Samantha Larkin

BACKGROUND: Metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) has no curative treatment options. Some forms of PCa are indolent and slow growing, while others metastasise quickly and may prove fatal within a very short time. The basis of this variable prognosis is poorly understood, despite considerable research. The aim of this study was to identify markers associated with the progression of PCa. METHODS: Artificial neuronal network analysis combined with data from literature and previous work produced a panel of putative PCa progression markers, which were used in a transcriptomic analysis of 29 radical prostatectomy samples and correlated with clinical outcome. RESULTS: Statistical analysis yielded seven putative markers of PCa progression, ANPEP, ABL1, PSCA, EFNA1, HSPB1, INMT and TRIP13. Two data transformation methods were utilised with only markers that were significant in both selected for further analysis. ANPEP and EFNA1 were significantly correlated with Gleason score. Models of progression co-utilising markers ANPEP and ABL1 or ANPEP and PSCA had the ability to correctly predict indolent or aggressive disease, based on Gleason score, in 89.7% and 86.2% of cases, respectively. Another model of TRIP13 expression in combination with preoperative PSA level and Gleason score was able to correctly predict recurrence in 85.7% of cases. CONCLUSION: This proof of principle study demonstrates a novel association of carcinogenic and tumourigenic gene expression with PCa stage and prognosis.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common male cancer in the United Kingdom and we aimed to identify clinically relevant biomarkers corresponding to stage progression of the disease. METHODS: We used enhanced proteomic profiling of PCa progression using iTRAQ 3D LC mass spectrometry on high-quality serum samples to identify biomarkers of PCa. RESULTS: We identified >1000 proteins. Following specific inclusion/exclusion criteria we targeted seven proteins of which two were validated by ELISA and six potentially interacted forming an 'interactome' with only a single protein linking each marker. This network also includes accepted cancer markers, such as TNF, STAT3, NF-κB and IL6. CONCLUSIONS: Our linked and interrelated biomarker network highlights the potential utility of six of our seven markers as a panel for diagnosing PCa and, critically, in determining the stage of the disease. Our validation analysis of the MS-identified proteins found that SAA alongside KLK3 may improve categorisation of PCa than by KLK3 alone, and that TSR1, although not significant in this model, might also be a clinically relevant biomarker.

Here we describe protocols for the dopaminergic differentiation of pluripotent stem cells. We have optimized and compared two distinct protocols, both of which are chemically defined and applicable to both embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cells. First, we present a five-step method based on rosette formation (Basic Protocol 1); then we describe a monolayer paradigm based on inhibition of alternate developmental pathways (Basic Protocol 2). Directed differentiation of pluripotent cells into specific cell types is a crucial step towards understanding human development and realizing the biomedical relevance of these cells, whether for replacement therapy or disease modeling.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of prostate cancer (PCa) has increased in recent years due to the aging of the population and increased testing; however, mortality rates have remained largely unchanged. Studies have shown deficiencies in predicting patient outcome for both of the major PCa diagnostic tools, namely prostate specific antigen (PSA) and transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. Therefore, serum biomarkers are needed that accurately predict prognosis of PCa (indolent vs. aggressive) and can thus inform clinical management. AIM: This study uses surface enhanced laser desorption/ionization time of flight mass spectrometry (SELDI-TOF-MS) mass spectrometry analysis to identify differential serum protein expression between PCa patients with indolent vs. aggressive disease categorised by Gleason grade and biochemical recurrence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 99 serum samples were selected for analysis. According to Gleason score, indolent (45 samples) and aggressive (54) forms of PCa were compared using univariate analysis. The same samples were then separated into groups of different recurrence status (10 metastatic, 15 biochemical recurrences and 70 non-recurrences) and subjected to univariate analysis in the same way. The data from Gleason score and recurrence groups were then analysed using multivariate statistical analysis to improve PCa biomarker classification. RESULTS: The comparison between serum protein spectra from indolent and aggressive samples resulted in the identification of twenty-six differentially expressed protein peaks (p<0.05), of which twenty proteins were found with 99% confidence. A total of 18 differentially expressed proteins (p<0.05) were found to distinguish between recurrence groups; three of these were robust with p<0.01. Sensitivity and specificity within the Gleason score group was 73.3% and 60% respectively and for the recurrence group 70% and 62.5%. CONCLUSION: SELDI-TOF-MS technology has facilitated the discovery of prognostic biomarkers in serum that can successfully discriminate aggressive from indolent PCa and also differentiate between recurrence groups.

Despite advances in molecular medicine, genomics, proteomics and translational research, prostate cancer remains the second most common cause of cancer-related mortality for men in the Western world. Clearly, early detection, targeted treatment and post-treatment monitoring are vital tools to combat this disease. Tumor markers can be useful for diagnosis and early detection of cancer, assessment of prognosis, prediction of therapeutic effect and treatment monitoring. Such tumor markers include prostate-specific antigen (prostate), cancer antigen (CA)15.3 (breast), CA125 (ovarian), CA19.9 (gastrointestinal) and serum alpha-fetoprotein (testicular cancer). However, all of these biomarkers lack sensitivity and specificity and, therefore, there is a large drive towards proteomic biomarker discovery. Current research efforts are directed towards discovering biosignatures from biological samples using novel proteomic technologies that provide high-throughput, in-depth analysis and quantification of the proteome. Several of these studies have revealed promising biomarkers for use in diagnosis, assessment of prognosis, and targeting treatment of prostate cancer. This review focuses on prostate cancer proteomic biomarker discovery and its future potential.