-
Something wrong with this record ?
Urinary Cell-Free DNA Quantification as Non-Invasive Biomarker in Patients with Bladder Cancer
A. Brisuda, E. Pazourkova, V. Soukup, A. Horinek, J. Hrbáček, O. Capoun, I. Svobodova, S. Pospisilova, M. Korabecna, J. Mares, T. Hanuš, M. Babjuk,
Language English Country Switzerland
Document type Journal Article, Multicenter Study, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Grant support
NT12417
MZ0
CEP Register
Digital library NLK
Full text - Article
Source
NLK
Medline Complete (EBSCOhost)
from 1998-01-01 to 1 year ago
PubMed
26338254
DOI
10.1159/000438828
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- MeSH
- Urinalysis standards MeSH
- Cell-Free System MeSH
- DNA analysis urine MeSH
- Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Biomarkers, Tumor urine MeSH
- Urinary Bladder Neoplasms diagnosis urine MeSH
- Predictive Value of Tests MeSH
- Reproducibility of Results MeSH
- ROC Curve MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Sensitivity and Specificity MeSH
- Case-Control Studies MeSH
- Check Tag
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Multicenter Study MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
INTRODUCTION: Concentration of urinary cell-free DNA (ucfDNA) belongs to potential bladder cancer markers, but the reported results are inconsistent due to the use of various non-standardised methodologies. The aim of the study was to standardise the methodology for ucfDNA quantification as a potential non-invasive tumour biomarker. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In total, 66 patients and 34 controls were enrolled into the study. Volumes of each urine portion (V) were recorded and ucfDNA concentrations (c) were measured using real-time PCR. Total amounts (TA) of ucfDNA were calculated and compared between patients and controls. Diagnostic accuracy of the TA of ucfDNA was determined. RESULTS: The calculation of TA of ucfDNA in the second urine portion was the most appropriate approach to ucfDNA quantification, as there was logarithmic dependence between the volume and the concentration of a urine portion (p = 0.0001). Using this methodology, we were able to discriminate between bladder cancer patients and subjects without bladder tumours (p = 0.0002) with area under the ROC curve of 0.725. Positive and negative predictive value of the test was 90 and 45%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Quantification of ucf DNA according to our modified method could provide a potential non-invasive biomarker for diagnosis of patients with bladder cancer.
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc17001028
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20181030144413.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 170103s2016 sz f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1159/000438828 $2 doi
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1159/000438828 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)26338254
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a sz
- 100 1_
- $a Brisuda, Antonín, $u Department of Urology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic. $d 1980- $7 xx0208968
- 245 10
- $a Urinary Cell-Free DNA Quantification as Non-Invasive Biomarker in Patients with Bladder Cancer / $c A. Brisuda, E. Pazourkova, V. Soukup, A. Horinek, J. Hrbáček, O. Capoun, I. Svobodova, S. Pospisilova, M. Korabecna, J. Mares, T. Hanuš, M. Babjuk,
- 520 9_
- $a INTRODUCTION: Concentration of urinary cell-free DNA (ucfDNA) belongs to potential bladder cancer markers, but the reported results are inconsistent due to the use of various non-standardised methodologies. The aim of the study was to standardise the methodology for ucfDNA quantification as a potential non-invasive tumour biomarker. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In total, 66 patients and 34 controls were enrolled into the study. Volumes of each urine portion (V) were recorded and ucfDNA concentrations (c) were measured using real-time PCR. Total amounts (TA) of ucfDNA were calculated and compared between patients and controls. Diagnostic accuracy of the TA of ucfDNA was determined. RESULTS: The calculation of TA of ucfDNA in the second urine portion was the most appropriate approach to ucfDNA quantification, as there was logarithmic dependence between the volume and the concentration of a urine portion (p = 0.0001). Using this methodology, we were able to discriminate between bladder cancer patients and subjects without bladder tumours (p = 0.0002) with area under the ROC curve of 0.725. Positive and negative predictive value of the test was 90 and 45%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Quantification of ucf DNA according to our modified method could provide a potential non-invasive biomarker for diagnosis of patients with bladder cancer.
- 650 _2
- $a senioři $7 D000368
- 650 _2
- $a nádorové biomarkery $x moč $7 D014408
- 650 _2
- $a studie případů a kontrol $7 D016022
- 650 _2
- $a bezbuněčný systém $7 D002474
- 650 _2
- $a DNA $x analýza $x moč $7 D004247
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
- 650 _2
- $a prediktivní hodnota testů $7 D011237
- 650 _2
- $a ROC křivka $7 D012372
- 650 _2
- $a kvantitativní polymerázová řetězová reakce $7 D060888
- 650 _2
- $a reprodukovatelnost výsledků $7 D015203
- 650 _2
- $a senzitivita a specificita $7 D012680
- 650 _2
- $a analýza moči $x normy $7 D016482
- 650 _2
- $a nádory močového měchýře $x diagnóza $x moč $7 D001749
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a multicentrická studie $7 D016448
- 655 _2
- $a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
- 700 1_
- $a Pazourková, Eva $7 xx0208969
- 700 1_
- $a Soukup, Viktor, $d 1974- $7 xx0081956
- 700 1_
- $a Hořínek, Aleš, $d 1961- $7 xx0061416
- 700 1_
- $a Hrbáček, Jan $7 xx0208970
- 700 1_
- $a Capoun, Otakar
- 700 1_
- $a Svobodova, Iveta
- 700 1_
- $a Pospisilova, Sarka
- 700 1_
- $a Korabecna, Marie
- 700 1_
- $a Mareš, Jaroslav, $d 1951- $7 jo20010082326
- 700 1_
- $a Hanuš, Tomáš
- 700 1_
- $a Babjuk, Marko, $d 1961- $7 jn20020716353
- 773 0_
- $w MED00004616 $t Urologia internationalis $x 1423-0399 $g Roč. 96, č. 1 (2016), s. 25-31
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26338254 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20170103 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20181030144929 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1180168 $s 961595
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2016 $b 96 $c 1 $d 25-31 $e 20150903 $i 1423-0399 $m Urologia internationalis $n Urol Int $x MED00004616
- GRA __
- $a NT12417 $p MZ0
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20170103