Ductal Lavage Findings in Women With Known Breast Cancer Undergoing Mastectomy

Yang

et al. 2006

Intl Journal of Cancer

Recent studies show that morphology based analysis of ductal lavage specimens failed to detect many cancers in women with breast cancer. Such an observation raises doubts about the potential role of ductal lavage in an individual's risk assessment and early detection of breast cancer. We hypothesize that biomarkerbased analysis using markers of malignancy field defects including DNA 5c exceeding rate (DNA 5cER) and G-actin might provide a more reliable test for breast cancer risk. The study was performed in 2 phases, the training and validation phase. For the training phase, 36 Chinese women were recruited (13 with breast cancer, 8 with intraductal papilloma and 15 with benign breast diseases). The validation phase included 10 women with cancer and 7 women without cancer. Ductal lavage samples were processed by the ThinPrep technique and evaluated by morphology followed by biomarker analysis using laser scan cytometry (LSC) for G-actin and DNA5cER. In the training phase, biomarker analysis was performed on the 67% (24 of 36) of samples that had over 100 epithelial cells. The sensitivity of DNA5cER was 90% with a specificity of 100%, and G-actin was 100% and 93%, respectively. By contrast, the sensitivity and specificity obtained by cytology alone were 67% and 93%, respectively. Similar results were obtained from the small validation study. Quantitative analysis of biomarkers for G-actin and DNA5cER is feasible and useful in distinguishing benign from malignant breast disease on archived ductal lavage slides. Further studies are warranted to determine the value of these biomarkers in prospective trials. ' 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Biomarker analysis on breast ductal lavage cells in women with and without breast cancer

Yang

et al. 2006

Intl Journal of Cancer

Cancer Prevention Research

“…For clinical diagnosis and prediction of the development of benign lesions to malignance, currently used biomarkers primarily are histologic atypia, cytologic atypia, cell proliferation, estrogen receptor (ER) expression, estradiol and related hormones, mammographic density, and several molecular biomarkers (9). At this time, there are no "omics"-based molecular biomarker panels for predicting benign lesions to cancer.…”

Section: Prognosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategic Approach to Validating Methylated Genes as Biomarkers for Breast Cancer

Wang

Srivastava

2010

Although the potential of biomarkers to aid in the early detection, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of breast cancer is broadly recognized and numerous biomarker candidates have been reported in the literature, few molecular markers have been adopted into clinical use to date. To address this lack of translation of biomarkers from the bench to clinical practice, the Cancer Biomarkers Research Group in the Division of Cancer Prevention of the National Cancer Institute organized a meeting, "Strategic Discussion on Biomarkers for Breast Cancer," which was held at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center on September 14, 2008. Participants included industry leaders, basic and physician scientists, and National Cancer Institute program staff. The objectives of this strategic discussion were to define clinical uses and needed performance characteristics of biomarkers; to identify novel approaches to discover and validate breast cancer biomarkers, particularly those with improved chances of being clinically useful; and to identify candidate DNA methylation markers that could be taken forward for validation. Participants presented and recommended methylation biomarkers suitable for initiating collaborative projects to evaluate the markers for future clinical application. This commentary summarizes their discussions and recommendations and the rationale for initiating specific projects to validate DNA methylation biomarkers of breast cancer. Cancer Prev Res; 3(1); 16-24. ©2010 AACR.

Patient variables that predict atypical cytology by nipple duct lavage

Bushnaq

Ashfaq

Leitch

et al. 2007

Cancer

Here, we summarize the assessment of protein structure refinement in CASP8. Twenty‐four groups refined a total of 12 target proteins. Averaging over all groups and all proteins, there was no net improvement over the original starting models. However, there are now some individual research groups who consistently do improve protein structures relative to a starting starting model. We compare various measures of quality assessment, including (i) standard backbone‐based methods, (ii) new methods from the Richardson group, and (iii) ensemble‐based methods for comparing experimental structures, such as NMR NOE violations and the suitability of the predicted models to serve as templates for molecular replacement. On the whole, there is a general correlation among various measures. However, there are interesting differences. Sometimes a structure that is in better agreement with the experimental data is judged to be slightly worse by GDT‐TS. This suggests that for comparing protein structures that are already quite close to the native, it may be preferable to use ensemble‐based experimentally derived measures of quality, in addition to single‐structure‐based methods such as GDT‐TS. Proteins 2009. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.