Molecular and metabonomic profiling of ejaculate fluid in prostate cancer detection

Teng, L., Buck, M., Scells, B., Clarke, R. A., Samaratunga, M. L. T. H., Yaxley, J., Gianduzzo, T., Coughlin, G., Lavin, M. F. and Gardiner, R. A. (2010). Molecular and metabonomic profiling of ejaculate fluid in prostate cancer detection. In: Abstracts of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Urological Society of Australia and New Zealand. 63rd Annual Meeting of the Urological Society of Australia and New Zealand, Perth, Australia, (2-2). 21-24 February 2010. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09122.x


Author Teng, L.
Buck, M.
Scells, B.
Clarke, R. A.
Samaratunga, M. L. T. H.
Yaxley, J.
Gianduzzo, T.
Coughlin, G.
Lavin, M. F.
Gardiner, R. A.
Title of paper Molecular and metabonomic profiling of ejaculate fluid in prostate cancer detection
Conference name 63rd Annual Meeting of the Urological Society of Australia and New Zealand
Conference location Perth, Australia
Conference dates 21-24 February 2010
Proceedings title Abstracts of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Urological Society of Australia and New Zealand   Check publisher's open access policy
Journal name BJU International   Check publisher's open access policy
Place of Publication Oxford, U.K.
Publisher Wiley-Blackwell Publishing
Publication Year 2010
Sub-type Published abstract
DOI 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09122.x
ISSN 1464-4096
1464-410X
Volume 105
Issue S1
Start page 2
End page 2
Total pages 1
Language eng
Formatted Abstract/Summary
Introduction: Unlike prostatic massage,
ejaculate contains seminal plasma as well as
disaggregated prostatic cells. In addition, ejaculate
is more likely to reflect contributions from all
parts of the gland as opposed to prostatic
massage which targets only the back of the
prostate. A further concern with prostatic
massage is the potential risk of seeding prostate
cancer cells systemically.
We employed a short list of discriminating
mRNA markers to complement the non-coding
gene PCA3 for molecular profiling of prostatic
fluid. Initial testing for PCA3 in ejaculate
indicated a 63% sensitivity and 72.5%
specificity for 71 patients, consistent with
findings for post-prostatic massage urine-based
studies. However, in keeping with our
hypothesis that multiple markers will be
required for accurate detection of prostate
cancer, it has become obvious that PCA3 by
itself is inadequate in the non-invasive
detection of prostate cancer.
Methods: Seventy-five men, prior to
proceeding to TRUS biopsy, provided ejaculate. RNA
was extracted, expanded and stored as cDNA prior
to PCR for b2M & PSA (reference markers), PCA3,
Hepsin, PSMA and Claudin 4. Data analysis
included serum PSA. More recently we have
included PCR for TMPRSS2:ERG to our profile and
are currently integrating metabonomic
profiling with NMR spectroscopy for
citrate, choline, spermidine, TMAO and betaine.
Results and Conclusions: Based on ROC
findings for PCA3 plus Hepsin plus serum PSA,
a sensitivity of 77%, a specificity of 68% for a
negative predictive value of 77%. was provided
These results will be updated and combined
with those from fusion gene RT-PCR and NMR
spectroscopy.

Q-Index Code EX
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status UQ

 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 0 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Sun, 06 Jun 2010, 00:07:32 EST