Clinical Cancer Research CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fujiwara, K.
Right arrow Articles by Tanimoto, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fujiwara, K.
Right arrow Articles by Tanimoto, M.
Clinical Cancer Research Vol. 11, 1219-1225, February 2005
© 2005 American Association for Cancer Research

Imaging, Diagnosis, Prognosis

Identification of Epigenetic Aberrant Promoter Methylation in Serum DNA Is Useful for Early Detection of Lung Cancer

Keiichi Fujiwara1, Nobukazu Fujimoto1, Masahiro Tabata1, Kenji Nishii2, Keitaro Matsuo4, Katsuyuki Hotta1, Toshiyuki Kozuki1, Motoi Aoe3, Katsuyuki Kiura1, Hiroshi Ueoka1 and Mitsune Tanimoto1

1 Department of Hematology, Oncology, and Respiratory Medicine, Okayama University Medical School, 2 Department of Respiratory Medicine, Okayama Institute of Health and Science, 3 Department of Cancer and Thoracic Surgery, Okayama University Graduate of Medicine and Dentistry, Okayama, Japan and 4 Division of Epidemiology and Prevention, Aichi Cancer Center Research Institute, Nagoya, Japan

Requests for reprints: Masahiro Tabata, Department of Hematology, Oncology, and Respiratory Medicine, Okayama University Medical School, 2-5-1 Shikata-cho, Okayama 700-8558, Japan. Phone: 81-86-235-7227; Fax: 81-86-232-8226; E-mail: tabata{at}md.okayama-u.ac.jp.


   ABSTRACT
Top
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the usefulness of serum DNA methylation of five tumor suppressor genes for early detection of lung cancer.

Experimental Design: Methylation status in serum DNA from 200 patients undergoing bronchofiberscopic examination for abnormal findings on chest radiograph detected by lung cancer screening or surveillance was examined using methylation-specific PCR.

Results: Ninety-one patients were given a pathologic diagnosis of lung cancer, 9 other malignant diseases, and 100 nonmalignant pulmonary diseases. In patients with lung cancer, methylation was detected in 18.7% for MGMT, 15.4% for p16INK4a, 12.1% for RASSF1A, 11.0% for DAPK, and 6.6% for RAR-ß, which was higher compared with that in patients with nonmalignant diseases. Age and smoking status seemed to associate with methylation status. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value of methylation in at least one gene for diagnosis of lung cancer were 49.5%, 85.0%, and 75.0%, respectively. Adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval) for having lung cancer was 5.28 (2.39-11.7) for patients with methylation in one gene and 5.89 (1.53-22.7) for those with methylation in two or more genes. It is of note that methylation was identified in 50.9% of stage I lung cancer patients, whereas serum protein tumor markers were positive in 11.3% of them.

Conclusions: These results suggest that identification of promoter methylation of tumor suppressor genes in serum DNA could be useful for early detection of lung cancer.

Key Words: Cancer surveillance and screening • chest radiograph • serum protein tumor markers • methylation-specific PCR


   INTRODUCTION
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Despite intensive treatment, the prognosis of patients with lung cancer is poor. The 5-year survival rate of patients with clinical stage I disease is ~60%, but in those with clinical stage II to IV diseases, the 5-year survival rate ranges from 40% to <5% (1). Thus, the prognosis of lung cancer is strongly correlated to its clinical stage. Over two thirds of lung cancer patients have an advanced disease at the time of initial presentation (2), and lack of efficient diagnostic methods for early detection is considered to be the major reasons for the poor prognosis of lung cancer.

Although lung cancer screening with annual chest radiograph and sputum cytology is currently conducted in many municipalities in Japan (3), the usefulness of mass screening is yet to be fully confirmed. The previous screening trials sponsored by the National Cancer Institute failed to show that screening with sputum cytology and chest radiography reduced mortality from lung cancer (4–7). However, because one of these trials indicated more favorable survival rates associated with the diagnosis of resectable tumors, the American Cancer Society maintains that physicians and patients may decide to have these screening tests on an individual basis (8). Therefore, the development of more useful method in addition to the chest radiograph and sputum cytology for lung cancer screening is urgently required.

Aberrant methylation of CpG islands, which are in or near the promoter region of various genes, is a common feature in various neoplasms and is associated with the transcriptional silencing of tumor suppressor genes (9–11). In addition, this alteration has been described to occur in the very early stage of carcinogenesis (12). Recent advances in techniques simplified the methods for identification of promoter methylation, among which methylation-specific PCR (MSP) is a simple, sensitive, and specific method to determine the methylation status of any CpG-rich region (13).

Several studies have shown that several genes, including tumor suppressor genes, such as retinoic acid receptor ß (RARß; ref. 14) and p16INK4a (15, 16), apoptosis-associated genes, such as death-associated protein kinase (DAPK; ref. 17) and ras association domain family 1A (RASSF1A; refs. 18, 19), and the DNA repair gene O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT; refs. 20, 21), were frequently methylated in lung cancer cells. Zochbauer-Muller et al. showed that 82% of the non–small cell lung cancer tissues had methylation of at least one gene from eight genes and rarely identified methylation of these genes in nonmalignant lung tissue (20). These findings suggest the potential use of DNA methylation as a marker for lung cancer.

It has been shown that cancer patients have increased levels of free DNA in their sera, which is thought to be released from cancer cells (22–24). Many investigators have reported that microsatellite alterations and p53 and/or ras gene mutations could be identified in the serum and/or plasma DNA of patients with various cancers (25–28). Thus, circulating tumor-derived DNA might be used as a source for tumor detection by PCR analysis, including MSP.

In the present study, we attempted to identify methylated DNA in sera of patients with abnormal findings on their chest radiograph as detected by lung cancer screening or physician surveillance. Although there are some recent reports of DNA methylation analyses carried out with remote medium, including serum, plasma, sputum, and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid or brushing samples, this is the first report that has examined the methylation status of serum DNA on a population basis and showed the usefulness of the approach as a diagnostic tool for early detection of lung cancer.


   MATERIALS AND METHODS
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Sample Collection and DNA Extraction. In this study, 200 patients undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy for abnormal findings on chest radiograph were investigated. The examinations were carried out as part of the lung cancer mass screening program in Okayama Prefecture (3) or through physician surveillance. Diagnosis of these patients was completely blinded to the laboratory researchers. Peripheral blood samples (6 mL) were collected to investigate methylation status of serum DNA with written informed consent. Serum (2 mL) was isolated after centrifugation at 3,000 rpm for 10 minutes and stored at –20°C until use. Serum DNA was extracted using QIAamp DNA Blood Midi kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) according to the manufacturer's instructions. We also examined methylation status of the tumor tissues. Of 200 patients evaluated in this study, 30 with lung cancer underwent surgical resection at Department of Cancer and Thoracic Surgery of Okayama University Hospital. Tumor tissues from these patients were investigated with written informed consent. Tumor DNA was extracted from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded lung cancer tissues using QIAamp DNA Mini kit (Qiagen) according to manufacturer's instructions.

Methylation-Specific PCR. Sample DNA was treated with sodium bisulfite using the CpGenome DNA Modification kit (Intergen, Purchase, NY) according to the manufacturer's instructions. All bisulfite-modified DNA was resuspended in TE buffer [10 mmol/L Tris-0.1 mmol/L EDTA (pH 7.5)] and used immediately or stored at –20°C until subsequent MSP. Primer sequences for the RARß, p16INK4a, DAPK, RASSF1A, and MGMT were as described elsewhere (18, 20). DNA from a small cell lung cancer cell line SBC-3 (29), which has promoter methylation of all tested genes, was used as a positive control for the methylated form and that from serum of normal volunteer for the unmethylated form. The PCR mixture contained 10x PCR buffer [100 mmol/L Tris-HCl (pH 8.3), 500 mmol/L KCl, 15 mmol/L MgCl2], deoxynucleotide triphosphates (each at 2.5 mmol/L), 0.5 µmol/L of each primer, 0.9 units Taq DNA polymerase (Takara Bio, Shiga, Japan), and 3 µL bisulfite-modified DNA in a final volume of 30µL. Initial denaturation at 95°C for 5 minutes was followed by 50 cycles of a denaturation step at 95°C for 30 seconds, an annealing step at each specific annealing temperature for 30 seconds, and an extension step at 72°C for 30 seconds and a final extension step at 72°C for 10 minutes was added. After amplification, each PCR product was electrophoresed through a 2% agarose gel, stained with ethidium bromide, and visualized under UV illumination. All tests were duplicated to confirm the result by blinded two researchers. Methylation-positive cases were defined as the cases whose serum DNA showed a visual band amplified with methylated-specific primers, even if it was faint. Representative results of methylation analysis by MSP are shown in Fig. 1.



View larger version (68K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Fig. 1 Representative results showing promoter methylation amplified by MSP. Lanes M and U, amplified product with primers recognizing methylated and unmethylated sequences, respectively; DNA from SBC-3 cell line and normal volunteer, positive control for methylated and unmethylated forms, respectively.

 
Measurement of Serum Protein Tumor Marker Levels. A part of each blood sample was used for examination of conventional serum protein tumor markers, including carcinoembryonic antigen, cytokeratin 19 fragment, and progastrin releasing peptide. The serum levels of carcinoembryonic antigen, cytokeratin 19 fragment, and progastrin releasing peptide were determined by chemiluminescent immunoassay using commercial kits from Abbott Laboratories (Abbott Park, IL), electrochemiluminescent immunoassay from Roche Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), and ELISA from Fujirebio (Tokyo, Japan). The cutoff values of these markers were set at 5.0 ng/mL for carcinoembryonic antigen, 3.5 ng/mL for cytokeratin 19 fragment, and 46.0 pg/mL for progastrin releasing peptide according to the manufacturer's instructions.

Statistical Analysis. The methylation status in five genes was scored in each patient as the total number of methylated genes. The methylation score of patients with lung cancer was compared with those with nonmalignant diseases using a t test with unequal variance. An unconditional logistic regression model was applied to estimate the odds ratios and its 95% confidence intervals for the occurrence of lung cancer. We used the patients without methylation in every five genes as a reference group and estimated the odds ratios for patients having one methylated gene and those having two or more methylated genes in five genes tested. Crude and multivariate models were examined. The factors adjusted in the multivariate model included age as a continuous variable divided by 10, sex, smoking status divided into quartiles (pack-years calculated by number of packs smoked per day multiplied by the number of years of smoking), and results of three tumor markers (carcinoembryonic antigen, cytokeratin 19 fragment, and progastrin releasing peptide) in a binary variable. {chi}2 or Fisher's exact test were applied to examine the distribution in categorical variables. A t test was applied to test the continuous variables. The statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05. All the statistical analyses were implemented by Stata version 8 (College Station, TX).


   RESULTS
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Patients Characteristics. Between January 2001 and December 2002, a total of 200 peripheral blood samples were collected from consecutive patients undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy. Of these patients, 91 were given a pathologic diagnosis of lung cancer (median age, 71 years; range, 45-92 years; male/female 61:30), 100 nonmalignant diseases (median age, 65.5 years; range, 26-89 years; male/female 64:36), and 9 other malignancies. The histologic subtypes of the lung cancers, based on WHO classification (30), were adenocarcinoma in 64 patients, squamous cell carcinoma in 21 patients, small cell carcinoma in 4 patients, and carcinoid in 2 patients. Clinical stage classifications, based on the International Staging System (1), were as follows: 53 patients had stage I disease, 7 patients stage II, 22 patients stage III, and 9 patients stage IV. Nonmalignant diseases mostly consisted of benign pulmonary diseases, such as tuberculosis, atypical mycobacteriosis, pneumoconiosis, interstitial pneumonia, bronchitis, organizing pneumonia, and bronchiectasis. Malignant diseases other than lung cancer included pulmonary metastasis of laryngeal cancer in 3 patients, invasive thymoma in 2 patients, and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, thyroid cancer, breast cancer, and rectal cancer in 1 patient each. Elderly patients were more frequently represented among patients with lung cancer than those with nonmalignant diseases (median age, 71 versus 65.5 years; P < 0.001). Current smokers were more commonly represented among patients with lung cancer than those with nonmalignant diseases (67% versus 54%; P = 0.046).

Methylation Status of Five Genes. As shown in Table 1, serum methylated DNA was detected in 18.7% for MGMT, 15.4% for p16INK4a, 12.1% for RASSF1A, 11.0% for DAPK, and 6.6% for RARß in lung cancer patients. When analyzed individually, the proportions of patients with methylated serum DNA were higher in patients with lung cancer than those with nonmalignant diseases in every five genes. Difference is especially evident for p16INK4a (P = 0.003) and MGMT (P < 0.001). Of 91 lung cancer patients, 45 (49.5%) had methylation of at least one gene. When methylation of at least one gene was assessed as positive, specificity and predictive values of methylation were 85.0% and 75.0%, respectively. The total number of methylations in five genes per patient was 0.64 in patients with lung cancer, which was higher than that in patients with nonmalignant diseases (0.19; P < 0.0001; Table 2). Of 9 patients with malignant diseases other than lung cancer, 6 (66.7%) had at least one methylation in five genes (data not shown). These 9 cases were excluded from subsequent analyses.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 1 Frequency of methylation in five genes

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 2 Comparison of methylation status between lung cancer and nonmalignant cases

 
Twenty-three of 30 (77%) tumor tissues obtained from lung cancer patients showed methylation of at least one gene (Fig. 2). Sixteen of 18 (89%) tissues from patients with serum DNA methylation also had methylated genes. Methylation of RASSF1A gene was identified in one serum sample and MGMT gene in two samples, but they were not identified in the corresponding tumor.



View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Fig. 2 Summary of methylation of RARß, p16INK4{alpha}, DAPK, RASSF1A, and MGMT in 30 corresponding tissue and serum samples. Black boxes, methylated samples; white boxes, unmethylated samples.

 
Association with Clinicopathologic Features. We analyzed the correlations between methylation status in serum DNA and clinicopathologic variables of the patients. There was no correlation between methylation status and sex or histology in this study. In addition, frequency of serum DNA methylation between smokers and nonsmokers was not significantly different in both patients with lung cancer (48.3% in nonsmokers, 45.8% in <40 pack-years smokers, and 52.6% in 40 pack-years smokers; P = 0.863) and those with nonmalignant diseases (Table 3). These findings were also observed when analyzed in individual gene. Although serum DNA methylation in ≥40 pack-years smokers with nonmalignant diseases tended to be more frequent than that in <40 pack-years smokers, this trend was particularly obvious in DAPK and RASSF1A genes. In control group, we found significant correlation between methylation and age (Table 3.).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 3 Correlation between clinical features and methylation of the different genes in nonmalignant cases

 
Methylation Status and Risk of Lung Cancer. Table 4 shows the results of a crude and adjusted logistic regression analyses evaluating correlation between number of methylated genes and risk of lung cancer. In the crude model, the patients with one methylated gene showed 5.08 (95% confidence interval, 2.28-11.3) times higher probability of having lung cancer compared with patients without any methylated genes. The odds ratio was higher in patients with two or more methylated genes. To consider the imbalance in baseline characteristics, we conducted similar analysis adjusting for age, sex, smoking status, and protein tumor marker results. The patients with methylation in at least one gene and two or more of five genes showed 5.28 (2.39-11.7; P < 0.001) and 5.89 (1.53-22.7; P = 0.010) times higher probability of having lung cancer, respectively.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 4 Methylation status and risk of lung cancer

 
Frequencies of Methylation According to Clinical Stage of Lung Cancer. We investigated the correlation between clinical stage and methylation status in five genes or conventional serum protein tumor markers (Table 5). Of 53 patients with stage I disease, 27 (50.9%) patients had methylated serum DNA in at least one gene, whereas only 6 (11.3%) patients showed elevation of at least one serum protein tumor marker. In patients with stage II, III, or IV diseases, the difference was not evident.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 5 Frequency of DNA methylation and elevation of conventional serum protein tumor markers according to clinical stage

 

   DISCUSSION
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
 
This study shows that identification of serum DNA methylation is a potentially useful approach to detect lung cancer patients from subjects screened by chest radiograph. Serum DNA methylation was more frequently observed in patients with lung cancer than those with nonmalignant diseases. Although the sensitivity for the diagnosis of lung cancer was only 49.5% when analyzed by a combination of five genes, the relatively high specificity (85.0%) indicates the usefulness for subjects screened by with chest radiograph. The odds ratio for diagnosis of lung cancer was >5.0 in patients with at least one methylated gene even after statistical adjustment by other clinicopathologic risk factors, such as smoking, age, sex, and results of tumor marker tests. Of note, serum DNA methylation could be identified even in patients in the early stages of lung cancer, whereas conventional serum protein tumor markers were rarely elevated, indicating that this DNA-based method is more sensitive than protein-based method for diagnosis of lung cancer in early stage.

In former studies, methylation in tumor tissues was detected in 40% to 43% of non–small cell lung cancer patients for RARß, 25% to 41% for p16INK4a, 16% to 44% for DAPK, 30% to 40% for RASSF1A, and 16% to 27% for MGMT (31). These results were consistent with our data in 30 tumor tissue samples. In our experiment, the frequency of detecting methylated genes in serum was about half to two thirds compared with that in tumor tissues. However, when we consider that tumor-derived DNA in blood is generally detectable in less than half of cancer patients (32), the frequency of methylation in serum DNA in our study may be reasonable. Laird reviewed the studies examining methylation status of serum/plasma DNA in patients with various neoplasms and indicated that clinical sensitivity of DNA methylation was ~50% (33). Esteller et al. did methylation analysis in serum DNA from patients with non–small cell lung cancer for multiple genes and showed 33% to 80% of clinical sensitivity by combination analysis of these genes (34). Our results are consistent with the results of these studies, indicating that similar sensitivity is achievable even after mass screening.

Among various techniques used for methylation analysis, we adopted a simple method of qualitative MSP analysis. The specificity of the primers we used in this study had been verified using genomic sequencing and/or restriction analysis in previous reports (13, 35). Recently, several studies showed improved detection rates of methylation status using a nested PCR approach or a quantitative real-time PCR technique (36–38). Particularly, sensitivity of the Taqman method was reported to be 10-fold higher than conventional qualitative MSP (39). To apply DNA methylation as tumor marker for detection of lung cancer, the use of these improved methods is an attractive strategy.

Although promoter methylation was observed predominantly in lung cancer patients, 1% to 8% of patients with nonmalignant disease were methylation positive for each gene in this study. In addition, three lung cancer patients with serum DNA methylation did not show same alteration in the corresponding tumor tissues. We considered the following as possible explanation of these positive results. Firstly, the methylated serum DNA might be derived from undetected precancerous lesions in these cases. According to the previous reports, aberrant promoter methylation is detectable in precancerous lesions, such as dysplasia and nonmalignant lung tissues of patients with lung cancer (20, 37) . Methylation-positive nonmalignant patients may develop malignant diseases in the near future. Secondly, aberrant methylation might be caused by environmental factors, such as smoking (12, 40) HREF="#B40">. In published series, controversial correlations between smoking and methylation have been reported (20, 41–44). We did not find any statistically significant correlation between smoking history and methylation; however, heavy smokers had at least one serum DNA methylation more frequently than mild to moderate smokers in patients with nonmalignant disease. The third explanation is possible occurrence of other occult malignancies. Indeed, we observed methylated serum DNA in 66.7% of the patients who were diagnosed as having another malignant disease. The final explanation is the possibility of detecting age-related methylation in control group.

To use this serum DNA methylation as a marker in lung cancer mass screening, several issues must be considered. The fairy good specificity even in patients screened by chest radiograph suggests the advantage of this approach. On the other hand, poor sensitivity may compromise the advantage of specificity. Improving sensitivity as a mass screening test might be achieved by two approaches. One is to increase sensitivity of DNA methylation itself by using large number of tested genes or applying a quantitative methylation assay. The other is to combine the methylation with highly sensitive screening method such as low-dose spiral computed tomography (45–47). Because one of the serious limitations of low-dose spiral computed tomography is its poor specificity (48), combination with the serum DNA methylation may overcome the limitation. Indeed, physicians often experience difficulty in sampling tumor specimen from small legions detected by computed tomography scans for pathologic diagnosis by invasive procedures, such as fiberoptic bronchoscopic examination or computed tomography–guided fine needle aspiration. Accordingly, in consideration of relatively higher frequency of serum DNA methylation in early-stage disease (50.9% in stage I) and serious complications after invasive procedures (49), serum DNA methylation may be a test to be conducted before invasive procedure. Although further evaluation is essential, the results in this study indicate the substantial usefulness for detection of lung cancer.

In conclusion, we examined the aberrant promoter methylation status in serum DNA and showed the usefulness of this approach as a tool for detection of lung cancer in patients screened by chest radiograph. Further studies are warranted to confirm the efficiency of the procedure and search for best combination of genes for methylation analysis. Moreover, it is important to investigate prospectively whether methylation-positive noncancer cases will have malignancies in the near future.


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We thank Dr. Tsuyoshi Kodani and colleagues (Okayama Institute of Health and Science) for collecting clinical and pathologic data and Drs. Haruyuki Kawai (Okayama Saiseikai General Hospital) and Youichiro Ogama (Okayama University Medical School) for technical advice.


   FOOTNOTES
 
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

Note: K. Fujiwara is a recipient of AACR-ITO EN, Ltd., Scholar-in-Training Award and a presenter of a mini-symposium session for the AACR 95th Annual Meeting.

Received 8/ 4/04; revised 10/27/04; accepted 10/28/04.


   REFERENCES
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Mountain CF. Revisions in the international system for staging lung cancer. Chest 1997;111:1710–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Ihde DC. Chemotherapy of lung cancer. N Engl J Med 1992;327:1434–41.[Medline]
  3. Nishii K, Ueoka H, Kiura K, et al. A case-control study of lung cancer screening in Okayama Prefecture, Japan. Lung Cancer 2001;34:325–32.[CrossRef][Medline]
  4. Melamed MR, Flehinger BJ, Zaman MB, Heelan RT, Parchick WA, Martini N. Screening for early lung cancer: results of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering study in New York. Chest 1984;86:44–53.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Fontana RS, Sanderson DR, Woolner LB, Taylor WF, Miller WE, Muhm JR. Lung cancer screening: the Mayo program. J Occup Med 1986;28:746–50.[Medline]
  6. Tockman MS. Survival and mortality from lung cancer in a screened population: the Johns Hopkins Study. Chest 1986;89:324–5S.[Free Full Text]
  7. Marcus PM, Bergstralh EJ, Fagerstrom RM, et al. Lung cancer mortality in the Mayo Lung Project: impact of extended follow up. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:1308–16.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Smith RA, Cokkinides V, Eyre HJ; American Cancer Society. American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer, 2003. CA Cancer J Clin 2003;53:27–43.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Baylin SB, Herman JG, Graff JR, Vertino PM, Issa JP. Alterations in DNA methylation: a fundamental aspect of neoplasia. Adv Cancer Res 1998;72:141–96.[Medline]
  10. Baylin SB, Esteller M, Rountree MR, Bachman KE, Schuebel K, Herman JG. Aberrant patterns of DNA methylation, chromatin formation and gene expression in cancer. Hum Mol Genet 2001;10:687–92.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Merlo A, Herman JG, Mao L, et al. 5' CpG island methylation is associated with transcriptional silencing of the tumor suppressor p16/CDKN2/MTS1 in human cancers. Nat Med 1995;1:686–92.[CrossRef][Medline]
  12. Belinsky SA, Nikula KJ, Palmisano WA, et al. Aberrant methylation of p16INK4a is an early event in lung cancer and a potential biomarker for early diagnosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1998;95:11891–6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Herman JG, Graff JR, Myohanen S, Nelkin BD, Baylin SB. Methylation-specific PCR: a novel PCR assay for methylation status of CpG islands. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1996;93:9821–6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Virmani AK, Rathi A, Zochbauer-Muller S, et al. Promoter methylation and silencing of the retinoic acid receptor-ß gene in lung carcinomas. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:1303–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Kashiwabara K, Oyama T, Sano T, Fukuda T, Nakajima T. Correlation between methylation status of the p16/CDKN2 gene and the expression of p16 and Rb proteins in primary non-small cell lung cancers. Int J Cancer 1998;79:215–20.[CrossRef][Medline]
  16. Kersting M, Friedl C, Kraus A, Behn M, Pankow W, Schuermann M. Differential frequencies of p16INK4a promoter hypermethylation, p53 mutation, and K-ras mutation in exfoliative material mark the development of lung cancer in symptomatic chronic smokers. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:3221–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Tang X, Khuri FR, Lee JJ, et al. Hypermetylation of the death-associated protein (DAP) kinase promoter and aggressiveness in stage I non-small-cell lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:1511–6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Burbee DG, Forgacs E, Zochbauer-Muller S, et al. Epigenetic inactivation of RASSF1A in lung and breast cancers and malignant phenotype suppression. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:691–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Dammann R, Takahashi T, Pfeifer GP. The CpG island of the novel tumor suppressor gene RASSF1A is intensely methylated in primary small cell lung carcinomas. Oncogene 2001;20:3563–7.[CrossRef][Medline]
  20. Zochbauer-Muller S, Fong KM, Virmani AK, Geradts J, Gazdar AF, Minna JD. Aberrant promoter methylation of multiple genes in non-small cell lung cancers. Cancer Res 2001;61:249–55.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Esteller M, Cor PG, Baylin SB, Herman JG. A gene hypermethylation profile of human cancer. Cancer Res 2001;61:3225–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Leon SA, Shapiro B, Sklaroff DM, Yaros MJ. Free DNA in the serum of cancer patients and the effect of therapy. Cancer Res 1977;37:646–50.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Stroun M, Anker P, Maurice P, Lyautey J, Lederrey C, Beljanski M. Neoplastic characteristics of the DNA found in the plasma of cancer patients. Oncology 1989;46:318–22.[Medline]
  24. Shapiro B, Chakrabaty M, Cohn E, Leon SA. Determination of circulating DNA levels in patients with benign or malignant gastrointestinal diseases. Cancer (Phila) 1983;51:2116–20.
  25. Nawroz H, Koch W, Anker P, Stroun M, Sidransky D. Microsatellite alterations in serum DNA of head and neck cancer patients. Nat Med 1996;2:1035–7.[CrossRef][Medline]
  26. Chen XQ, Stroun M, Magnenat JL, et al. Microsatellite alterations in plasma DNA of small cell lung cancer patients. Nat Med 1996;2:1033–7.[CrossRef][Medline]
  27. Hibi K, Robinson R, Wu L, Hamilton SR, Sidransky D, Jen J. Molecular detection of genetic alterations in the serum of colorectal cancer patients. Cancer Res 1998;58:1405–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. Mulcahy HE, Lyautey J, Lederrey C, et al. A prospective study of K-ras mutations in the plasma of pancreatic cancer patients. Clin Cancer Res 1998;4:271–5.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  29. Miyamoto H. Establishment and characterization of an Adriamycin-resistant subline of human small cell lung cancer cells. Acta Med Okayama 1986;40:65–73.
  30. WHO. Histological typing of lung and pleural tumors. 3rd ed. Geneva: WHO; 1999.
  31. Zochbauer-Muller S, Minna JD, Gazdar AF. Aberrant DNA methylation in lung cancer: biological and clinical implications. Oncologist 2001;7:451–7.
  32. Usadel H, Brabender J, Danenberg KD, et al. Quantitative adenomatous polyposis coli promoter methylation analysis in tumor tissue, serum, and plasma DNA of patients with lung cancer. Cancer Res 2002;62:371–5.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Laird PW. The power and the promise of DNA methylation markers. Nat Rev Cancer 2003;3:253–66.[CrossRef][Medline]
  34. Esteller M, Sanchez-Cespedes M, Rosell R, Sidransky D, Baylin SB, Herman JG. Detection of aberrant promoter hypermethylation of tumor suppressor genes in serum DNA from non-small cell lung cancer patients. Cancer Res 1999;59:67–70.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  35. Katzenellenbogen RA, Baylin SB, Herman JG. Hypermethylation of the DAP-kinase CpG island is a common alteration in B-cell malignancies. Blood 1999;93:4347–53.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. An Q, Liu Y, Gao Y, et al. Detection of p16 hypermethylation in circulating plasma DNA of non-small cell lung cancer patients. Cancer Lett 2002;188:109–14.[CrossRef][Medline]
  37. Brabender J, Usadel H, Metzger R, et al. Quantitative O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase methylation analysis in curatively resected non-small cell lung cancer: associations with clinical outcome. Clin Cancer Res 2003;9:223–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. Harden SV, Tokumaru Y, Westra WH, et al. Gene promoter hypermethylation in tumors and lymph nodes of stage I lung cancer patients. Clin Cancer Res 2003;9:1370–5.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  39. Eads CA, Danenberg KD, Kawakami K, et al. MethyLight: a high-throughput assay to measure DNA methylation. Nucleic Acids Res 2000;28:E32.
  40. Tsou JA, Hagen JA, Carpenter CL, Laird-Offringa IA. DNA methylation analysis: a powerful new tool for lung cancer diagnosis. Oncogene 2002;12:5450–61.
  41. Belinsky SA, Palmisano WA, Gilliland FD, et al. Aberrant promoter methylation in bronchial epithelium and sputum from current and former smokers. Cancer Res 2002;62:2370–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  42. Palmisano WA, Divine KK, Saccomanno G, et al. Predicting lung cancer by detecting aberrant promoter methylation in sputum. Cancer Res 2000;60:5954–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  43. Soria JC, Rodriguez M, Liu DD, Lee JJ, Hong W K, Mao L. Aberrant promoter methylation of multiple genes in bronchial brush samples from former cigarette smokers. Cancer Res 2002;62:351–5.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  44. Kim DH, Nelson HH, Wiencke JK, et al. p16(INK4a) and histology-specific methylation of CpG islands by exposure to tobacco smoke in non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer Res 2001;61:3419–24.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  45. Henschke CI, McCauley DI, Yankelevitz DF, et al. Early lung cancer action project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. Lancet 1999;354:99–105.[CrossRef][Medline]
  46. Swensen SJ, Jet JR, Sloan JA, et al. Screening for lung cancer with low-dose spiral computed tomography. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002;165:508–13.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  47. McWilliams A, MacAulay C, Gazdar AF, et al. Innovative molecular and imaging approaches for the detection of lung cancer and its precursor lesions. Oncogene 2002;21:6949–59.[CrossRef][Medline]
  48. Sone S, Takashima S, Li F, et al. Mass screening for lung cancer with mobile spiral computed tomography scanner. Lancet 1998;351:1242–5.[CrossRef][Medline]
  49. Mulshine JL. Screening for lung cancer: in pursuit of pre-metastatic disease. Nat Rev Cancer 2003;3:65–73.[CrossRef][Medline]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 CarcinogenesisHome page
S. Umemura, N. Fujimoto, A. Hiraki, K. Gemba, N. Takigawa, K. Fujiwara, M. Fujii, H. Umemura, M. Satoh, M. Tabata, et al.
Aberrant promoter hypermethylation in serum DNA from patients with silicosis
Carcinogenesis, September 1, 2008; 29(9): 1845 - 1849.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Genome ResHome page
Y. Korshunova, R. K. Maloney, N. Lakey, R. W. Citek, B. Bacher, A. Budiman, J. M. Ordway, W. R. McCombie, J. Leon, J. A. Jeddeloh, et al.
Massively parallel bisulphite pyrosequencing reveals the molecular complexity of breast cancer-associated cytosine-methylation patterns obtained from tissue and serum DNA
Genome Res., January 1, 2008; 18(1): 19 - 29.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CarcinogenesisHome page
A. G. Schwartz, G. M. Prysak, C. H. Bock, and M. L. Cote
The molecular epidemiology of lung cancer
Carcinogenesis, March 1, 2007; 28(3): 507 - 518.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nucleic Acids ResHome page
R. Tetzner, D. Dietrich, and J. Distler
Control of carry-over contamination for PCR-based DNA methylation quantification using bisulfite treated DNA
Nucleic Acids Res., January 12, 2007; 35(1): e4 - e4.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
A. K. Pathak, M. Bhutani, S. Kumar, A. Mohan, and R. Guleria
Circulating Cell-Free DNA in Plasma/Serum of Lung Cancer Patients as a Potential Screening and Prognostic Tool
Clin. Chem., October 1, 2006; 52(10): 1833 - 1842.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
S. A. Belinsky, D. M. Klinge, J. D. Dekker, M. W. Smith, T. J. Bocklage, F. D. Gilliland, R. E. Crowell, D. D. Karp, C. A. Stidley, and M. A. Picchi
Gene Promoter Methylation in Plasma and Sputum Increases with Lung Cancer Risk
Clin. Cancer Res., September 15, 2005; 11(18): 6505 - 6511.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fujiwara, K.
Right arrow Articles by Tanimoto, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fujiwara, K.
Right arrow Articles by Tanimoto, M.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online