Diagnostic, Prognostic, and Predictive Molecular Biomarkers and the Utility of Molecular Imaging in Common Gastrointestinal Tumors

Idowu, Michael O.; Laudadio, Jennifer; Rizzo, Kathryn

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/890805

BioMed Research International

On this page

References Copyright Related Articles

Special Issue

Diagnostic, Prognostic, and Predictive Molecular Biomarkers and the Utility of Molecular Imaging in Common Gastrointestinal Tumors

View this Special Issue

Editorial | Open Access

Volume 2015 | Article ID 890805 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/890805

Diagnostic, Prognostic, and Predictive Molecular Biomarkers and the Utility of Molecular Imaging in Common Gastrointestinal Tumors

Michael O. Idowu,¹Jennifer Laudadio,²and Kathryn Rizzo¹

Received07 May 2015

Accepted07 May 2015

Published04 Nov 2015

The exponential increase in the use of molecular biomarkers as diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive aids in the management of cancer patients highlights the increasing importance of molecular biology in oncology. The clinical utility of some molecular biomarkers like KRAS (Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog), BRAF (B-Raf protooncogene, serine/threonine kinase), PIK3CA (phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase, catalytic subunit alpha), KIT (commonly known as cKit) (v-kit Hardy-Zuckerman 4 feline sarcoma viral oncogene homolog), ERBB2 (commonly known as HER2) (erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2), and EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor) among others has been validated in gastrointestinal and pancreatobiliary tumors. However, the clinical utility of some of molecular biomarkers is still being investigated and validated. Although technically not a “molecular biomarker,” the utility of “molecular imaging” is being elucidated.

This special issue covers some of the biomarkers currently in current clinical use and others being investigated, including the following: (i) MMP14 (previously known as MT1-MMP) (matrix metallopeptidase 14 (membrane-inserted) or previously known asmatrix metalloproteinase 14 (membrane-inserted)) and role in colorectal cancer, potential utility being described in other cancers [1–4], (ii) SLC6A14 (solute carrier family 6 (amino acid transporter), member 14) and potential role in pancreatic cancer, potential utility in other cancers being described [5–7], (iii) molecular profiling [8–14] of tumors to detect potentially actionable mutation or variant in pancreatic cancers, and (iv) potential utility of Raman spectroscopy in evaluation of gastrointestinal lesions. Potential utility of this technology has been described in other tumors [15–20].

Michael O. Idowu
Jennifer Laudadio
Kathryn Rizzo

References

Y. Li, G. Cai, S. Yuan et al., “The overexpression membrane type 1 matrix metalloproteinase is associated with the progression and prognosis in breast cancer,” American Journal of Translational Research, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 120–127, 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
D. Trudel, P. Desmeules, S. Turcotte et al., “Visual and automated assessment of matrix metalloproteinase-14 tissue expression for the evaluation of ovarian cancer prognosis,” Modern Pathology, vol. 27, no. 10, pp. 1394–1404, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Wang, X. Zhang, L. Huang, J. Li, S. Qu, and F. Pan, “Matrix metalloproteinase-14 expression and its prognostic value in cervical carcinoma,” Cell Biochemistry and Biophysics, vol. 70, no. 2, pp. 729–734, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T.-H. Yan, Z.-H. Lin, J.-H. Jiang et al., “Matrix metalloproteinase 14 overexpression is correlated with the progression and poor prognosis of nasopharyngeal carcinoma,” Archives of Medical Research, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Gupta, P. D. Prasad, S. Ghamande et al., “Up-regulation of the amino acid transporter ATB^0,+ (SLC6A14) in carcinoma of the cervix,” Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 8–13, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Karunakaran, S. Ramachandran, V. Coothankandaswamy et al., “SLC6A14 (ATB^0,+) protein, a highly concentrative and broad specific amino acid transporter, is a novel and effective drug target for treatment of estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer,” The Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 286, no. 36, pp. 31830–31838, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Karunakaran, N. S. Umapathy, M. Thangaraju et al., “Interaction of tryptophan derivatives with SLC6A14 (ATB⁰,⁺) reveals the potential of the transporter as a drug target for cancer chemotherapy,” Biochemical Journal, vol. 414, no. 3, pp. 343–355, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Bogaert and H. Prenen, “Molecular genetics of colorectal cancer,” Annals of Gastroenterology, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 9–14, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
A. E. Cyr and J. A. Margenthaler, “Molecular profiling of breast cancer,” Surgical Oncology Clinics of North America, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 451–462, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. K. Dutta and I. Dutta, “Origin of ovarian cancer: Molecular profiling,” Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India, vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 152–157, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. L. Richer, J. M. Friel, V. M. Carson, L. J. Inge, and T. G. Whitsett, “Genomic profiling toward precision medicine in non-small cell lung cancer: getting beyond EGFR,” Pharmacogenomics and Personalized Medicine, vol. 8, pp. 63–79, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. R. Schoenborn, P. Nelson, and M. Fang, “Genomic profiling defines subtypes of prostate cancer with the potential for therapeutic stratification,” Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 19, no. 15, pp. 4058–4066, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. L. Wood, J. A. Westbrook, and J. E. Brown, “Omic-profiling in breast cancer metastasis to bone: implications for mechanisms, biomarkers and treatment,” Cancer Treatment Reviews, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 139–152, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Wu, J. M. Schwartz, G. Brabant, and G. Nenadic, “Molecular profiling of thyroid cancer subtypes using large-scale text mining,” BMC Medical Genomics, vol. 7, supplement 3, article S3, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. M. Barroso, R. W. Smits, T. C. Bakker Schut et al., “Discrimination between oral cancer and healthy tissue based on water content determined by Raman spectroscopy,” Analytical Chemistry, vol. 87, no. 4, pp. 2419–2426, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Eberhardt, C. Stiebing, C. Matthäus, M. Schmitt, and J. Popp, “Advantages and limitations of Raman spectroscopy for molecular diagnostics: an update,” Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics, pp. 1–15, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Kong, C. Kendall, N. Stone, and I. Notingher, “Raman spectroscopy for medical diagnostics—from in-vitro biofluid assays to in-vivo cancer detection,” Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Rubina and C. M. Krishna, “Raman spectroscopy in cervical cancers: an update,” Journal of Cancer Research and Therapeutics, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 10–17, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Tolstik, C. Marquardt, C. Beleites et al., “Classification and prediction of HCC tissues by Raman imaging with identification of fatty acids as potential lipid biomarkers,” Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology, vol. 141, no. 3, pp. 407–418, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. P. Ye, J. Hu, L. Liang, and C. Y. Zhang, “Surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy for simultaneous sensitive detection of multiple microRNAs in lung cancer cells,” Chemical Communications, vol. 50, no. 80, pp. 11883–11886, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2015 Michael O. Idowu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

1108

Downloads

663

Citations