open access
Proteomic pattern of cervico-vaginal fluid (CVF) in an ovarian cancer diagnosis — pilot study
Affiliations- Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecologic Oncology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland
- Department of Inorganic and Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Polska
open access
Abstract
Objectives: High grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSC) is the most common type of ovarian cancer and is responsible for about 90% of ovarian cancer deaths. The diagnostic tests currently used do not increase the detection rates for ovarian cancer. There is a great necessity to develop new and non-invasive diagnostic tests for ovarian cancer (OC). Cervico-vaginal fluid (CVF) seems to be a potential and valuable source of biomarkers for genital tract diseases including ovarian cancer. The aim of our pilot study was to undertake a preliminary proteomic analysis of CVF derived from ovarian cancer patients and to compare these with results from a control group.
Material and methods: We analysed and compared samples from a group of ovarian cancer patients and a control group of healthy patients. The study used MALDI-TOF coupled with nanoLC and ClinProTools software for MS, MS/MS spectra collection and proteomic analysis.
Results: We identified 404 different proteins in the OC group and 417 proteins in the control group. 239 of the proteins were found to be common to both study groups, 165 proteins were unique to the OC subjects, and 178 proteins were unique to the control subjects. We selected three proteins as the OC markers with the greatest potential: cysteine-rich secretory protein 3, fibronectin and Ly6/PLAUR domain-containing protein 3.
Conclusions: The proteins we selected seem to possess great potential as markers for the screening and early detection of OC, especially in non-invasive and low-cost diagnostic tests. However, our findings require more advanced and validated proteomic analysis to confirm the suitability of the selected proteins in everyday medical diagnoses.
Abstract
Objectives: High grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSC) is the most common type of ovarian cancer and is responsible for about 90% of ovarian cancer deaths. The diagnostic tests currently used do not increase the detection rates for ovarian cancer. There is a great necessity to develop new and non-invasive diagnostic tests for ovarian cancer (OC). Cervico-vaginal fluid (CVF) seems to be a potential and valuable source of biomarkers for genital tract diseases including ovarian cancer. The aim of our pilot study was to undertake a preliminary proteomic analysis of CVF derived from ovarian cancer patients and to compare these with results from a control group.
Material and methods: We analysed and compared samples from a group of ovarian cancer patients and a control group of healthy patients. The study used MALDI-TOF coupled with nanoLC and ClinProTools software for MS, MS/MS spectra collection and proteomic analysis.
Results: We identified 404 different proteins in the OC group and 417 proteins in the control group. 239 of the proteins were found to be common to both study groups, 165 proteins were unique to the OC subjects, and 178 proteins were unique to the control subjects. We selected three proteins as the OC markers with the greatest potential: cysteine-rich secretory protein 3, fibronectin and Ly6/PLAUR domain-containing protein 3.
Conclusions: The proteins we selected seem to possess great potential as markers for the screening and early detection of OC, especially in non-invasive and low-cost diagnostic tests. However, our findings require more advanced and validated proteomic analysis to confirm the suitability of the selected proteins in everyday medical diagnoses.
Keywords
ovarian cancer; proteomic pattern; tumor markers; cervico-vaginal fluid
About this articleTitle
Proteomic pattern of cervico-vaginal fluid (CVF) in an ovarian cancer diagnosis — pilot study
Journal
Issue
Article type
Research paper
Pages
688-694
Published online
2018-12-28
Page views
1906
Article views/downloads
1283
DOI
Pubmed
Bibliographic record
Ginekol Pol 2018;89(12):688-694.
Keywords
ovarian cancer
proteomic pattern
tumor markers
cervico-vaginal fluid
Authors
Emilia Gasiorowska
Bartosz Urbaniak
Jakub Lorek
Jan Matysiak
Ewa Nowak-Markwitz
References (22)- Gilbert L, Basso O, Sampalis J, et al. DOvE Study Group. Assessment of symptomatic women for early diagnosis of ovarian cancer: results from the prospective DOvE pilot project. Lancet Oncol. 2012; 13(3): 285–291.
- Henderson JT, Webber EM, Sawaya GF. Screening for Ovarian Cancer: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA. 2018; 319(6): 595–606.
- Buys SS, Partridge E, Black A, et al. PLCO Project Team. Effect of screening on ovarian cancer mortality: the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA. 2011; 305(22): 2295–2303.
- Di Quinzio MKW, Oliva K, Holdsworth SJ, et al. Proteomic analysis and characterisation of human cervico-vaginal fluid proteins. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2007; 47(1): 9–15.
- The Panther Classification System program . http://www.pantherdb.org/.
- Michaels JEA, Dasari S, Pereira L, et al. Comprehensive proteomic analysis of the human amniotic fluid proteome: gestational age-dependent changes. J Proteome Res. 2007; 6(4): 1277–1285.
- Shaw JLV, Smith CR, Diamandis EP. Proteomic analysis of human cervico-vaginal fluid. J Proteome Res. 2007; 6(7): 2859–2865.
- Fox CH. Adnexal malignancy detected by cervical cytology. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1978; 132(2): 148–150.
- Takashina T, Ono M, Kanda Y, et al. Cervicovaginal and endometrial cytology in ovarian cancer. Acta Cytol. 1988; 32(2): 159–162.
- Nwanodi O, Choi C, Khulpateea N. Cervicovaginal cytology and diagnosis of ovarian or peritoneal cancer: case report and literature review. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2008; 277(2): 171–174.
- Suzuki M, Suzuki T, Matsuura M, et al. Prediction of histologic type and lymph node metastasis for advanced ovarian cancer on uterine cervical and endometrial cytology. Acta Cytol. 2010; 54(4): 575–581.
- Otsuka I, Kameda S, Hoshi K. Early detection of ovarian and fallopian tube cancer by examination of cytological samples from the endometrial cavity. Br J Cancer. 2013; 109(3): 603–609.
- Zegels G, Van Raemdonck GAa, Tjalma WAa, et al. Use of cervicovaginal fluid for the identification of biomarkers for pathologies of the female genital tract. Proteome Sci. 2010; 8: 63.
- Suckau D, Resemann A, Schuerenberg M, et al. A novel MALDI LIFT-TOF/TOF mass spectrometer for proteomics. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2003; 376(7): 952–965.
- Kenny HA, Chiang CY, White EA, et al. Mesothelial cells promote early ovarian cancer metastasis through fibronectin secretion. J Clin Invest. 2014; 124(10): 4614–4628.
- Henriksen R, Lundwall Å, Udby L, et al. The expression of β-microseminoprotein but not CRISP3 is reduced in ovarian cancer and correlates to survival. Anticancer Res. 2012; 32(9): 3993–3999.
- Gong WJ, Liu JY, Yin JY, et al. Resistin facilitates metastasis of lung adenocarcinoma through the TLR4/Src/EGFR/PI3K/NF-κB pathway. Cancer Sci. 2018; 109(8): 2391–2400.
- Pathak BR, Breed AA, Apte S, et al. Cysteine-rich secretory protein 3 plays a role in prostate cancer cell invasion and affects expression of PSA and ANXA1. Mol Cell Biochem. 2016; 411(1-2): 11–21.
- Noh BJ, Sung JY, Kim YW, et al. Prognostic value of ERG, PTEN, CRISP3 and SPINK1 in predicting biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer. Oncol Lett. 2016; 11(6): 3621–3630.
- Wang L, Hirohashi Y, Ogawa T, et al. LY6/PLAUR domain containing 3 has a role in the maintenance of colorectal cancer stem-like cells. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2017; 486(2): 232–238.
- Cohen AS, Khalil FK, Welsh EA, et al. Cell-surface marker discovery for lung cancer. Oncotarget. 2017; 8(69): 113373–113402.
- Willuda J, Linden L, Lerchen HG, et al. Preclinical Antitumor Efficacy of BAY 1129980-a Novel Auristatin-Based Anti-C4.4A (LYPD3) Antibody-Drug Conjugate for the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Mol Cancer Ther. 2017; 16(5): 893–904.
