Back

Cancer/Testis Antigens Differentially Expressed in Prostate Cancer: Potential New Biomarkers and Targets for Immunotherapies

Kagohara, L.; Carleton, N. M.; Takahashi, S.; Shiraishi, T.; Mooney, S. M.; Vessella, R. L.; Getzenberg, R. H.; Kulkarni, P.; Veltri, R. W.

2019-06-12 cancer biology
10.1101/646869 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Current clinical tests for prostate cancer (PCa), such as the PSA test, are not fully capable of discerning patients that are highly likely to develop metastatic prostate cancer (MPCa). Hence, more accurate prediction tools are needed to provide treatment strategies that are focused on the different risk groups. Cancer/testis antigens (CTAs) are expressed during embryonic development and present aberrant expression in cancer making them ideal tumor specific biomarkers. Here, the potential use of a panel of CTAs as a biomarker for PCa detection as well as metastasis prediction is explored. We initially identified eight CTAs (CEP55, NUF2, PAGE4, PBK, RQCD1, SPAG4, SSX2 and TTK) that are differentially expressed in MPCa when compared to local disease and used this panel to compare the gene and protein expression profiles in paired PCa and normal adjacent prostate tissue. We identified differential expression of all eight CTAs at the protein level when comparing 80 paired samples of PCa and the adjacent non-cancer tissue. Using multiple logistic regression we also show that a panel of these CTAs present high accuracy to discriminate normal from tumor samples. In summary, this study provides evidence that a panel of CTAs, differentially expressed in aggressive PCa, is a potential biomarker for diagnosis and prognosis to be used in combination with the current clinically available tools and is also a potential target for immunotherapy development.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.