使用细胞收集器检测结直肠癌患者腹腔中的游离癌细胞:一项实验研究。

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Cancer Medicine Pub Date : 2024-11-06 DOI:10.1002/cam4.70378
Yudi Wu, Fangxun He, Liang Liu, Wei Jiang, Jiao Deng, Yujie Zhang, Zhixin Cao, Xiangshang Xu, Jianping Gong
{"title":"使用细胞收集器检测结直肠癌患者腹腔中的游离癌细胞:一项实验研究。","authors":"Yudi Wu,&nbsp;Fangxun He,&nbsp;Liang Liu,&nbsp;Wei Jiang,&nbsp;Jiao Deng,&nbsp;Yujie Zhang,&nbsp;Zhixin Cao,&nbsp;Xiangshang Xu,&nbsp;Jianping Gong","doi":"10.1002/cam4.70378","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Colorectal cancer (CRC) is associated with high incidence and mortality rates globally. The presence of intraperitoneal free cancer cells (IFCCs) is recognized as an independent prognostic factor for CRC patients. However, a clinical gold standard for IFCCs detection is lacking. The GILUPI CellCollector has demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity in detecting free cancer cells, yet its application for CRC IFCCs detection remains unreported.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We selected CRC and normal cell lines to evaluate the CellCollector's ability to detect tumor cells. A total of 70 CRC patients and 17 patients with benign disease undergoing laparoscopic procedures were investigated. Peritoneal lavage fluid was collected pre- and post-operation, and both real-time PCR (CEA mRNA) and CellCollector detection were performed. We compared the sensitivity and specificity of these two methods.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>CellCollector can distinguish well between CRC and normal cells in cell line experiments. CellCollector detects IFCCs better than real-time PCR (CEA) in CRC patients in different TNM Stages. The sensitivity of CellCollector was higher than that of real-time PCR (84.6% vs. 48.4%), and the specificity of CellCollector was also higher than real-time PCR (79.1% vs. 60.4%). There was no significant difference in the results of IFCCs detected by CellCollector before and after total mesorectal excision (TME) or complete mesocolic excision (CME) radical colorectomy (<i>p</i> &gt; 0.05), but there was a significant difference in real-time PCR detection (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The CellCollector demonstrates superior sensitivity and specificity compared to real-time PCR for detecting IFCCs in CRC patients, suggesting its potential as a clinical tool for IFCCs detection.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Trial Registration</h3>\n \n <p>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01978444</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":139,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Medicine","volume":"13 21","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11538901/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Use of CellCollector Assay to Detect Free Cancer Cells in the Peritoneal Cavity of Colorectal Cancer Patients: An Experimental Study\",\"authors\":\"Yudi Wu,&nbsp;Fangxun He,&nbsp;Liang Liu,&nbsp;Wei Jiang,&nbsp;Jiao Deng,&nbsp;Yujie Zhang,&nbsp;Zhixin Cao,&nbsp;Xiangshang Xu,&nbsp;Jianping Gong\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/cam4.70378\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Colorectal cancer (CRC) is associated with high incidence and mortality rates globally. The presence of intraperitoneal free cancer cells (IFCCs) is recognized as an independent prognostic factor for CRC patients. However, a clinical gold standard for IFCCs detection is lacking. The GILUPI CellCollector has demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity in detecting free cancer cells, yet its application for CRC IFCCs detection remains unreported.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We selected CRC and normal cell lines to evaluate the CellCollector's ability to detect tumor cells. A total of 70 CRC patients and 17 patients with benign disease undergoing laparoscopic procedures were investigated. Peritoneal lavage fluid was collected pre- and post-operation, and both real-time PCR (CEA mRNA) and CellCollector detection were performed. We compared the sensitivity and specificity of these two methods.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>CellCollector can distinguish well between CRC and normal cells in cell line experiments. CellCollector detects IFCCs better than real-time PCR (CEA) in CRC patients in different TNM Stages. The sensitivity of CellCollector was higher than that of real-time PCR (84.6% vs. 48.4%), and the specificity of CellCollector was also higher than real-time PCR (79.1% vs. 60.4%). There was no significant difference in the results of IFCCs detected by CellCollector before and after total mesorectal excision (TME) or complete mesocolic excision (CME) radical colorectomy (<i>p</i> &gt; 0.05), but there was a significant difference in real-time PCR detection (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>The CellCollector demonstrates superior sensitivity and specificity compared to real-time PCR for detecting IFCCs in CRC patients, suggesting its potential as a clinical tool for IFCCs detection.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Trial Registration</h3>\\n \\n <p>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01978444</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancer Medicine\",\"volume\":\"13 21\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11538901/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancer Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cam4.70378\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cam4.70378","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:结直肠癌(CRC)在全球的发病率和死亡率都很高。腹腔内游离癌细胞(IFCCs)的存在被认为是 CRC 患者的一个独立预后因素。然而,目前还缺乏检测游离癌细胞的临床金标准。GILUPI CellCollector 在检测游离癌细胞方面具有很高的灵敏度和特异性,但其在 CRC IFCCs 检测中的应用仍未见报道:我们选择了 CRC 和正常细胞系来评估 CellCollector 检测肿瘤细胞的能力。我们共调查了 70 名接受腹腔镜手术的 CRC 患者和 17 名良性疾病患者。我们收集了手术前后的腹腔灌洗液,并进行了实时 PCR(CEA mRNA)和 CellCollector 检测。我们比较了这两种方法的灵敏度和特异性:结果:在细胞系实验中,CellCollector 能很好地区分 CRC 和正常细胞。在不同 TNM 分期的 CRC 患者中,CellCollector 检测 IFCC 的效果优于实时 PCR(CEA)。CellCollector 的灵敏度比实时 PCR 高(84.6% 对 48.4%),特异性也比实时 PCR 高(79.1% 对 60.4%)。在全直肠系膜切除术(TME)或完全结肠系膜切除术(CME)根治性结肠切除术前后,CellCollector 检测到的 IFCC 结果无明显差异(P > 0.05),但实时 PCR 检测到的 IFCC 结果有明显差异(P 结论:CellCollector 的灵敏度和特异性均高于实时 PCR:与实时 PCR 相比,CellCollector 检测 CRC 患者 IFCCs 的灵敏度和特异性均优于实时 PCR,这表明它有潜力成为检测 IFCCs 的临床工具:试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier:NCT01978444。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The Use of CellCollector Assay to Detect Free Cancer Cells in the Peritoneal Cavity of Colorectal Cancer Patients: An Experimental Study

The Use of CellCollector Assay to Detect Free Cancer Cells in the Peritoneal Cavity of Colorectal Cancer Patients: An Experimental Study

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is associated with high incidence and mortality rates globally. The presence of intraperitoneal free cancer cells (IFCCs) is recognized as an independent prognostic factor for CRC patients. However, a clinical gold standard for IFCCs detection is lacking. The GILUPI CellCollector has demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity in detecting free cancer cells, yet its application for CRC IFCCs detection remains unreported.

Methods

We selected CRC and normal cell lines to evaluate the CellCollector's ability to detect tumor cells. A total of 70 CRC patients and 17 patients with benign disease undergoing laparoscopic procedures were investigated. Peritoneal lavage fluid was collected pre- and post-operation, and both real-time PCR (CEA mRNA) and CellCollector detection were performed. We compared the sensitivity and specificity of these two methods.

Results

CellCollector can distinguish well between CRC and normal cells in cell line experiments. CellCollector detects IFCCs better than real-time PCR (CEA) in CRC patients in different TNM Stages. The sensitivity of CellCollector was higher than that of real-time PCR (84.6% vs. 48.4%), and the specificity of CellCollector was also higher than real-time PCR (79.1% vs. 60.4%). There was no significant difference in the results of IFCCs detected by CellCollector before and after total mesorectal excision (TME) or complete mesocolic excision (CME) radical colorectomy (p > 0.05), but there was a significant difference in real-time PCR detection (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

The CellCollector demonstrates superior sensitivity and specificity compared to real-time PCR for detecting IFCCs in CRC patients, suggesting its potential as a clinical tool for IFCCs detection.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01978444

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cancer Medicine
Cancer Medicine ONCOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
2.50%
发文量
907
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: Cancer Medicine is a peer-reviewed, open access, interdisciplinary journal providing rapid publication of research from global biomedical researchers across the cancer sciences. The journal will consider submissions from all oncologic specialties, including, but not limited to, the following areas: Clinical Cancer Research Translational research ∙ clinical trials ∙ chemotherapy ∙ radiation therapy ∙ surgical therapy ∙ clinical observations ∙ clinical guidelines ∙ genetic consultation ∙ ethical considerations Cancer Biology: Molecular biology ∙ cellular biology ∙ molecular genetics ∙ genomics ∙ immunology ∙ epigenetics ∙ metabolic studies ∙ proteomics ∙ cytopathology ∙ carcinogenesis ∙ drug discovery and delivery. Cancer Prevention: Behavioral science ∙ psychosocial studies ∙ screening ∙ nutrition ∙ epidemiology and prevention ∙ community outreach. Bioinformatics: Gene expressions profiles ∙ gene regulation networks ∙ genome bioinformatics ∙ pathwayanalysis ∙ prognostic biomarkers. Cancer Medicine publishes original research articles, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and research methods papers, along with invited editorials and commentaries. Original research papers must report well-conducted research with conclusions supported by the data presented in the paper.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信