4.7 Article

A highly predictive autoantibody-based biomarker panel for prognosis in early-stage NSCLC with potential therapeutic implications

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 126, 期 2, 页码 238-246

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41416-021-01572-x

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. University of Birmingham Development and Alumni Relations Office (DARO) Charitable Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite surgical resection being the main treatment for early-stage lung cancer, a significant proportion of patients still experience aggressive relapse post-operatively. Researchers have identified a highly predictive biomarker signature for survivorship in early-stage lung cancer, which may lead to the development of a new prognostic panel and potential adjuvant therapies.
Background Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Surgical resection remains the definitive curative treatment for early-stage disease offering an overall 5-year survival rate of 62%. Despite careful case selection, a significant proportion of early-stage cancers relapse aggressively within the first year post-operatively. Identification of these patients is key to accurate prognostication and understanding the biology that drives early relapse might open up potential novel adjuvant therapies. Methods We performed an unsupervised interrogation of >1600 serum-based autoantibody biomarkers using an iterative machine-learning algorithm. Results We identified a 13 biomarker signature that was highly predictive for survivorship in post-operative early-stage lung cancer; this outperforms currently used autoantibody biomarkers in solid cancers. Our results demonstrate significantly poor survivorship in high expressers of this biomarker signature with an overall 5-year survival rate of 7.6%. Conclusions We anticipate that the data will lead to the development of an off-the-shelf prognostic panel and further that the oncogenic relevance of the proteins recognised in the panel may be a starting point for a new adjuvant therapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据