selection of the appropriate therapy strategy. While non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in early stages and single lung metastases from other cancers mostly are resected by surgery, late stage NSCLC, small cell lung cancers (SCLC) and multiple lung metastases are treated by systemic chemo- and/or radiotherapeutic approaches. In many patients, biopsies for the histopathological subtyping can not be taken due to multimorbidity and instable clinical conditions of the patient or unfavourable localisation of the tumor. In addition, heterogeneity of lung tumors may imply the presence of different malignant cell types in one suspicious lesion. As tumor-related biomarkers in blood reflect the biochemical properties of cancer cells, their release or non-release may be helpful to support the clinical decision making. This review summarizes the current knowledge about the potential and the role of serum-based biomarkers for the differential diagnosis of lung cancer which is also mirrored in the new recommendations of the National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry (NACB). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The dysregulation of proliferating and apoptotic processes is a common feature in cancerogenesis. Thus, apoptotic products released into blood circulation are suggested as promising markers for the early cancer detection. However though sensitive assays are available, the lack of organ- and tumor-specificity limits the usefulness of most apoptotic parameters for screening purposes. However, they seem to be valuable for the prognosis and the prediction of response to systemic chemo- or radiotherapy in cancer disease. Here, the relevance of diverse circulating apoptotic markers is reviewed for the clinical management of patients with lung cancer. Among those promising markers are ligands and receptors of the FAS-system, members of the intracellular caspase cascade, cleaved apoptosis substrates such as cytokeratines, nucleosomal DNA, and apoptosis modulators like survivin. The review discusses their role for diagnosis, prognosis and therapy monitoring of lung cancer disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to test the diagnostic utility of the DNA integrity index for detection of cancer. Matched serum and plasma samples of 42 patients with various forms of cancer and 17 patients with corresponding benign diseases were analyzed. DNA was isolated from 1 mL serum and plasma using the MagNA Pure LC system. Cell-free DNA was quantified by real-time PCR using the reference gene of the LightCycler t(14;18) kit. Subsequently, the DNA integrity index was calculated as the ratio in relative abundance of 347-bp versus 137-bp PCR products. We found that DNA concentrations were not different in plasma (median: 4.5 ng/mL) and serum (67.1 ng/mL) of patients with benign diseases when compared with values in plasma (5.1 ng/mL) and serum (65.4 ng/mL) of cancer patients. Similarly, the DNA integrity index in plasma (0.38), and serum of patients with benign diseases (0.29) was comparable to values in plasma (0.33) and serum (0.37) of cancer patients. Diagnostic sensitivity of DNA (AUC 0.53) and DNA integrity (AUC 0.45) was poor in plasma, and was increased only slightly by the combination of both (AUC 0.57). In serum, sensitivity of DNA (AUC 0.52) and DNA integrity (AUC 0.64) was higher and was further improved by the combination of both (AUC 0.72) reaching a sensitivity of 30% at 100% specificity. In conclusion, we could not confirm a high diagnostic utility of the DNA integrity index. However, a combination with other markers such as DNA may enhance sensitivity for cancer detection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cancer antigen CA15-3 antigen is known as a valuable marker for the management of breast cancer. Methods: The analytical and clinical performance of the Access® BR Monitor Immunoassay System (Beckman Coulter) was evaluated at five different European sites and compared with a reference system, defined as CA15-3 on the Elecsys® System (Roche Diagnostics). Results: Total imprecision (%CV) of the BR Monitor ranged between 5.5% and 11.7%, and inter-laboratory reproducibility between 3.4% and 5.1%. Linearity upon dilution showed a mean recovery of 98.5% (SD±9.1%). Endogenous interferents had no influence on BR Monitor levels (mean recoveries: hemoglobin 112%, bilirubin 111%, triglycerides 108%). There was no high-dose hook effect up to 13,540 kU/L. Clinical performance investigated in sera from 1811 individuals showed a general correlation between the Access BR Monitor and Elecsys CA15-3 (R=0.797), with a slope of 1.383. CA15-3 serum levels, as measured by the BR Monitor, were low in healthy individuals (n=267, median=11.9 kU/L, 95th percentile=23.5 kU/L), higher in individuals with various benign diseases (n=549, medians=11.3–15.6 kU/L, 95th percentiles=21.6–54.6 kU/L) and even higher in individuals suffering from various cancers (n=995, medians=11.2–22.8 kU/L, 95th percentiles=30.0–429.7 kU/L). Best diagnostic accuracy for cancer detection against the relevant benign control group by the BR Monitor was found for locoregional and metastatic breast cancer, as well as for ovarian cancer [area under the curve (AUC) 0.619, 0.897 and 0.774]. Results for the reference CA15-3 assay were comparable (AUC 0.611, 0.887 and 0.818). Conclusions: The Access BR Monitor provides accurate methodological characteristics and demonstrates an analytical and clinical correlation with Elecsys CA15-3. Best diagnostic accuracy for the BR Monitor was found in breast and ovarian cancer. Our results also suggest a clinical value of the BR Monitor in other cancers. Clin Chem Lab Med 2008;46:612–22. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Gastrointestinal cancer antigen CA19-9 is known as a valuable marker for the management of patients with pancreatic cancer. Methods: The analytical and clinical performance of the Access® GI Monitor assay (Beckman Coulter) was evaluated on the UniCel® DxI 800 Immunoassay System at five different European sites and compared with a reference method, defined as CA19-9 on the Elecsys System (Roche Diagnostics). Results: Total imprecision (%CV) of the GI Monitor ranged between 3.4% and 7.7%, and inter-laboratory reproducibility between 3.6% and 4.0%. Linearity upon dilution showed a mean recovery of 97.4% (SD+7.2%). Endogenous interferents had no influence on GI Monitor levels (mean recoveries: hemoglobin 103%, bilirubin 106%, triglycerides 106%). There was no high-dose hook effect up to 115,000 kU/L. Clinical performance investigated in sera from 1811 individuals showed a good correlation between the Access® GI Monitor and Elecsys CA19-9 (R=0.959, slope=1.004, intercept=+0.17). GI Monitor serum levels were low in healthy individuals (n=267, median=6.0 kU/L, 95th percentile=23.1 kU/L), higher in individuals with various benign diseases (n=550, medians=5.8–13.4 kU/L, 95th percentiles=30.1–195.5kU/L) and even higher in individuals suffering from various cancers (n=995, medians=8.4–233.8 kU/L, 95th percentiles=53.7–13,902 kU/L). Optimal diagnostic accuracy for cancer detection against the relevant benign control group by the GI Monitor was found for pancreatic cancer [area under the curve (AUC) 0.83]. Results for the reference CA19-9 assay were comparable (AUC 0.85). Conclusions: The Access® GI Monitor provides very good methodological characteristics and demonstrates an excellent analytical and clinical correlation with the Elecsys CA19-9. The GI Monitor shows the best diagnostic accuracy in pancreatic cancer. Our results also suggest a clinical value of the GI Monitor in other cancers. Clin Chem Lab Med 2008;46:600–11. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An editorial about the challenges in the detection of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is presented. The authors addressed the prevalence of lung cancer worldwide. They discussed the involvement of circulating biomarkers in the management of lung cancer. They explained the difference between small and non-small cell lung cancer.