Improvement of protein immobilization for the elaboration of tumor-associated antigen microarrays: Application to the sensitive and specific detection of tumor markers from breast cancer sera

Yang, Zhugen; Chevolot, Yann; Géhin, Thomas; Solassol, Jérôme; Mangé, Alain; Souteyrand, Éliane; Laurenceau, Emmanuelle

doi:10.1016/j.bios.2012.08.019

Cited by 41 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Combining various TAAs onto microstructured microarray under optimized conditions (spotting pH buffer, surface chemistry, and blocking procedure) could improve sensitivity and specificity of anti-TAA autoantibody detection. A recent paper showed the utility of protein microarray for autoantibody detection in sera of breast cancer patients [41]. The authors investigated both surface chemistry and protein immobilization conditions to improve sensitivity of the detection of tumor autoantibodies on these microarrays.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of Autoantibodies to Detect the Onset of Breast Cancer

Lacombe

Mangé

Solassol

2014

Journal of Immunology Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The widespread use of screening mammography has resulted in increased detection of early-stage breast disease, particularly for in situ carcinoma and early-stage breast cancer. However, the majority of women with abnormalities noted on screening mammograms are not diagnosed with cancer because of several factors, including radiologist assessment, patient age, breast density, malpractice concerns, and quality control procedures. Although magnetic resonance imaging is a highly sensitive detection tool that has become standard for women at very high risk of developing breast cancer, it lacks sufficient specificity and costeffectiveness for use as a general screening tool. Therefore, there is an important need to improve screening and diagnosis of early-invasive and noninvasive tumors, that is, in situ carcinoma. The great potential for molecular tools to improve breast cancer outcomes based on early diagnosis has driven the search for diagnostic biomarkers. Identification of tumor-specific markers capable of eliciting an immune response in the early stages of tumor development seems to provide an effective approach for early diagnosis. The aim of this review is to describe several autoantibodies identified during breast cancer diagnosis. We will focus on these molecules highlighted in the past two years and discuss the potential future use of autoantibodies as biomarkers of early-stage breast cancer.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of Autoantibodies to Detect the Onset of Breast Cancer

Lacombe

Mangé

Solassol

2014

Journal of Immunology Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They are biochemically well-characterized, and many reagents and techniques are available for their detection, simplifying assay development. Until very recently, several specific autoantibodies have been detected in the sera of patients with advanced-stage breast cancer (14,(39)(40)(41)(42)(43)(44)(45)(46)(47)(48)(49)(50)(51)(52)(53)(54)(55)(56)(57)(58). However, very few studies have attempted to identify and/or evaluate autoantibodies in node-negative earlystage PBC ( 2 cm) or, more importantly, in preinvasive breast cancer, for which mammography's sensitivity is decreased.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Multiparametric Serum Marker Panel as a Complementary Test to Mammography for the Diagnosis of Node-Negative Early-Stage Breast Cancer and DCIS in Young Women

Lacombe

Mangé

Bougnoux

et al. 2014

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers &Amp; Prevention

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The sensitivity of mammography for the detection of small lesions, including node-negative early-stage (T1N0) primary breast cancer (PBC) and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), is significantly decreased in young patients. From a clinical standpoint, an inconclusive mammogram reflects the inability of clinicians to confidently decide whether patients should be referred for biopsy or for follow-up with repeat imaging.Methods: Specific ELISAs were developed for a panel of 13 well-recognized breast autoantigens (HSP60, FKBP52, PRDX2, PPIA, MUC1, GAL3, PAK2, P53, CCNB1, PHB2, RACK1, RUVBL1, and HER2). Circulating autoantibody levels were measured in a cohort of 396 serum samples from histologically confirmed DCIS (n ¼ 87) or T1N0 PBC (n ¼ 153) and healthy controls (n ¼ 156).Results: Individually, antibodies against CCNB1, FKBP52, GAL3, PAK2, PRDX2, PPIA, P53, and MUC1 demonstrated discriminatory power between breast cancer and healthy control groups. At 90% sensitivity, the overall combined specificity of the autoantibody serum screening test was 42%. Adjustment for higher sensitivities of 95% and 99% resulted in 30% and 21% specificities, respectively (33% and 18% in T1N0 PBC and 28% and 21% in DCIS). Finally, in patients with node-negative early-stage breast cancer younger than 50 years, the autoantibody assay exhibited 59% specificity with a fixed sensitivity at 90%.Conclusions: Our autoantibody panel allows accurate detection of early breast cancer and DCIS, notably in younger patients.Impact: Clinical assessment of this autoantibody panel displays a potential to facilitate clinical management of early-stage breast cancer detection in cases of inconclusive mammogram. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 23(9); 1834-42. Ó2014 AACR.

show abstract

“…Regarding the (tumor-associated) antigens, the level of expression, post-translational modification, or variations in protein processing are of great importance. Differences in sensitivities and specificities were also shown by studies on the immobilization of six TAA (including p53 and NY-ESO-1) using different surface chemistries [15]. Therefore, the diagnostic sensitivity of most TAAB is too low for diagnostic screening.…”

Section: Biomarkers For the Prediction Diagnosis And Monitoring Of mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Improvement of AAB assays by evaluating different targets (proteins vs. peptides, post-translationally modified proteins/glycoproteins) or assay modifications (antigen immobilization, buffer conditions) to increase diagnostic accuracies of appropriate markers [14,15]. Improvement of AAB assays by evaluating different targets (proteins vs. peptides, post-translationally modified proteins/glycoproteins) or assay modifications (antigen immobilization, buffer conditions) to increase diagnostic accuracies of appropriate markers [14,15].…”

Section: Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%