% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Bhardwaj:167344,
author = {M. Bhardwaj$^*$ and T. Terzer$^*$ and P. Schrotz-King$^*$
and H. Brenner$^*$},
title = {{C}omparison of {P}roteomic {T}echnologies for
{B}lood-{B}ased {D}etection of {C}olorectal {C}ancer.},
journal = {International journal of molecular sciences},
volume = {22},
number = {3},
issn = {1422-0067},
address = {Basel},
publisher = {Molecular Diversity Preservation International},
reportid = {DKFZ-2021-00291},
pages = {1189},
year = {2021},
note = {#EA:C070#LA:C070#},
abstract = {Blood-based protein biomarkers are increasingly being
explored as supplementary or efficient alternatives for
population-based screening of colorectal cancer (CRC). The
objective of the current study was to compare the diagnostic
potential of proteins measured with different proteomic
technologies. The concentrations of protein biomarkers were
measured using proximity extension assays (PEAs), liquid
chromatography/multiple reaction monitoring-mass
spectrometry (LC/MRM-MS) and quantibody microarrays (QMAs)
in plasma samples of 56 CRC patients and 99 participants
free of neoplasms. In another approach, proteins were
measured in serum samples of 30 CRC cases and 30
participants free of neoplasm using immunome full-length
functional protein arrays (IpAs). From all the measurements,
9, 6, 35 and 14 protein biomarkers overlapped for
comparative evaluation of (a) PEA and LC/MRM-MS, (b) PEA and
QMA, (c) PEA and IpA, and (d) LC/MRM-MS and IpA
measurements, respectively. Correlation analysis was
performed, along with calculation of the area under the
curve (AUC) for assessing the diagnostic potential of each
biomarker. DeLong's test was performed to assess the
differences in AUC. Evaluation of the nine biomarkers
measured with PEA and LC/MRM-MS displayed correlation
coefficients >+0.6, similar AUCs and DeLong's p-values
indicating no differences in AUCs for biomarkers like
insulin-like growth factor binding protein 2 (IGFBP2),
matrix metalloproteinase 9 (MMP9) and serum paraoxonase
lactonase 3 (PON3). Comparing six proteins measured with PEA
and QMA showed good correlation and similar diagnostic
performance for only one protein, growth differentiation
factor 15 (GDF15). The comparison of 35 proteins measured
with IpA and PEA and 14 proteins analyzed with IpA and
LC/MRM-MS revealed poor concordance and comparatively better
AUCs when measured with PEA and LC/MRM-MS. The comparison of
different proteomic technologies suggests the superior
performance of novel technologies like PEA and LC/MRM-MS
over the assessed array-based technologies in
blood-protein-based early detection of CRC.},
keywords = {LC/MRM-MS (Other) / biomarkers (Other) / colorectal cancer
(Other) / diagnosis (Other) / microarray (Other) / plasma
proteins (Other) / proximity extension assays (Other)},
cin = {C120 / C070 / HD01 / C060},
ddc = {540},
cid = {I:(DE-He78)C120-20160331 / I:(DE-He78)C070-20160331 /
I:(DE-He78)HD01-20160331 / I:(DE-He78)C060-20160331},
pnm = {313 - Krebsrisikofaktoren und Prävention (POF4-313)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-313},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:33530402},
doi = {10.3390/ijms22031189},
url = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/167344},
}