Technical considerations in PCR-based assay design for diagnostic DNA methylation cancer biomarkers
Background DNA methylation biomarkers for early detection, risk stratification and treatment response in cancer have been of great interest over the past decades. Nevertheless, clinical implementation of these biomarkers is limited, as only < 1% of the identified biomarkers is translated into a c...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | |
container_title | |
container_volume | |
creator | Massen, Maartje Lommen, Kim Wouters, Kim A. D Vandersmissen, Johan Van Criekinge, Wim Herman, James G Melotte, Veerle Schouten, Leo J van Engeland, Manon Smits, Kim M |
description | Background DNA methylation biomarkers for early detection, risk stratification and treatment response in cancer have been of great interest over the past decades. Nevertheless, clinical implementation of these biomarkers is limited, as only < 1% of the identified biomarkers is translated into a clinical or commercial setting. Technical factors such as a suboptimal genomic location of the assay and inefficient primer or probe design have been emphasized as important pitfalls in biomarker research. Here, we use eleven diagnostic DNA methylation biomarkers for colorectal cancer (ALX4, APC, CDKN2A, MGMT, MLH1, NDRG4, SDC2, SFRP1, SFRP2, TFPI1 and VIM), previously described in a systematic literature search, to evaluate these pitfalls. Results To assess the genomic assay location, the optimal genomic locations according to TCGA data were extracted and compared to the genomic locations used in the published assays for all eleven biomarkers. In addition, all primers and probes were technically evaluated according to several criteria, based on literature and expert opinion. Both assay location and assay design quality varied widely among studies. Conclusions Large variation in both assay location and design hinders the development of future DNA methylation biomarkers as well as inter-study comparability. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>ghent</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_ghent_librecat_oai_archive_ugent_be_01GWXYRNM91PKF1A28FRSZZW9E</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>oai_archive_ugent_be_01GWXYRNM91PKF1A28FRSZZW9E</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-ghent_librecat_oai_archive_ugent_be_01GWXYRNM91PKF1A28FRSZZW9E3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqtjNFKw0AQRfdBwaL9h_mBQLbFNvtYaqJQLCUttPZlmWymyWi6Czur0L-3ip_gfbkHLufeqJEuZkU2z-ePd2os8p5fMzXG6Hyk3I5c79nhAC544ZYiJr4SsIfNss4aFGoBRfACLQl3Hk4hQsvY-SCJHTytF3Cm1F-GXxMcekcRGg5njB8U5UHdnnAQGv_1vSqrcrd8ybqefLIDN5EcJhuQLUbX8xfZz-5nasjm-nl_eKvXr0ZvVpVeTIqq3h6Pe1NO_-vnG4fPXqM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Institutional Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Technical considerations in PCR-based assay design for diagnostic DNA methylation cancer biomarkers</title><source>Ghent University Academic Bibliography</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</source><creator>Massen, Maartje ; Lommen, Kim ; Wouters, Kim A. D ; Vandersmissen, Johan ; Van Criekinge, Wim ; Herman, James G ; Melotte, Veerle ; Schouten, Leo J ; van Engeland, Manon ; Smits, Kim M</creator><creatorcontrib>Massen, Maartje ; Lommen, Kim ; Wouters, Kim A. D ; Vandersmissen, Johan ; Van Criekinge, Wim ; Herman, James G ; Melotte, Veerle ; Schouten, Leo J ; van Engeland, Manon ; Smits, Kim M</creatorcontrib><description>Background DNA methylation biomarkers for early detection, risk stratification and treatment response in cancer have been of great interest over the past decades. Nevertheless, clinical implementation of these biomarkers is limited, as only < 1% of the identified biomarkers is translated into a clinical or commercial setting. Technical factors such as a suboptimal genomic location of the assay and inefficient primer or probe design have been emphasized as important pitfalls in biomarker research. Here, we use eleven diagnostic DNA methylation biomarkers for colorectal cancer (ALX4, APC, CDKN2A, MGMT, MLH1, NDRG4, SDC2, SFRP1, SFRP2, TFPI1 and VIM), previously described in a systematic literature search, to evaluate these pitfalls. Results To assess the genomic assay location, the optimal genomic locations according to TCGA data were extracted and compared to the genomic locations used in the published assays for all eleven biomarkers. In addition, all primers and probes were technically evaluated according to several criteria, based on literature and expert opinion. Both assay location and assay design quality varied widely among studies. Conclusions Large variation in both assay location and design hinders the development of future DNA methylation biomarkers as well as inter-study comparability.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1868-7075</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1868-7083</identifier><language>eng</language><subject>Assay design ; Biology and Life Sciences ; Biomarkers ; Cancer biomarkers ; CELL-FREE DNA ; COLORECTAL-CANCER ; CPG ISLAND HYPERMETHYLATION ; Diagnosis ; DNA ; DNA methylation ; Epigenetics ; FECAL ; GENE METHYLATION ; Genomic location ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; POTENTIAL MARKER ; PROMOTER HYPERMETHYLATION ; SERUM ; SFRP2 ; STOOL SAMPLES</subject><creationdate>2022</creationdate><rights>Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC-BY 4.0) info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,315,776,780,4010,27837</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Massen, Maartje</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lommen, Kim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wouters, Kim A. D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vandersmissen, Johan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Criekinge, Wim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herman, James G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melotte, Veerle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schouten, Leo J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Engeland, Manon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smits, Kim M</creatorcontrib><title>Technical considerations in PCR-based assay design for diagnostic DNA methylation cancer biomarkers</title><description>Background DNA methylation biomarkers for early detection, risk stratification and treatment response in cancer have been of great interest over the past decades. Nevertheless, clinical implementation of these biomarkers is limited, as only < 1% of the identified biomarkers is translated into a clinical or commercial setting. Technical factors such as a suboptimal genomic location of the assay and inefficient primer or probe design have been emphasized as important pitfalls in biomarker research. Here, we use eleven diagnostic DNA methylation biomarkers for colorectal cancer (ALX4, APC, CDKN2A, MGMT, MLH1, NDRG4, SDC2, SFRP1, SFRP2, TFPI1 and VIM), previously described in a systematic literature search, to evaluate these pitfalls. Results To assess the genomic assay location, the optimal genomic locations according to TCGA data were extracted and compared to the genomic locations used in the published assays for all eleven biomarkers. In addition, all primers and probes were technically evaluated according to several criteria, based on literature and expert opinion. Both assay location and assay design quality varied widely among studies. Conclusions Large variation in both assay location and design hinders the development of future DNA methylation biomarkers as well as inter-study comparability.</description><subject>Assay design</subject><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Biomarkers</subject><subject>Cancer biomarkers</subject><subject>CELL-FREE DNA</subject><subject>COLORECTAL-CANCER</subject><subject>CPG ISLAND HYPERMETHYLATION</subject><subject>Diagnosis</subject><subject>DNA</subject><subject>DNA methylation</subject><subject>Epigenetics</subject><subject>FECAL</subject><subject>GENE METHYLATION</subject><subject>Genomic location</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>POTENTIAL MARKER</subject><subject>PROMOTER HYPERMETHYLATION</subject><subject>SERUM</subject><subject>SFRP2</subject><subject>STOOL SAMPLES</subject><issn>1868-7075</issn><issn>1868-7083</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ADGLB</sourceid><recordid>eNqtjNFKw0AQRfdBwaL9h_mBQLbFNvtYaqJQLCUttPZlmWymyWi6Czur0L-3ip_gfbkHLufeqJEuZkU2z-ePd2os8p5fMzXG6Hyk3I5c79nhAC544ZYiJr4SsIfNss4aFGoBRfACLQl3Hk4hQsvY-SCJHTytF3Cm1F-GXxMcekcRGg5njB8U5UHdnnAQGv_1vSqrcrd8ybqefLIDN5EcJhuQLUbX8xfZz-5nasjm-nl_eKvXr0ZvVpVeTIqq3h6Pe1NO_-vnG4fPXqM</recordid><startdate>2022</startdate><enddate>2022</enddate><creator>Massen, Maartje</creator><creator>Lommen, Kim</creator><creator>Wouters, Kim A. D</creator><creator>Vandersmissen, Johan</creator><creator>Van Criekinge, Wim</creator><creator>Herman, James G</creator><creator>Melotte, Veerle</creator><creator>Schouten, Leo J</creator><creator>van Engeland, Manon</creator><creator>Smits, Kim M</creator><scope>ADGLB</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2022</creationdate><title>Technical considerations in PCR-based assay design for diagnostic DNA methylation cancer biomarkers</title><author>Massen, Maartje ; Lommen, Kim ; Wouters, Kim A. D ; Vandersmissen, Johan ; Van Criekinge, Wim ; Herman, James G ; Melotte, Veerle ; Schouten, Leo J ; van Engeland, Manon ; Smits, Kim M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-ghent_librecat_oai_archive_ugent_be_01GWXYRNM91PKF1A28FRSZZW9E3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Assay design</topic><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Biomarkers</topic><topic>Cancer biomarkers</topic><topic>CELL-FREE DNA</topic><topic>COLORECTAL-CANCER</topic><topic>CPG ISLAND HYPERMETHYLATION</topic><topic>Diagnosis</topic><topic>DNA</topic><topic>DNA methylation</topic><topic>Epigenetics</topic><topic>FECAL</topic><topic>GENE METHYLATION</topic><topic>Genomic location</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>POTENTIAL MARKER</topic><topic>PROMOTER HYPERMETHYLATION</topic><topic>SERUM</topic><topic>SFRP2</topic><topic>STOOL SAMPLES</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Massen, Maartje</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lommen, Kim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wouters, Kim A. D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vandersmissen, Johan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Criekinge, Wim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herman, James G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melotte, Veerle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schouten, Leo J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Engeland, Manon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smits, Kim M</creatorcontrib><collection>Ghent University Academic Bibliography</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Massen, Maartje</au><au>Lommen, Kim</au><au>Wouters, Kim A. D</au><au>Vandersmissen, Johan</au><au>Van Criekinge, Wim</au><au>Herman, James G</au><au>Melotte, Veerle</au><au>Schouten, Leo J</au><au>van Engeland, Manon</au><au>Smits, Kim M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Technical considerations in PCR-based assay design for diagnostic DNA methylation cancer biomarkers</atitle><date>2022</date><risdate>2022</risdate><issn>1868-7075</issn><issn>1868-7083</issn><abstract>Background DNA methylation biomarkers for early detection, risk stratification and treatment response in cancer have been of great interest over the past decades. Nevertheless, clinical implementation of these biomarkers is limited, as only < 1% of the identified biomarkers is translated into a clinical or commercial setting. Technical factors such as a suboptimal genomic location of the assay and inefficient primer or probe design have been emphasized as important pitfalls in biomarker research. Here, we use eleven diagnostic DNA methylation biomarkers for colorectal cancer (ALX4, APC, CDKN2A, MGMT, MLH1, NDRG4, SDC2, SFRP1, SFRP2, TFPI1 and VIM), previously described in a systematic literature search, to evaluate these pitfalls. Results To assess the genomic assay location, the optimal genomic locations according to TCGA data were extracted and compared to the genomic locations used in the published assays for all eleven biomarkers. In addition, all primers and probes were technically evaluated according to several criteria, based on literature and expert opinion. Both assay location and assay design quality varied widely among studies. Conclusions Large variation in both assay location and design hinders the development of future DNA methylation biomarkers as well as inter-study comparability.</abstract><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1868-7075 |
ispartof | |
issn | 1868-7075 1868-7083 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_ghent_librecat_oai_archive_ugent_be_01GWXYRNM91PKF1A28FRSZZW9E |
source | Ghent University Academic Bibliography; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings; PubMed Central Open Access; Springer Nature OA Free Journals |
subjects | Assay design Biology and Life Sciences Biomarkers Cancer biomarkers CELL-FREE DNA COLORECTAL-CANCER CPG ISLAND HYPERMETHYLATION Diagnosis DNA DNA methylation Epigenetics FECAL GENE METHYLATION Genomic location Medicine and Health Sciences POTENTIAL MARKER PROMOTER HYPERMETHYLATION SERUM SFRP2 STOOL SAMPLES |
title | Technical considerations in PCR-based assay design for diagnostic DNA methylation cancer biomarkers |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T20%3A45%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-ghent&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Technical%20considerations%20in%20PCR-based%20assay%20design%20for%20diagnostic%20DNA%20methylation%20cancer%20biomarkers&rft.au=Massen,%20Maartje&rft.date=2022&rft.issn=1868-7075&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cghent%3Eoai_archive_ugent_be_01GWXYRNM91PKF1A28FRSZZW9E%3C/ghent%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |