Oncofetal fibronectin mRNA is highly abundant in the blood of patients with papillary thyroid carcinoma and correlates with high-serum thyroid-stimulating hormone levels

Serum oncofetal fibronectin (onfFN) mRNA in differentiated thyroid carcinoma (DTC): large overlap between disease-free and metastatic patients

AIM

This study assessed if onfFN mRNA in the peripheral blood of patients with DTC can identify individuals with metastatic disease.

METHODS

Comparison of onfFN mRNA was made among 3 groups: disease-free, lymph node metastasis, and distant metastasis using real-time RT-PCR on 5 ml blood samples from each DTC patient.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients were included: 30 (59%) were disease-free; 7 (13.7%) had lymph node metastasis; and 14 (27.5%) had distant metastasis. OnfFN mRNA levels in the 3 groups were significantly different (P=0.001) but with a large overlap and the expression being highest in the disease-free group. Subgroup analysis of the metastatic groups did not show any effect of age, cell type, and serum TSH, Tg, and antiTg on onfFN mRNA. The within-run and between-run root mean square coefficients of variations were <2%.

CONCLUSION

OnfFN mRNA in patients with DTC cannot identify those with metastatic disease.

Blood presence of circulating oncofetal fibronectin mRNA, by RT-PCR, does not represent a useful specific marker for the management and follow-up of thyroid cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Recent studies strongly suggest the use of oncofetal fibronectin (onfFN) mRNA in diagnostic follow-up and staging due to its very high specificity for thyroid cancers. Since the use of this marker has not been well established yet, particularly in the monitoring of minimal residual disease, we have tried to verify the diagnostic power of onfFN and its usefulness as a prognostic molecular marker. For this reason, we evaluated (by RT-PCR) the presence of onfFN mRNAs, not only in blood samples and thyroid tissues (both normal and neoplastic), but also in different biological fluids (such as K3-EDTA blood samples, saliva and urine) belonging to healthy individuals.

METHODS

Molecular investigations, such as RT-PCR protocol, and sequencing of onfFN cDNAs evaluation of the above-mentioned samples were performed.

RESULTS

The onfFN transcript was largely expressed in all benign and malignant thyroid tissues [differentiated thyroid carcinomas (DTCs)] tested as well as in a large number of biological fluids; in particular, 100% urine samples were positive for onfFN transcript as compared to the thyroglobulin (Tg) mRNA (75%), while saliva was always positive for onfFN and never for Tg. These findings indicate that onfFN cannot be considered a marker specific for thyroid cancer presence. Finally, Tg results were positive in a large part of the samples, but not always in concomitance with onfFN.

CONCLUSIONS

We underline how the complexity of onfFN transcripts could affect the RT-PCR procedure. In addition, the presence of onfFN transcripts in several normal and cancer tissues, along with non-thyroid biological fluids or cells, does not allow the use of this marker for cancer monitoring.