A Validation Study of a Multiple Reaction Monitoring-Based Proteomic Assay to Diagnose Breast Cancer

Exploring novel protein-based biomarkers for advancing breast cancer diagnosis: A review

This review provides a contemporary examination of the evolving landscape of breast cancer (BC) diagnosis, focusing on the pivotal role of novel protein-based biomarkers. The overview begins by elucidating the multifaceted nature of BC, exploring its prevalence, subtypes, and clinical complexities. A critical emphasis is placed on the transformative impact of proteomics, dissecting the proteome to unravel the molecular intricacies of BC. Navigating through various sources of samples crucial for biomarker investigations, the review underscores the significance of robust sample processing methods and their validation in ensuring reliable outcomes. The central theme of the review revolves around the identification and evaluation of novel protein-based biomarkers. Cutting-edge discoveries are summarised, shedding light on emerging biomarkers poised for clinical application. Nevertheless, the review candidly addresses the challenges inherent in biomarker discovery, including issues of standardisation, reproducibility, and the complex heterogeneity of BC. The future direction section envisions innovative strategies and technologies to overcome existing challenges. In conclusion, the review summarises the current state of BC biomarker research, offering insights into the intricacies of proteomic investigations. As precision medicine gains momentum, the integration of novel protein-based biomarkers emerges as a promising avenue for enhancing the accuracy and efficacy of BC diagnosis. This review serves as a compass for researchers and clinicians navigating the evolving landscape of BC biomarker discovery, guiding them toward transformative advancements in diagnostic precision and personalised patient care.

The usefulness of a three-protein signature blood assay (Mastocheck®) for follow-up after breast cancer surgery

PURPOSE

Mastocheck®, a proteomic-based blood assay, has been developed for early diagnosis of breast cancer. The purpose of this study is whether Mastocheck® is useful as a postoperative follow-up.

METHODS

A total of 255 patients were analyzed. The patients were classified into longitudinal monitoring and recurrence/nonrecurrence cohorts. The longitudinal monitoring cohort consisted of 111 patients. In this cohort, blood analyses were performed three times (before surgery, 8 weeks after surgery, and between 6 months and one year after surgery), and a comparative analysis of the values of Mastocheck® and individual proteins at each time point was performed. The recurrence/nonrecurrence cohort consisted of 144 patients who had been followed up for more than 1 year, and the blood marker values at the time of local recurrence were compared to those of nonrecurrence patients.

RESULTS

In the longitudinal monitoring cohort analysis, in 81 of 111 patients were diagnosed with breast cancer with Mastocheck® and the sensitivity was 73.0%. Of 111 patients in the longitudinal monitoring cohort, 108 had two blood analyses (before and 8 weeks after surgery), and three serial blood analyses were performed on 53 patients. The Mastocheck® value that were in the cancer range of 73.0% (in 81 of 111 patients) of patients before surgery, was within the normal range of 68.5% (in 74 of 108 patients) at 8 weeks after surgery and 88.7% (in 47 of 53 patients) from 6 months to 1 year after surgery. The value of Mastocheck® was significantly decreased after surgery compared to before surgery (p < 0.001). In the recurrence/nonrecurrence cohort analysis, the Mastocheck® values were in the cancer range in 38 out of 63 recurrence patients and within the normal range in 66 of 81 nonrecurrence patients (sensitivity of 60.3% and specificity of 80.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Mastocheck® is expected to be used as a blood marker tool to aid in the early detection of recurrence during follow-up after breast cancer surgery.

Network analysis of plasma proteomes in affective disorders

The conventional differentiation of affective disorders into major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BD) has insufficient biological evidence. Utilizing multiple proteins quantified in plasma may provide critical insight into these limitations. In this study, the plasma proteomes of 299 patients with MDD or BD (aged 19-65 years old) were quantified using multiple reaction monitoring. Based on 420 protein expression levels, a weighted correlation network analysis was performed. Significant clinical traits with protein modules were determined using correlation analysis. Top hub proteins were determined using intermodular connectivity, and significant functional pathways were identified. Weighted correlation network analysis revealed six protein modules. The eigenprotein of a protein module with 68 proteins, including complement components as hub proteins, was associated with the total Childhood Trauma Questionnaire score (r = -0.15, p = 0.009). Another eigenprotein of a protein module of 100 proteins, including apolipoproteins as hub proteins, was associated with the overeating item of the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (r = 0.16, p = 0.006). Functional analysis revealed immune responses and lipid metabolism as significant pathways for each module, respectively. No significant protein module was associated with the differentiation between MDD and BD. In conclusion, childhood trauma and overeating symptoms were significantly associated with plasma protein networks and should be considered important endophenotypes in affective disorders.

Diagnostic accuracy of a three-protein signature in women with suspicious breast lesions: a multicenter prospective trial

BACKGROUND

Mammography screening has been proven to detect breast cancer at an early stage and reduce mortality; however, it has low accuracy in young women or women with dense breasts. Blood-based diagnostic tools may overcome the limitations of mammography. This study assessed the diagnostic performance of a three-protein signature in patients with suspicious breast lesions.

FINDINGS

This trial (MAST; KCT0004847) was a prospective multicenter observational trial. Three-protein signature values were obtained using serum and plasma from women with suspicious lesions for breast malignancy before tumor biopsy. Additionally, blood samples from women who underwent clear or benign mammography were collected for the assays. Among 642 participants, the sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy values of the three-protein signature were 74.4%, 66.9%, and 70.6%, respectively, and the concordance index was 0.698 (95% CI 0.656, 0.739). The diagnostic performance was not affected by the demographic features, clinicopathologic characteristics, and co-morbidities of the participants.

CONCLUSIONS

The present trial showed an accuracy of 70.6% for the three-protein signature. Considering the value of blood-based biomarkers for the early detection of breast malignancies, further evaluation of this proteomic assay is warranted in larger, population-level trials. This Multi-protein Assessment using Serum to deTermine breast lesion malignancy (MAST) was registered at the Clinical Research Information Service of Korea with the identification number of KCT0004847 ( https://cris.nih.go.kr ).

Diagnostic performance improvement with combined use of proteomics biomarker assay and breast ultrasound

PURPOSE

To investigate the combined use of blood-based 3-protein signature and breast ultrasound (US) for validating US-detected lesions.

METHODS

From July 2011 to April 2020, women who underwent whole-breast US within at least 6 months from sampling period were retrospectively included. Blood-based 3-protein signature (Mastocheck®) value and US findings were evaluated. Following outcome measures were compared between US alone and the combination of Mastocheck® value with US: sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and biopsy rate.

RESULTS

Among the 237 women included, 59 (24.9%) were healthy individuals and 178 (75.1%) cancer patients. Mean size of cancers was 1.2 ± 0.8 cm. Median value of Mastocheck® was significantly different between nonmalignant (- 0.24, interquartile range [IQR] - 0.48, - 0.03) and malignant lesions (0.55, IQR - 0.03, 1.42) (P < .001). Utilizing Mastocheck® value with US increased the AUC from 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61, 0.73) to 0.81 (95% CI 0.75, 0.88; P < .001), and specificity from 35.6 (95% CI 23.4, 47.8) to 64.4% (95% CI 52.2, 76.6; P < .001) without loss in sensitivity. PPV was increased from 82.2 (95% CI 77.1, 87.3) to 89.3% (95% CI 85.0, 93.6; P < .001), and biopsy rate was significantly decreased from 79.3 (188/237) to 72.1% (171/237) (P < .001). Consistent improvements in specificity, PPV, and AUC were observed in asymptomatic women, in women with dense breast, and in those with normal/benign mammographic findings.

CONCLUSION

Mastocheck® is an effective tool that can be used with US to improve diagnostic specificity and reduce false-positive findings and unnecessary biopsies.

Targeted liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry analysis of proteins: Basic principles, applications, and perspectives

Liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) is now the main analytical method for the identification and quantification of peptides and proteins in biological samples. In modern research, identification of biomarkers and their quantitative comparison between samples are becoming increasingly important for discovery, validation, and monitoring. Such data can be obtained following specific signals after fragmentation of peptides using multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) and parallel reaction monitoring (PRM) methods, with high specificity, accuracy, and reproducibility. In addition, these methods allow measurement of the amount of post-translationally modified forms and isoforms of proteins. This review article describes the basic principles of MRM assays, guidelines for sample preparation, recent advanced MRM-based strategies, applications and illustrative perspectives of MRM/PRM methods in clinical research and molecular biology.

Proteomic Interrogation in Cancer Biomarker

Biomarkers factor into the diagnosis and treatment of almost every patient with cancer. The innovation in proteomics follows improvement of mass spectrometry techniques and data processing strategy. Recently, proteomics and typical biological studies have been the answer for clinical applications. The clinical proteomics techniques are now actively adapted to protein identification in large patient cohort, biomarker development for more sensitive and specific screening based on quantitative data. And, it is important for clinical, translational researchers to be acutely aware of the issues surrounding appropriate biomarker development, in order to facilitate entry of clinically useful biomarkers into the clinic. Here, we discuss in detail include the case research for clinical proteomics. Furthermore, we give an overview on the current developments and novel findings in proteomics-based cancer biomarker research.

Quantitative Proteomic Approach for Discriminating Major Depressive Disorder and Bipolar Disorder by Multiple Reaction Monitoring-Mass Spectrometry

Because major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BD) manifest with similar symptoms, misdiagnosis is a persistent issue, necessitating their differentiation through objective methods. This study was aimed to differentiate between these disorders using a targeted proteomic approach. Multiple reaction monitoring-mass spectrometry (MRM-MS) analysis was performed to quantify protein targets regarding the two disorders in plasma samples of 270 individuals (90 MDD, 90 BD, and 90 healthy controls (HCs)). In the training set (72 MDD and 72 BD), a generalizable model comprising nine proteins was developed. The model was evaluated in the test set (18 MDD and 18 BD). The model demonstrated a good performance (area under the curve (AUC) >0.8) in discriminating MDD from BD in the training (AUC = 0.84) and test sets (AUC = 0.81) and in distinguishing MDD from BD without current hypomanic/manic/mixed symptoms (90 MDD and 75 BD) (AUC = 0.83). Subsequently, the model demonstrated excellent performance for drug-free MDD versus BD (11 MDD and 10 BD) (AUC = 0.96) and good performance for MDD versus HC (AUC = 0.87) and BD versus HC (AUC = 0.86). Furthermore, the nine proteins were associated with neuro, oxidative/nitrosative stress, and immunity/inflammation-related biological functions. This proof-of-concept study introduces a potential model for distinguishing between the two disorders.

A Quest for New Cancer Diagnosis, Prognosis and Prediction Biomarkers and Their Use in Biosensors Development

Traditional techniques for cancer diagnosis, such as nuclear magnetic resonance, ultrasound and tissue analysis, require sophisticated devices and highly trained personnel, which are characterized by elevated operation costs. The use of biomarkers has emerged as an alternative for cancer diagnosis, prognosis and prediction because their measurement in tissues or fluids, such as blood, urine or saliva, is characterized by shorter processing times. However, the biomarkers used currently, and the techniques used for their measurement, including ELISA, western-blot, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or immunohistochemistry, possess low sensitivity and specificity. Therefore, the search for new proteomic, genomic or immunological biomarkers and the development of new noninvasive, easier and cheaper techniques that meet the sensitivity and specificity criteria for the diagnosis, prognosis and prediction of this disease has become a relevant topic. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview about the search for new cancer biomarkers, including the strategies that must be followed to identify them, as well as presenting the latest advances in the development of biosensors that possess a high potential for cancer diagnosis, prognosis and prediction, mainly focusing on their relevance in lung, prostate and breast cancers.