Present and future of cancer biomarkers

Eleftherios P. Diamandis

doi:10.1515/cclm-2014-0317

Enjoy 40% off

academic books on De Gruyter Brill *

Article

Present and future of cancer biomarkers

Eleftherios P. Diamandis

Published/Copyright: May 7, 2014

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Submit Manuscript Author Information

From the journal Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) Volume 52 Issue 6

Abstract

The cancer biomarker field appears to be stagnant. Very few, if any, new cancer biomarkers have been introduced into clinical practice the last 20 years. The reason is that most of the newly discovered cancer biomarkers are inferior in terms of sensitivity and specificity to the classical cancer biomarkers that we currently use. The revolutionary technologies of proteomics, genomics, and other omics did not deliver on the promise to discover new and improved cancer biomarkers. However, more recently, the explosive growth of whole genome and exome sequencing has provided for the first time nearly complete mutational landscapes of many cancer types, in thousands of samples. We now know that many of these mutations are only found in cancer. It is thus possible that the mutant proteins encoded by these genes may represent the long-sought, highly specific cancer molecules that we may envision to use as cancer biomarkers. I here speculate that modern mass spectrometry may have the necessary sensitivity and specificity to detect mutant proteins in various biological fluids for the purpose of diagnosis, prognosis, and disease monitoring.

Keywords: cancer biomarkers; mass spectrometry; mutant proteins; p53 gene mutations; whole genome sequencing

Corresponding author: Eleftherios P. Diamandis, MD, PhD, FRCP(C), FRSC, FAAAS, Hold’em for Life Chair in Prostate Cancer Biomarkers, Division Head of Clinical Biochemistry Mount Sinai Hospital and University Health Network, Professor and Head, Division of Clinical Biochemistry Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto Mount Sinai Hospital, Joseph and Wolf Lebovic Center 60 Murray St, 6th floor, Room L6-201 (Box 32), Toronto, ON, M5T 3L9, Canada, Phone: +1 416 5868443, Fax: +1 416 6195521, E-mail: ediamandis@mtsinai.on.ca; and Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada; and Department of Clinical Biochemistry, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada

References

1. Diamandis EP, Hoffman BR, Sturgeon CM. National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry Laboratory Medicine Practice Guidelines for the use of tumor markers. Clin Chem 2008;54:1935–9.10.1373/clinchem.2008.105494Search in Google Scholar PubMed

2. Kulasingam V, Pavlou MP, Diamandis EP. Integrating high-throughput technologies in the quest for effective biomarkers for ovarian cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 2010;10:371–8.10.1038/nrc2831Search in Google Scholar PubMed

3. Diamandis EP. Cancer biomarkers: can we turn recent failures into success? J Natl Cancer Inst 2010;102:1462–7.10.1093/jnci/djq306Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

4. Diamandis EP. Analysis of serum proteomic patterns for early cancer diagnosis: drawing attention to potential problems. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:353–6.10.1093/jnci/djh056Search in Google Scholar PubMed

5. Lawrence MS, Stojanov P, Mermel CH, Robinson JT, Garraway LA, Golub TR, et al. Discovery and saturation analysis of cancer genes across 21 tumour types. Nature 2014;505:495–501.10.1038/nature12912Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

6. Kandoth C, McLellan MD, Vandin F, Ye K, Niu B, Lu C, et al. Mutational landscape and significance across 12 major cancer types. Nature 2013;502:333–9.10.1038/nature12634Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

7. Ashworth A, Hudson TJ. Genomics: comparisons across cancers. Nature 2013;502:306–7.10.1038/502306aSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

8. Yap TA, Gerlinger M, Futreal PA, Pusztai L, Swanton C. Intratumor heterogeneity: seeing the wood for the trees. Sci Transl Med 2012;4:127.10.1126/scitranslmed.3003854Search in Google Scholar PubMed

9. McCluggage WG. Morphological subtypes of ovarian carcinoma: a review with emphasis on new developments and pathogenesis. Pathology 2011;43:420–32.10.1097/PAT.0b013e328348a6e7Search in Google Scholar PubMed

10. Diamandis EP. A repository for “rare” tumor markers? Clin Chem Lab Med 2014;52:795–7.10.1515/cclm-2014-0012Search in Google Scholar PubMed

11. Kinde I, Bettegowda C, Wang Y, Wu J, Agrawal N, Shih Ie, et al. Evaluation of DNA from the Papanicolaou test to detect ovarian and endometrial cancers. Sci Transl Med 2013;5:167ra4.10.1126/scitranslmed.3004952Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

12. Drabovich AP, Dimitromanolakis A, Saraon P, Soosaipillai A, Batruch I, Mullen B, et al. Differential diagnosis of azoospermia with proteomic biomarkers ECM1 and TEX101 quantified in seminal plasma. Sci Transl Med 2013;5:212ra160.10.1126/scitranslmed.3006260Search in Google Scholar PubMed

13. Diamandis EP, Bast RC Jr, Gold P, Chu TM, Magnani JL. Reflection on the discovery of carcinoembryonic antigen, prostate-specific antigen, and cancer antigens CA125 and CA19-9. Clin Chem 2013;59:22–31.10.1373/clinchem.2012.187047Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

14. Rittenhouse H, Blase A, Shamel B, Schalken J, Groskopf J. The long and winding road to FDA approval of a novel prostate cancer test: our story. Clin Chem 2013;59:32–4.10.1373/clinchem.2012.198739Search in Google Scholar PubMed

15. Imperiale TF, Ransohoff DF, Itzkowitz SH, Levin TR, Lavin P, Lidgard GP, et al. Multitarget stool DNA testing for colorectal-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1311194. [Epub ahead of print 19 Mar 2014].10.1056/NEJMoa1311194Search in Google Scholar PubMed

16. Pavlou MP, Diamandis EP, Blasutig IM. The long journey of cancer biomarkers from the bench to the clinic. Clin Chem 2013;59:147–57.10.1373/clinchem.2012.184614Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Received: 2014-3-24

Accepted: 2014-4-3

Published Online: 2014-5-7

Published in Print: 2014-6-1

You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2014-0317

Keywords for this article

cancer biomarkers; mass spectrometry; mutant proteins; p53 gene mutations; whole genome sequencing