TY - JOUR
T1 - Novel DNA Methylation Biomarker Panel for Detection of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma and High-Grade Dysplasia
AU - Yu, Ming
AU - Moinova, Helen R.
AU - Willbanks, Amber
AU - Cannon, Victoria K.
AU - Wang, Ting
AU - Carter, Kelly
AU - Kaz, Andrew
AU - Reddi, Deepti
AU - Inadomi, John
AU - Luebeck, Georg
AU - Iyer, Prasad G.
AU - Canto, Marcia I.
AU - Wang, Jean S.
AU - Shaheen, Nicholas J.
AU - Thota, Prashanti N.
AU - Willis, Joseph E.
AU - LaFramboise, Thomas
AU - Chak, Amitabh
AU - Markowitz, Sanford D.
AU - Grady, William M.
N1 - Funding Information:
These studies were supported by funding from the NCI (R50CA233042 to M. Yu), NIH (UO1CA152756, RO1CA220004, P30CA015704, U54CA163060, UO1CA086402, UO1CA182940, the Prevent Cancer Foundation to W.M. Grady; P50CA150964 and UO1CA152756 to S.D. Markowitz; U54CA163060 and P30DK097948 to A. Chak). P.G. Iyer receives funding from Exact Sciences, Pentax Medical, and Cernostics. Funding is also provided by the Cottrell Family Fund, Evergreen Fund, and Listwin Foundation to W.M. Grady.
Funding Information:
M. Yu reports a patent for 63/317,906 pending. H.R. Moinova reports personal fees and other support from Lucid Diagnostics, as well as grants from NIH during the conduct of the study; in addition, H.R. Moinova has a patent for WO2016/109712 A1 pending and licensed to Lucid Diagnostics. J. Inadomi reports personal fees from Cernostics outside the submitted work. P.G. Iyer reports grants and personal fees from Exact Sciences and Cernostics, as well as personal fees and nonfinancial support from CDX Medical during the conduct of the study. P.G. Iyer also reports personal fees from Ambu and Medtronic, as well as grants and personal fees from Pentax Medical outside the submitted work. M.I. Canto reports other support from NIH/NCI during the conduct of the study. N.J. Shaheen reports grants from Lucid Diagnostics, Medtronic, Interpace Diagnostics, and CDx Diagnostics, as well as personal fees from Castle Biosciences and Exact Sciences during the conduct of the study. N.J. Shaheen also reports grants from Steris and Pentax, as well as personal fees from Aqua Sciences and Cook Medical outside the submitted work. J.E. Willis reports grants from NCI during the conduct of the study, as well as personal fees from Lucid Diagnostics outside the submitted work; in addition, J.E. Willis has a patent for Lucid Diagnostics issued and licensed. A. Chak reports grants, personal fees, and other support from Lucid Diagnostics during the conduct of the study, as well as personal fees from CDX Diagnostics outside the submitted work; in addition, A. Chak has a patent for WO2016/109712A1 pending and licensed to Lucid Diagnostics. S.D. Markowitz reports grants, personal fees, and other support from Lucid Diagnostics during the conduct of the study. S.D. Markowitz also reports other support from Exact Sciences, as well as personal fees and other support from Amgen outside the submitted work; in addition, S.D. Markowitz has a patent for WO 2016/109712 A1 pending and licensed to Lucid Diagnostics. W.M. Grady reports personal fees from Guardant Health, Freenome, DiaCarta, and Nephron, as well as nonfinancial support
Publisher Copyright:
©2022 American Association for Cancer Research.
PY - 2022/9/1
Y1 - 2022/9/1
N2 - Purpose: Current endoscopy-based screening and surveillance programs have not been proven effective at decreasing esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) mortality, creating an unmet need for effective molecular tests for early detection of this highly lethal cancer. We conducted a genome-wide methylation screen to identify novel methylation markers that distinguish EAC and high-grade dysplasia (HGD) from normal squamous epithelium (SQ) or nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus (NDBE). Experimental Design: DNA methylation profiling of samples from SQ, NDBE, HGD, and EAC was performed using HM450 methylation arrays (Illumina) and reduced-representation bisulfate sequencing. Ultrasensitive methylation-specific droplet digital PCR and next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based bisulfite-sequencing assays were developed to detect the methylation level of candidate CpGs in independent esophageal biopsy and endoscopic brushing samples. Results: Five candidate methylation markers were significantly hypermethylated in HGD/EAC samples compared with SQ or NDBE (P < 0.01) in both esophageal biopsy and endoscopic brushing samples. In an independent set of brushing samples used to construct biomarker panels, a four-marker panel (model 1) demonstrated sensitivity of 85.0% and 90.8% for HGD and EACs respectively, with 84.2% and 97.9% specificity for NDBE and SQ respectively. In a validation set of brushing samples, the panel achieved sensitivity of 80% and 82.5% for HGD and EAC respectively, at specificity of 67.6% and 96.3% for NDBE and SQ samples. Conclusions: A novel DNA methylation marker panel differentiates HGD/EAC from SQ/NDBE. DNA-methylation–based molecular assays hold promise for the detection of HGD/EAC using esophageal brushing samples.
AB - Purpose: Current endoscopy-based screening and surveillance programs have not been proven effective at decreasing esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) mortality, creating an unmet need for effective molecular tests for early detection of this highly lethal cancer. We conducted a genome-wide methylation screen to identify novel methylation markers that distinguish EAC and high-grade dysplasia (HGD) from normal squamous epithelium (SQ) or nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus (NDBE). Experimental Design: DNA methylation profiling of samples from SQ, NDBE, HGD, and EAC was performed using HM450 methylation arrays (Illumina) and reduced-representation bisulfate sequencing. Ultrasensitive methylation-specific droplet digital PCR and next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based bisulfite-sequencing assays were developed to detect the methylation level of candidate CpGs in independent esophageal biopsy and endoscopic brushing samples. Results: Five candidate methylation markers were significantly hypermethylated in HGD/EAC samples compared with SQ or NDBE (P < 0.01) in both esophageal biopsy and endoscopic brushing samples. In an independent set of brushing samples used to construct biomarker panels, a four-marker panel (model 1) demonstrated sensitivity of 85.0% and 90.8% for HGD and EACs respectively, with 84.2% and 97.9% specificity for NDBE and SQ respectively. In a validation set of brushing samples, the panel achieved sensitivity of 80% and 82.5% for HGD and EAC respectively, at specificity of 67.6% and 96.3% for NDBE and SQ samples. Conclusions: A novel DNA methylation marker panel differentiates HGD/EAC from SQ/NDBE. DNA-methylation–based molecular assays hold promise for the detection of HGD/EAC using esophageal brushing samples.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85137137190&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-22-0445
DO - 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-22-0445
M3 - Article
C2 - 35705525
AN - SCOPUS:85137137190
SN - 1078-0432
VL - 28
SP - 3761
EP - 3769
JO - Clinical Cancer Research
JF - Clinical Cancer Research
IS - 17
ER -