在泛癌症筛查中,多组学生物标记物并不优于临床变量

IF 5.4 Q1 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Martin Smelik, Yelin Zhao, Dina Mansour Aly, AKM Firoj Mahmud, Oleg Sysoev, Xinxiu Li, Mikael Benson
{"title":"在泛癌症筛查中,多组学生物标记物并不优于临床变量","authors":"Martin Smelik, Yelin Zhao, Dina Mansour Aly, AKM Firoj Mahmud, Oleg Sysoev, Xinxiu Li, Mikael Benson","doi":"10.1038/s43856-024-00671-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cancer screening tests are considered pivotal for early diagnosis and survival. However, the efficacy of these tests for improving survival has recently been questioned. This study aims to test if cancer screening could be improved by biomarkers in peripheral blood based on multi-omics data. We utilize multi-omics data from 500,000 participants in the UK Biobank. Machine learning is applied to search for proteins, metabolites, genetic variants, or clinical variables to diagnose cancers collectively and individually. Here we show that the overall performance of the potential blood biomarkers do not outperform clinical variables for collective diagnosis. However, we observe promising results for individual cancers in close proximity to peripheral blood, with an Area Under the Curve (AUC) greater than 0.8. Our findings suggest that the identification of blood biomarkers for cancer might be complicated by variable overlap between molecular changes in tumor tissues and peripheral blood. This explanation is supported by local proteomics analyses of different tumors, which all show high AUCs, greater than 0.9. Thus, multi-omics biomarkers for the diagnosis of individual cancers may potentially be effective, but not for groups of cancers. This study aimed to find out if we could improve cancer screening tests by looking for signs of cancer in blood samples. We used computer and mathematical models to analyze data from 500,000 people. We found that these blood tests were not better than existing methods for diagnosing multiple types of cancer at once. However, they did show promise for diagnosing individual types of cancer that are close to the bloodstream. This suggests that finding blood markers for cancer is complex and depends on how much the cancer affects the blood. These findings could help in the development of more effective tests for individual types of cancer in the future. Smelik et al. investigate the effectiveness of using multi-omics biomarkers in blood for cancer screening. The results indicate that while these biomarkers show promise for diagnosing individual cancers in close proximity to the blood stream, they do not surpass clinical variables for diagnosing multiple cancers.","PeriodicalId":72646,"journal":{"name":"Communications medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s43856-024-00671-z.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multiomics biomarkers were not superior to clinical variables for pan-cancer screening\",\"authors\":\"Martin Smelik, Yelin Zhao, Dina Mansour Aly, AKM Firoj Mahmud, Oleg Sysoev, Xinxiu Li, Mikael Benson\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s43856-024-00671-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Cancer screening tests are considered pivotal for early diagnosis and survival. However, the efficacy of these tests for improving survival has recently been questioned. This study aims to test if cancer screening could be improved by biomarkers in peripheral blood based on multi-omics data. We utilize multi-omics data from 500,000 participants in the UK Biobank. Machine learning is applied to search for proteins, metabolites, genetic variants, or clinical variables to diagnose cancers collectively and individually. Here we show that the overall performance of the potential blood biomarkers do not outperform clinical variables for collective diagnosis. However, we observe promising results for individual cancers in close proximity to peripheral blood, with an Area Under the Curve (AUC) greater than 0.8. Our findings suggest that the identification of blood biomarkers for cancer might be complicated by variable overlap between molecular changes in tumor tissues and peripheral blood. This explanation is supported by local proteomics analyses of different tumors, which all show high AUCs, greater than 0.9. Thus, multi-omics biomarkers for the diagnosis of individual cancers may potentially be effective, but not for groups of cancers. This study aimed to find out if we could improve cancer screening tests by looking for signs of cancer in blood samples. We used computer and mathematical models to analyze data from 500,000 people. We found that these blood tests were not better than existing methods for diagnosing multiple types of cancer at once. However, they did show promise for diagnosing individual types of cancer that are close to the bloodstream. This suggests that finding blood markers for cancer is complex and depends on how much the cancer affects the blood. These findings could help in the development of more effective tests for individual types of cancer in the future. Smelik et al. investigate the effectiveness of using multi-omics biomarkers in blood for cancer screening. The results indicate that while these biomarkers show promise for diagnosing individual cancers in close proximity to the blood stream, they do not surpass clinical variables for diagnosing multiple cancers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":72646,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Communications medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s43856-024-00671-z.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Communications medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s43856-024-00671-z\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communications medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s43856-024-00671-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

癌症筛查测试被认为是早期诊断和生存的关键。然而,这些检测对提高生存率的功效最近受到了质疑。本研究旨在基于多组学数据,检验外周血中的生物标记物是否能改善癌症筛查。我们利用了英国生物库中 50 万名参与者的多组学数据。应用机器学习搜索蛋白质、代谢物、遗传变异或临床变量,以诊断癌症的集体和个体。我们在此表明,在集体诊断方面,潜在血液生物标记物的整体表现并不优于临床变量。不过,我们观察到,对于与外周血关系密切的单个癌症,结果很有希望,曲线下面积(AUC)大于 0.8。我们的研究结果表明,由于肿瘤组织和外周血分子变化之间存在不同程度的重叠,癌症血液生物标记物的鉴定可能会变得复杂。对不同肿瘤进行的局部蛋白质组学分析也支持这一解释,这些分析均显示出大于 0.9 的高 AUC。因此,多组学生物标志物对单个癌症的诊断可能有效,但对癌症组的诊断则无效。这项研究的目的是了解我们能否通过在血液样本中寻找癌症迹象来改进癌症筛查测试。我们使用计算机和数学模型分析了 50 万人的数据。我们发现,在一次性诊断多种类型的癌症方面,这些血液检测并不比现有方法更好。不过,它们确实有望诊断出接近血液的个别癌症类型。这表明,寻找癌症的血液标记非常复杂,取决于癌症对血液的影响程度。这些发现可能有助于将来针对个别类型的癌症开发出更有效的检测方法。Smelik 等人研究了使用血液中的多组学生物标记物进行癌症筛查的有效性。结果表明,虽然这些生物标志物在诊断与血流接近的个别癌症方面显示出前景,但它们在诊断多种癌症方面并没有超过临床变量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Multiomics biomarkers were not superior to clinical variables for pan-cancer screening

Multiomics biomarkers were not superior to clinical variables for pan-cancer screening
Cancer screening tests are considered pivotal for early diagnosis and survival. However, the efficacy of these tests for improving survival has recently been questioned. This study aims to test if cancer screening could be improved by biomarkers in peripheral blood based on multi-omics data. We utilize multi-omics data from 500,000 participants in the UK Biobank. Machine learning is applied to search for proteins, metabolites, genetic variants, or clinical variables to diagnose cancers collectively and individually. Here we show that the overall performance of the potential blood biomarkers do not outperform clinical variables for collective diagnosis. However, we observe promising results for individual cancers in close proximity to peripheral blood, with an Area Under the Curve (AUC) greater than 0.8. Our findings suggest that the identification of blood biomarkers for cancer might be complicated by variable overlap between molecular changes in tumor tissues and peripheral blood. This explanation is supported by local proteomics analyses of different tumors, which all show high AUCs, greater than 0.9. Thus, multi-omics biomarkers for the diagnosis of individual cancers may potentially be effective, but not for groups of cancers. This study aimed to find out if we could improve cancer screening tests by looking for signs of cancer in blood samples. We used computer and mathematical models to analyze data from 500,000 people. We found that these blood tests were not better than existing methods for diagnosing multiple types of cancer at once. However, they did show promise for diagnosing individual types of cancer that are close to the bloodstream. This suggests that finding blood markers for cancer is complex and depends on how much the cancer affects the blood. These findings could help in the development of more effective tests for individual types of cancer in the future. Smelik et al. investigate the effectiveness of using multi-omics biomarkers in blood for cancer screening. The results indicate that while these biomarkers show promise for diagnosing individual cancers in close proximity to the blood stream, they do not surpass clinical variables for diagnosing multiple cancers.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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