The association of genetic factors with serum calretinin levels in asbestos-related diseases.

BACKGROUND: Asbestos exposure is associated with different asbestos-related diseases, including malignant mesothelioma (MM). MM diagnosis is confirmed with immunohistochemical analysis of several markers, including calretinin. Increased circulating calretinin was also observed in MM. The aim of the study was to determine if CALB2 polymorphisms or polymorphisms in genes that can regulate calretinin expression are associated with serum calretinin levels or MM susceptibility. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The study included 288 MM patients and 616 occupationally asbestos-exposed subjects without MM (153 with asbestosis, 380 with pleural plaques and 83 without asbestos-related disease). Subjects were genotyped for seven polymorphisms in CALB2, E2F2, MIR335, NRF1 and SEPTIN7 genes using competitive allele-specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Serum calretinin was determined with ELISA in 545 subjects. Nonparametric tests, logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Carriers of at least one polymorphic CALB2 rs889704 allele had lower calretinin levels (P = 0.036). Carriers of two polymorphic MIR335 rs3807348 alleles had higher calretinin (P = 0.027), while carriers of at least one polymorphic NRF1 rs13241028 allele had lower calretinin levels (P = 0.034) in subjects without MM. Carriers of two polymorphic E2F2 rs2075995 alleles were less likely to develop MM (odds ratio [OR] = 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.43-0.96, P = 0.032), but the association was no longer significant after adjustment for age (P = 0.093). Optimal serum calretinin cut-off values differentiating MM patients from other subjects differed according to CALB2, NRF1, E2F2, and MIR335 genotypes. CONCLUSIONS: The results of presented study suggest that genetic variability could influence serum calretinin levels. These findings could contribute to a better understanding of calretinin regulation and potentially to earlier MM diagnosis.

Mesothelioma Biomarkers: Discovery in Search of Validation.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an asbestos-related neoplasm that can only be treated successfully when correctly diagnosed and treated early. The asbestos-exposed population is a high-risk group that could benefit from sensitive and specific blood- or tissue-based biomarkers. We review recent work with biomarker development in MPM and literature of the last 20 years on the most promising blood- and tissue-based biomarkers. Proteomic, genomic, and epigenomic platforms are covered. SMRP is the only validated blood-based biomarker with diagnostic, monitoring and prognostic value. To strengthen development and testing of MPM biomarkers, cohorts for validation must be established by enlisting worldwide collaborations.

Mesothelin, Calretinin, and Megakaryocyte Potentiating Factor as Biomarkers of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma.

PURPOSE: Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a highly lethal cancer caused by exposure to asbestos. Currently, the diagnosis is a challenge, carried out by means of invasive methods of limited sensitivity. This is a case-control study to evaluate the individual and combined performance of minimally invasive biomarkers for the diagnosis of MPM. METHOD: A study of 166 incident cases of MPM and 378 population controls of Mestizo-Mexican ethnicity was conducted. Mesothelin, calretinin, and megakaryocyte potentiating factor (MPF) were quantified in plasma by ELISA. The samples were collected from 2011 to 2016. RESULTS: Based on ROC analysis and a preset specificity of 95%, the combination of the three biomarkers reached an AUC of 0.944 and a sensitivity of 82% in men. In women, an AUC of 0.937 and a sensitivity of 87% were reached. In nonconditional logistic regression models, the adjusted ORs in men were 7.92 (95% CI 3.02-20.78) for mesothelin, 20.44 (95% CI 8.90-46.94) for calretinin, and 4.37 (95% CI 1.60-11.94) for MPF. The ORs for women were 28.89 (95% CI 7.32-113.99), 17.89 (95% CI 3.93-81.49), and 2.77 (95% CI 0.47-16.21), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first study evaluating a combination of mesothelin, calretinin, and MPF, and demonstrating a sex effect for calretinin. The biomarker panel showed a good performance in a Mestizo-Mexican population, with high sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of MPM.

Prediagnostic detection of mesothelioma by circulating calretinin and mesothelin - a case-control comparison nested into a prospective cohort of asbestos-exposed workers.

Malignant mesothelioma (MM) is strongly associated with a previous asbestos exposure. To improve timely detection of MM in asbestos workers, better screening tools - like minimally-invasive biomarkers - are desirable. Between 2008 and 2018 2,769 patients with benign asbestos-related diseases were recruited to participate in annual screens. Using a nested case-control design the protein markers calretinin and mesothelin were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays in prediagnostic plasma samples of 34 MM cases as well as 136 matched controls from the cohort. Conditional on a pre-defined specificity of 98% for calretinin and 99% for mesothelin the markers reached individual sensitivities of 31% and 23%, respectively, when including the incident cases with samples taken between one and 15 months before diagnosis. The combination of both markers increased the sensitivity to 46% at 98% specificity. Marker complementation increased with earlier sampling. The marker combination improves the sensitivity of the individual markers, indicating a useful complementation and suggesting that additional markers may further improve the performance. This is the first prospective cohort study to evaluate a detection of MM by calretinin and its combination with mesothelin up to about a year before clinical diagnosis. Whether an earlier diagnosis will result in reduced mortality has yet to be demonstrated.

Biomarkers for Predicting Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma in a Mexican Population.

Background: Diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) remains a challenge, especially when resources in pathology are limited. The study aimed to evaluate cost-effective tumor markers to predict the probability of MPM in plasma samples in order to accelerate the diagnostic workup of the tissue of potential cases. Methods: We conducted a case-control study stratified by gender, which included 75 incident cases with MPM from three Mexican hospitals and 240 controls frequency-matched by age and year of blood drawing. Plasma samples were obtained to determine mesothelin, calretinin, and thrombomodulin using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs). We estimated the performance of the markers based on the area under the curve (AUC) and predicted the probability of an MPM diagnosis of a potential case based on the marker concentrations. Results: Mesothelin and calretinin, but not thrombomodulin were significant predictors of a diagnosis of MPM with AUCs of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.85-0.95), 0.88 (95% CI: 0.82-0.94), and 0.51 (95% CI: 0.41-0.61) in males, respectively. For MPM diagnosis in men we estimated a true positive rate of 0.79 and a false positive rate of 0.11 for mesothelin. The corresponding figures for calretinin were 0.81 and 0.18, and for both markers combined 0.84 and 0.11, respectively. Conclusions: We developed prediction models based on plasma concentrations of mesothelin and calretinin to estimate the probability of an MPM diagnosis. Both markers showed a good performance and could be used to accelerate the diagnostic workup of tissue samples in Mexico.

Assessment of potential predictors of calretinin and mesothelin to improve the diagnostic performance to detect malignant mesothelioma: results from a population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Mesothelin and calretinin are blood-based markers for malignant mesothelioma. The objective of this study was to analyse the markers in plasma samples from cancer-free men and to identify factors influencing their concentrations to minimise false-positive test results when using these markers for the early detection of malignant mesothelioma. SETTING: The present analyses used data and archived blood samples of the population-based Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study among elderly people collected from 2011 to 2014. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 569 men (median age 70 years) without a malignant disease at the time of blood sampling were selected for these analyses. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME: Mesothelin and calretinin concentration in plasma samples. RESULTS: We observed 24 mesothelin concentrations ≥1.5 nM (specificity 95.8%, 95% CI 93.8% to 97.2%) and 34 calretinin concentrations ≥1.0 ng/mL (specificity 94.0%, 95% CI 91.7% to 95.7%). Only five men had both markers above these cut-offs. Renal dysfunction and hypertension were major predictors of elevated mesothelin in addition to age. Regarding calretinin, the effect of renal dysfunction was slightly weaker and hypertension was not associated with increased concentrations. However, a diagnosis of cancer after blood collection and bronchial asthma were associated with positive calretinin results. CONCLUSIONS: The combined determination of mesothelin and calretinin results in only few false-positive marker tests. Both markers are mainly influenced by renal dysfunction. The determination of cystatin C concentrations may be informative when interpreting the test results.

Calretinin as a blood-based biomarker for mesothelioma.

BACKGROUND: Malignant mesothelioma (MM) is a deadly cancer mainly caused by previous exposure to asbestos. With a latency period up to 50 years the incidence of MM is still increasing, even in countries that banned asbestos. Secondary prevention has been established to provide persons at risk regular health examinations. An earlier detection with tumor markers might improve therapeutic options. Previously, we have developed a new blood-based assay for the protein marker calretinin. Aim of this study was the verification of the assay in an independent study population and comparison with the established marker mesothelin. METHODS: For a case-control study in men, a total of 163 cases of pleural MM and 163 controls were available from Australia, another 36 cases and 72 controls were recruited in Germany. All controls had asbestosis and/or plaques. Calretinin and mesothelin were determined by ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) in serum or plasma collected prior to therapy. We estimated the performance of both markers and tested factors potentially influencing marker concentrations like age, sample storage time, and MM subtype. RESULTS: Calretinin was able to detect all major subtypes except for sarcomatoid MM. Calretinin showed a similar performance in Australian and German men. At a pre-defined specificity of 95% the sensitivity of calretinin reached 71% and that of mesothelin 69%, when excluding sarcomatoid MM. At 97% specificity, the combination with calretinin increased the sensitivity of mesothelin from 66% to 75%. Sample storage time did not influence the results. In controls the concentrations of calretinin increased 1.87-fold (95% CI 1.10-3.20) per 10 years of age and slightly more for mesothelin (2.28, 95% CI 1.30-4.00). CONCLUSIONS: Calretinin could be verified as a blood-based marker for MM. The assay is robust and shows a performance that is comparable to that of mesothelin. Retrospective analyses would not be limited by storage time. The high specificity supports a combination of calretinin with other markers. Calretinin is specific for epithelioid and biphasic MM but not the rarer sarcomatoid form. Molecular markers like calretinin and mesothelin are promising tools to improve and supplement the diagnosis of MM and warrant further validation in a prospective study.