Cytokeratin-19 as a biomarker in urine and in serum for the diagnosis of endometriosis--a prospective study

Deciphering the potential of proteomic-based biomarkers in women's reproductive diseases: empowering precision medicine in gynecology

CONTEXT

Gynecological disorders represent a complex set of malignancies that result from a diverse array of molecular changes affecting the lives of over a million women worldwide. Ovarian, Endometrial, and Cervical cancers, Endometriosis, PCOS are the most prevalent ones that pose a grave threat to women's health. Proteomics has emerged as an invaluable tool for developing novel biomarkers, screening methods, and targeted therapeutic agents for gynecological disorders. Some of these biomarkers have been approved by the FDA, but regrettably, they have a constrained diagnostic accuracy in early-stage diagnosis as all of these biomarkers lack sensitivity and specificity. Lately, high-throughput proteomics technologies have made significant strides, allowing for identification of potential biomarkers with improved sensitivity and specificity. However, limited successes have been shown with translation of these discoveries into clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the current and potential protein biomarkers for gynecological cancers, endometriosis and PCOS, discusses recent advances and challenges, and highlights future directions for the field.

CONCLUSION

We propose that proteomics holds great promise as a powerful tool to revolutionize the fight against female reproductive diseases and can ultimately improve personalized patient outcomes in women's biomedicine.

How Do Microorganisms Influence the Development of Endometriosis? Participation of Genital, Intestinal and Oral Microbiota in Metabolic Regulation and Immunopathogenesis of Endometriosis

Microorganisms inhabiting the human body play an extremely key role in its proper functioning, as well as in the development of the immune system, which, by maintaining the immune balance, allows you to enjoy health. Dysbiosis of the intestinal microbiota, or in the oral cavity or reproductive tract, understood as a change in the number and diversity of all microorganisms inhabiting them, may correlate with the development of many diseases, including endometriosis, as researchers have emphasized. Endometriosis is an inflammatory, estrogen-dependent gynecological condition defined by the growth of endometrial cells outside the uterine cavity. Deregulation of immune homeostasis resulting from microbiological disorders may generate chronic inflammation, thus creating an environment conducive to the increased adhesion and angiogenesis involved in the development of endometriosis. In addition, research in recent years has implicated bacterial contamination and immune activation, reduced gastrointestinal function by cytokines, altered estrogen metabolism and signaling, and abnormal progenitor and stem cell homeostasis, in the pathogenesis of endometriosis. The aim of this review was to present the influence of intestinal, oral and genital microbiota dysbiosis in the metabolic regulation and immunopathogenesis of endometriosis.

The Potential of Non-Invasive Biomarkers for Early Diagnosis of Asymptomatic Patients with Endometriosis

Endometriosis is a disease that affects women of reproductive age and has a significantly negative impact on their well-being. The main symptoms are dysmenorrhoea, chronic pelvic pain and infertility. In many patients the diagnostic process is very long and can take up to 8-12 years. Laparoscopy, an invasive method, is still necessary to confirm the diagnosis. Therefore, development of more effective diagnostic markers appears to be of the utmost importance for early diagnosis of endometriosis and provision of appropriate treatment. From a clinical point of view, detection of early-stage endometriosis in asymptomatic patients is an ideal situation since early diagnosis of endometriosis may delay the onset of symptoms as well as prevent progression and complications. In the meantime, Cancer Antigen 125 (CA-125) is still the most frequently studied and used marker. Other glycoproteins, growth factors and immune markers seem to play an important role. However, the search for an ideal endometriosis marker is still underway. Further studies into the pathogenesis of endometriosis will help to identify biomarkers or sets of biomarkers with the potential to improve and speed up the diagnostic process in a non-invasive way.

Biomarkers for the Noninvasive Diagnosis of Endometriosis: State of the Art and Future Perspectives

BACKGROUND

Early and accurate diagnosis of endometriosis is crucial for the management of this benign, yet debilitating pathology. Despite the advances of modern medicine, there is no common ground regarding the pathophysiology of this disease as it continues to affect the quality of life of millions of women of reproductive age. The lack of specific symptoms often determines a belated diagnosis. The gold standard remains invasive, surgery followed by a histopathological exam. A biomarker or a panel of biomarkers is easy to measure, usually noninvasive, and could benefit the clinician in both diagnosing and monitoring the treatment response. Several studies have advanced the idea of biomarkers for endometriosis, thereby circumventing unnecessary invasive techniques. Our paper aims at harmonizing the results of these studies in the search of promising perspectives on early diagnosis.

METHODS

We selected the papers from Google Academic, PubMed, and CrossRef and reviewed recent articles from the literature, aiming to evaluate the effectiveness of various putative serum and urinary biomarkers for endometriosis.

RESULTS

The majority of studies focused on a panel of biomarkers, rather than a single biomarker and were unable to identify a single biomolecule or a panel of biomarkers with sufficient specificity and sensitivity in endometriosis.

CONCLUSION

Noninvasive biomarkers, proteomics, genomics, and miRNA microarray may aid the diagnosis, but further research on larger datasets along with a better understanding of the pathophysiologic mechanisms are needed.

CYFRA 21-1 and Placental Growth Factor as Screening Markers for Endometriosis

Background

This study evaluated the performance of serum CYFRA 21-1 and placental growth factor (PIGF) as screening markers for endometriosis.

Material/Methods

In this prospective study included 81 female patients who underwent laparoscopy to treat benign ovarian tumors. Serum samples were obtained from all study patients before surgery. Serum marker levels, including CYFRA 21-1, PIGF, cancer antigen (CA)125, CA19-9, and human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) were measured using a fluorescence immunoassay technique.

Results

Forty of the patients were diagnosed with endometriosis (the study group) and 41 women were diagnosed with other benign ovarian tumors (the control group). Mean serum CYFRA 21-1 and PIGF levels were not different between these 2 groups (P=0.179 and P=0.865, respectively). Elevated serum CA125 levels (>35 U/mL) and lower CYFRA 21-1 levels (≤2.29 ng/mL) were more frequently observed in the endometriosis study group than in the control group (P<0.0001, and P=048, respectively). High serum PIGF levels (>14.2 pg/mL) were observed in both groups (P=0.226). Mean serum CA19-9 levels and HE4 levels, as well as the ROMA (risk of ovarian malignancy Algorithm) score were similar between the 2 groups. Sensitivity (95.0%) and negative predictive value (NPV) (80.0%) of CYFRA 21-1 for diagnosing endometriosis were higher than those of CA125 (sensitivity 67.5%, NPV 74.5%) and PIGF (sensitivity 20.0%, NPV 53.6%). However, the specificity (PIGF 90.2%, CA125 92.7%) and positive predictive value (PPV) (PIGF 66.7%, CA125 87.1%) of PIGF and CA125 for diagnosing endometriosis were higher than those of CYFRA 21-1 (specificity 19.5%, PPV 53.5%).

Conclusions

CYFRA 21-1 and PIGF may be promising markers to identify patients with and without ovarian endometriosis.

Combination of the non-invasive tests for the diagnosis of endometriosis

BACKGROUND

About 10% of women of reproductive age suffer from endometriosis, a costly chronic disease causing pelvic pain and subfertility. Laparoscopy is the gold standard diagnostic test for endometriosis, but is expensive and carries surgical risks. Currently, there are no non-invasive tests available in clinical practice to accurately diagnose endometriosis. This review assessed the diagnostic accuracy of combinations of different non-invasive testing modalities for endometriosis and provided a summary of all the reviews in the non-invasive tests for endometriosis series.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the diagnostic accuracy of any combination of non-invasive tests for the diagnosis of pelvic endometriosis (peritoneal and/or ovarian or deep infiltrating) compared to surgical diagnosis as a reference standard. The combined tests were evaluated as replacement tests for diagnostic surgery and triage tests to assist decision-making to undertake diagnostic surgery for endometriosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We did not restrict the searches to particular study designs, language or publication dates. We searched CENTRAL to July 2015, MEDLINE and EMBASE to May 2015, as well as the following databases to April 2015: CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, LILACS, OAIster, TRIP, ClinicalTrials.gov, DARE and PubMed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered published, peer-reviewed, randomised controlled or cross-sectional studies of any size, including prospectively collected samples from any population of women of reproductive age suspected of having one or more of the following target conditions: ovarian, peritoneal or deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE). We included studies comparing the diagnostic test accuracy of a combination of several testing modalities with the findings of surgical visualisation of endometriotic lesions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently collected and performed a quality assessment of the data from each study by using the QUADAS-2 tool. For each test, the data were classified as positive or negative for the surgical detection of endometriosis and sensitivity and specificity estimates were calculated. The bivariate model was planned to obtain pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity whenever sufficient data were available. The predetermined criteria for a clinically useful test to replace diagnostic surgery were a sensitivity of 0.94 and a specificity of 0.79 to detect endometriosis. We set the criteria for triage tests at a sensitivity of 0.95 and above and a specificity of 0.50 and above, which 'rules out' the diagnosis with high accuracy if there is a negative test result (SnOUT test), or a sensitivity of 0.50 and above and a specificity of 0.95 and above, which 'rules in' the diagnosis with high accuracy if there is a positive result (SpIN test).

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven eligible studies included 1339 participants. All the studies were of poor methodological quality. Seven studies evaluated pelvic endometriosis, one study considered DIE and/or ovarian endometrioma, two studies differentiated endometrioma from other ovarian cysts and one study addressed mapping DIE at specific anatomical sites. Fifteen different diagnostic combinations were assessed, including blood, urinary or endometrial biomarkers, transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) and clinical history or examination. We did not pool estimates of sensitivity and specificity, as each study analysed independent combinations of the non-invasive tests.Tests that met the criteria for a replacement test were: a combination of serum IL-6 (cut-off >15.4 pg/ml) and endometrial PGP 9.5 for pelvic endometriosis (sensitivity 1.00 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91 to 1.00), specificity 0.93 (95% CI, 0.80, 0.98) and the combination of vaginal examination and transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) for rectal endometriosis (sensitivity 0.96 (95% CI 0.86 to 0.99), specificity 0.98 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.00)). Tests that met the criteria for SpIN triage tests for pelvic endometriosis were: 1. a multiplication of urine vitamin-D-binding protein (VDBP) and serum CA-125 (cut-off >2755) (sensitivity 0.74 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.84), specificity 0.97 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.00)) and 2. a combination of history (length of menses), serum CA-125 (cut-off >35 U/ml) and endometrial leukocytes (sensitivity 0.61 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.69), specificity 0.95 (95% CI 0.91 to 0.98)). For endometrioma, the following combinations qualified as SpIN test: 1. TVUS and either serum CA-125 (cut-off ≥25 U/ml) or CA 19.9 (cut-off ≥12 U/ml) (sensitivity 0.79 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.91), specificity 0.97 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.00)); 2. TVUS and serum CA 19.9 (cut-off ≥12 U/ml) (sensitivity 0.54 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.70), specificity 0.97 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.0)); 3-4. TVUS and serum CA-125 (cut-off ≥20 U/ml or cut-off ≥25 U/ml) (sensitivity 0.69 (95% CI 0.49 to 0.85), specificity 0.96 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.99)); 5. TVUS and serum CA-125 (cut-off ≥35 U/ml) (sensitivity 0.52 (95% CI 0.33 to 0.71), specificity 0.97 (95% CI 0.90 to 1.00)). A combination of vaginal examination and TVUS reached the threshold for a SpIN test for obliterated pouch of Douglas (sensitivity 0.87 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.96), specificity 0.98 (95% CI 0.95 to 1.00)), vaginal wall endometriosis (sensitivity 0.82 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.95), specificity 0.99 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.0)) and rectovaginal septum endometriosis (sensitivity 0.88 (95% CI 0.47 to 1.00), specificity 0.99 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.00)).All the tests were evaluated in individual studies and displayed wide CIs. Due to the heterogeneity and high risk of bias of the included studies, the clinical utility of the studied combination diagnostic tests for endometriosis remains unclear.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

None of the biomarkers evaluated in this review could be evaluated in a meaningful way and there was insufficient or poor-quality evidence. Laparoscopy remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of endometriosis and using any non-invasive tests should only be undertaken in a research setting.

Blood biomarkers for the non-invasive diagnosis of endometriosis

BACKGROUND

About 10% of reproductive-aged women suffer from endometriosis, a costly chronic disease causing pelvic pain and subfertility. Laparoscopy is the gold standard diagnostic test for endometriosis, but is expensive and carries surgical risks. Currently, there are no non-invasive or minimally invasive tests available in clinical practice to accurately diagnose endometriosis. Although other reviews have assessed the ability of blood tests to diagnose endometriosis, this is the first review to use Cochrane methods, providing an update on the rapidly expanding literature in this field.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate blood biomarkers as replacement tests for diagnostic surgery and as triage tests to inform decisions on surgery for endometriosis. Specific objectives include:1. To provide summary estimates of the diagnostic accuracy of blood biomarkers for the diagnosis of peritoneal, ovarian and deep infiltrating pelvic endometriosis, compared to surgical diagnosis as a reference standard.2. To assess the diagnostic utility of biomarkers that could differentiate ovarian endometrioma from other ovarian masses.

SEARCH METHODS

We did not restrict the searches to particular study designs, language or publication dates. We searched CENTRAL to July 2015, MEDLINE and EMBASE to May 2015, as well as these databases to 20 April 2015: CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, LILACS, OAIster, TRIP, ClinicalTrials.gov, DARE and PubMed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered published, peer-reviewed, randomised controlled or cross-sectional studies of any size, including prospectively collected samples from any population of reproductive-aged women suspected of having one or more of the following target conditions: ovarian, peritoneal or deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE). We included studies comparing the diagnostic test accuracy of one or more blood biomarkers with the findings of surgical visualisation of endometriotic lesions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently collected and performed a quality assessment of data from each study. For each diagnostic test, we classified the data as positive or negative for the surgical detection of endometriosis, and we calculated sensitivity and specificity estimates. We used the bivariate model to obtain pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity whenever sufficient datasets were available. The predetermined criteria for a clinically useful blood test to replace diagnostic surgery were a sensitivity of 0.94 and a specificity of 0.79 to detect endometriosis. We set the criteria for triage tests at a sensitivity of ≥ 0.95 and a specificity of ≥ 0.50, which 'rules out' the diagnosis with high accuracy if there is a negative test result (SnOUT test), or a sensitivity of ≥ 0.50 and a specificity of ≥ 0.95, which 'rules in' the diagnosis with high accuracy if there is a positive result (SpIN test).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 141 studies that involved 15,141 participants and evaluated 122 blood biomarkers. All the studies were of poor methodological quality. Studies evaluated the blood biomarkers either in a specific phase of the menstrual cycle or irrespective of the cycle phase, and they tested for them in serum, plasma or whole blood. Included women were a selected population with a high frequency of endometriosis (10% to 85%), in which surgery was indicated for endometriosis, infertility work-up or ovarian mass. Seventy studies evaluated the diagnostic performance of 47 blood biomarkers for endometriosis (44 single-marker tests and 30 combined tests of two to six blood biomarkers). These were angiogenesis/growth factors, apoptosis markers, cell adhesion molecules, high-throughput markers, hormonal markers, immune system/inflammatory markers, oxidative stress markers, microRNAs, tumour markers and other proteins. Most of these biomarkers were assessed in small individual studies, often using different cut-off thresholds, and we could only perform meta-analyses on the data sets for anti-endometrial antibodies, interleukin-6 (IL-6), cancer antigen-19.9 (CA-19.9) and CA-125. Diagnostic estimates varied significantly between studies for each of these biomarkers, and CA-125 was the only marker with sufficient data to reliably assess sources of heterogeneity.The mean sensitivities and specificities of anti-endometrial antibodies (4 studies, 759 women) were 0.81 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 0.87) and 0.75 (95% CI 0.46 to 1.00). For IL-6, with a cut-off value of > 1.90 to 2.00 pg/ml (3 studies, 309 women), sensitivity was 0.63 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.75) and specificity was 0.69 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.82). For CA-19.9, with a cut-off value of > 37.0 IU/ml (3 studies, 330 women), sensitivity was 0.36 (95% CI 0.26 to 0.45) and specificity was 0.87 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.99).Studies assessed CA-125 at different thresholds, demonstrating the following mean sensitivities and specificities: for cut-off > 10.0 to 14.7 U/ml: 0.70 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.77) and 0.64 (95% CI 0.47 to 0.82); for cut-off > 16.0 to 17.6 U/ml: 0.56 (95% CI 0.24, 0.88) and 0.91 (95% CI 0.75, 1.00); for cut-off > 20.0 U/ml: 0.67 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.85) and 0.69 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.80); for cut-off > 25.0 to 26.0 U/ml: 0.73 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.79) and 0.70 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.77); for cut-off > 30.0 to 33.0 U/ml: 0.62 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.79) and 0.76 (95% CI 0.53 to 1.00); and for cut-off > 35.0 to 36.0 U/ml: 0.40 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.49) and 0.91 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.94).We could not statistically evaluate other biomarkers meaningfully, including biomarkers that were assessed for their ability to differentiate endometrioma from other benign ovarian cysts.Eighty-two studies evaluated 97 biomarkers that did not differentiate women with endometriosis from disease-free controls. Of these, 22 biomarkers demonstrated conflicting results, with some studies showing differential expression and others no evidence of a difference between the endometriosis and control groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Of the biomarkers that were subjected to meta-analysis, none consistently met the criteria for a replacement or triage diagnostic test. A subset of blood biomarkers could prove useful either for detecting pelvic endometriosis or for differentiating ovarian endometrioma from other benign ovarian masses, but there was insufficient evidence to draw meaningful conclusions. Overall, none of the biomarkers displayed enough accuracy to be used clinically outside a research setting. We also identified blood biomarkers that demonstrated no diagnostic value in endometriosis and recommend focusing research resources on evaluating other more clinically useful biomarkers.

Urinary biomarkers for the non-invasive diagnosis of endometriosis

BACKGROUND

About 10% of reproductive-aged women suffer from endometriosis which is a costly chronic disease that causes pelvic pain and subfertility. Laparoscopy is the 'gold standard' diagnostic test for endometriosis, but it is expensive and carries surgical risks. Currently, there are no simple non-invasive or minimally-invasive tests available in clinical practice that accurately diagnoses endometriosis.

OBJECTIVES

1. To provide summary estimates of the diagnostic accuracy of urinary biomarkers for the diagnosis of pelvic endometriosis compared to surgical diagnosis as a reference standard.2. To assess the diagnostic utility of biomarkers that could differentiate ovarian endometrioma from other ovarian masses.Urinary biomarkers were evaluated as replacement tests for surgical diagnosis and as triage tests to inform decisions to undertake surgery for endometriosis.

SEARCH METHODS

The searches were not restricted to particular study design, language or publication dates. We searched the following databases to 20 April - 31 July 2015: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, LILACS, OAIster, TRIP and ClinicalTrials.gov (trial register). MEDION, DARE, and PubMed were also searched to identify reviews and guidelines as reference sources of potentially relevant studies. Recently published papers not yet indexed in the major databases were also sought. The search strategy incorporated words in the title, abstract, text words across the record and the medical subject headings (MeSH) and was modified for each database.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published peer-reviewed, randomised controlled or cross-sectional studies of any size were considered, which included prospectively collected samples from any population of reproductive-aged women suspected of having one or more of the following target conditions: ovarian, peritoneal or deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE). We included studies comparing the diagnostic test accuracy of one or more urinary biomarkers with surgical visualisation of endometriotic lesions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently collected and performed a quality assessment of the data from each study. For each diagnostic test, the data were classified as positive or negative for the surgical detection of endometriosis and sensitivity and specificity estimates were calculated. If two or more tests were evaluated in the same cohort, each was considered as a separate data set. The bivariate model was used to obtain pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity whenever sufficient data sets were available. The predetermined criteria for a clinically useful urine test to replace diagnostic surgery was one with a sensitivity of 94% and a specificity of 79% to detect endometriosis. The criteria for triage tests were set at sensitivity of equal or greater than 95% and specificity of equal or greater than 50%, which in case of negative result rules out the diagnosis (SnOUT test) or sensitivity of equal or greater than 50% with specificity of equal or greater than 95%, which in case of positive result rules the diagnosis in (SpIN test).

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight studies involving 646 participants, most of which were of poor methodological quality. The urinary biomarkers were evaluated either in a specific phase of menstrual cycle or irrespective of the cycle phase. Five studies evaluated the diagnostic performance of four urinary biomarkers for endometriosis, including three biomarkers distinguishing women with and without endometriosis (enolase 1 (NNE); vitamin D binding protein (VDBP); and urinary peptide profiling); and one biomarker (cytokeratin 19 (CK 19)) showing no significant difference between the two groups. All of these biomarkers were assessed in small individual studies and could not be statistically evaluated in a meaningful way. None of the biomarkers met the criteria for a replacement test or a triage test. Three studies evaluated three biomarkers that did not differentiate women with endometriosis from disease-free controls.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was insufficient evidence to recommend any urinary biomarker for use as a replacement or triage test in clinical practice for the diagnosis of endometriosis. Several urinary biomarkers may have diagnostic potential, but require further evaluation before being introduced into routine clinical practice. Laparoscopy remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of endometriosis, and diagnosis of endometriosis using urinary biomarkers should only be undertaken in a research setting.

Update on Biomarkers for the Detection of Endometriosis

Endometriosis is histologically characterized by the displacement of endometrial tissue to extrauterine locations including the pelvic peritoneum, ovaries, and bowel. An important cause of infertility and pelvic pain, the individual and global socioeconomic burden of endometriosis is significant. Laparoscopy remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of the condition. However, the invasive nature of surgery, coupled with the lack of a laboratory biomarker for the disease, results in a mean latency of 7–11 years from onset of symptoms to definitive diagnosis. Unfortunately, the delay in diagnosis may have significant consequences in terms of disease progression. The discovery of a sufficiently sensitive and specific biomarker for the nonsurgical detection of endometriosis promises earlier diagnosis and prevention of deleterious sequelae and represents a clear research priority. In this review, we describe and discuss the current status of biomarkers of endometriosis in plasma, urine, and endometrium.

CYFRA 21-1 in urine: a diagnostic marker for endometriosis?

Diagnostic workup of endometriosis usually involves laparoscopic inspection and histological examination of biopsies. Unequivocal laboratory parameters for this ailment have not been available in routine diagnostic evaluations thus far. In this study, we examined urine concentrations of cytokeratin 19 (CYFRA 21-1), a structural protein specific for epithelia. We performed immunoassays for CYFRA 21-1 in urine samples from women afflicted with endometriosis throughout their menstrual cycle. We observed a significant increase in CYFRA 21-1 concentrations, corrected by creatinine levels, in the late follicular phase as compared with the level in healthy controls. We conclude that cyclically increased CYFRA 21-1 concentrations in urine could serve as a valuable noninvasive diagnostic parameter in the workup of clinically manifesting endometriosis.

Urine, peritoneal fluid and omental fat proteomes of reproductive age women: Endometriosis-related changes and associations with endocrine disrupting chemicals

Endometriosis, ectopic growth of the uterine lining (endometrium), which affects 6-11% of reproductive age women, is associated with pelvic pain and infertility. We investigated the peritoneal fluid (PF), urine and omental fat (OF) proteomes of women with endometriosis vs. individuals with no surgically visualized endometriosis. All participants were enrolled in the NICHD-funded ENDO Study. A two-step proteomic study was performed. The first, a broad survey, employed a semi-quantitative gel LC-mass spectrometry (MS) workflow: SDS PAGE fractionation, trypsin digestion and LC-MS/MS. The results showed sample integrity but failed to detect any differences between women with and without endometriosis. The second step was a quantitative analysis of OF samples. We employed another sample set (n=30) from women ± disease and isobaric mass-tag (iTRAQ) chemistry to label peptides and 2D LC-MS/MS for protein identification and quantification. Three proteins-matrix metalloproteinase-9, neutrophil elastase, and FAM49B-were significantly lower in abundance in samples from women with endometriosis. Interestingly, neutrophil elastase and FAM49B levels were associated with higher levels of a subset of endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) that were previously measured in the same samples. The results of these experiments showed the feasibility of associating endometriosis with changes in the OF protein repertoire and EDC levels.

BIOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Endometriosis, pathological growth of the uterine lining, is associated with significant morbidities, including pain and infertility. However, the causes of this common condition are poorly understood. This study determined whether endometriosis was associated with changes in the protein composition of peritoneal fluid, urine and/or omental fat. A protein of unknown function (FAM49B) and two proteinases (metalloproteinase-9, neutrophil elastase) were down regulated in OF samples from women with versus without endometriosis. These findings suggested proteinase imbalances at sites that were distant from the endometriotic lesions. Additionally, FAM49B and neutrophil elastase levels were associated with higher levels of a subset of environmental chemicals that were quantified in the same samples, suggesting other possible associations. Thus, this work generated hypotheses that will be tested in further studies.

Urine and serum concentrations of Cytokeratin 19 in preeclampsia

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the usefulness of Cytokeratin 19 as biomarker for the diagnosis of preeclampsia.

STUDY DESIGN

Cytokeratin 19 protein fragment CYFRA 21-1 was measured by means of electrochemiluminescence immunoassays in urine and serum samples of 32 women with preeclampsia and 32 samples of normotensive healthy singleton pregnancies at random, matched for gestational age, as controls.

RESULTS

The median serum concentrations of CYFRA 21-1 in controls and women with preeclampsia were 2.4 (range 1.3-6.6)ng/mL and 4.4 (range 2.1-16.2)ng/mL, respectively (p<0.001). The median urine concentrations of CYFRA 21-1 in controls and women with preeclampsia were 13.7 (range 0.7-441.4)ng/mL and 11.8 (range 1.5-338.6)ng/mL, respectively (p=0.629). Calculation of a ROC curve to study the use of serum CYFRA 21-1 concentration as a predictor of preeclampsia revealed cut-off points with the highest sum of specificity and sensitivity of 3.2ng/mL, leading to specificity of 75% and sensitivity of 84%. A similar curve calculated for CYFRA 21-1 in urine showed an area under the curve of 0.536 meaning no predictive power. The correlation between urinary excretion of protein in 24h and serum concentrations of CYFRA 21-1 in the case group was r=0.26, which is not significant (p=0.258). The correlation between proteinuria and urine values of CYFRA 21-1 was r=0.10, which also is not significant (p=0.666).

CONCLUSION

Serum levels of Cytokeratin 19 fragment are increased in women with preeclampsia. However this does not result in a significant difference in CYFRA 21-1 levels in maternal urine. Thus Cytokeratin 19 fragment may prove to be a valuable biomarker for preeclampsia in serum but not urine. We propose further longitudinal studies to investigate the role of Cytokeratin 19 in maternal serum of women with preeclampsia.