Diagnostic Utility of Selected Matrix Metalloproteinases (MMP-2, MMP-3, MMP-11, MMP-26), HE4, CA125 and ROMA Algorithm in Diagnosis of Ovarian Cancer.

Publisher: MDPI Country of Publication: Switzerland NLM ID: 101092791 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1422-0067 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 14220067 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Int J Mol Sci Subsets: MEDLINE

Original Publication: Basel, Switzerland : MDPI, [2000-

Ovarian Neoplasms*/blood ; Ovarian Neoplasms*/diagnosis ; CA-125 Antigen*/blood ; WAP Four-Disulfide Core Domain Protein 2*/analysis ; WAP Four-Disulfide Core Domain Protein 2*/metabolism ; Algorithms* ; Biomarkers, Tumor*/blood ; Matrix Metalloproteinase 2*/blood; Humans ; Female ; Middle Aged ; Adult ; Aged ; Proteins/metabolism ; Proteins/analysis ; Matrix Metalloproteinases/blood ; Matrix Metalloproteinases/metabolism ; Matrix Metalloproteinase 3/blood ; Membrane Proteins/blood ; Membrane Proteins/metabolism ; Case-Control Studies ; ROC Curve ; Matrix Metalloproteinase 11/blood ; Matrix Metalloproteinase 11/metabolism

Ovarian cancer (OC) has an unfavorable prognosis. Due to the lack of effective screening tests, new diagnostic methods are being sought to detect OC earlier. The aim of this study was to evaluate the concentration and diagnostic utility of selected matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) as OC markers in comparison with HE4, CA125 and the ROMA algorithm. The study group consisted of 120 patients with OC; the comparison group consisted of 70 patients with benign lesions and 50 healthy women. MMPs were determined via the ELISA method, HE4 and CA125 by CMIA. Patients with OC had elevated levels of MMP-3 and MMP-11, similar to HE4, CA125 and ROMA values. The highest SE, SP, NPV and PPV values were found for MMP-26, CA125 and ROMA in OC patients. Performing combined analyses of ROMA with selected MMPs increased the values of diagnostic parameters. The topmost diagnostic power of the test was obtained for MMP-26, CA125, HE4 and ROMA and performing combined analyses of MMPs and ROMA enhanced the diagnostic power of the test. The obtained results indicate that the tested MMPs do not show potential as stand-alone OC biomarkers, but can be considered as additional tests to raise the diagnostic utility of the ROMA algorithm.

Diagn Pathol. 2016 Apr 02;11:34. (PMID: 27038607)
J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2020 Jun;70(3):214-219. (PMID: 32476768)
Curr Oncol Rep. 2019 Jul 26;21(8):75. (PMID: 31346778)
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2020 Dec;29(12):2504-2512. (PMID: 33051337)
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2017 May;41:60-70. (PMID: 27894705)
Front Oncol. 2022 Jul 26;12:820128. (PMID: 35957909)
Diagnostics (Basel). 2021 Mar 07;11(3):. (PMID: 33800113)
Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2012;67(5):437-41. (PMID: 22666786)
Cancer Manag Res. 2019 Mar 28;11:2545-2551. (PMID: 30992682)
Cancer Biomark. 2016 Mar 11;16(4):599-607. (PMID: 27002762)
Oncol Lett. 2020 Jul;20(1):931-938. (PMID: 32566022)
J Ovarian Res. 2018 Jan 5;11(1):1. (PMID: 29304854)
Am J Clin Pathol. 2008 Feb;129(2):226-31. (PMID: 18208802)
PLoS One. 2018 Jun 27;13(6):e0198896. (PMID: 29949618)
Growth Factors. 2012 Feb;30(1):29-36. (PMID: 22010785)
Int J Mol Sci. 2021 Dec 23;23(1):. (PMID: 35008569)
PLoS One. 2019 Jun 20;14(6):e0218621. (PMID: 31220149)
Cancer Manag Res. 2023 Jul 04;15:573-589. (PMID: 37426394)
Am J Transl Res. 2021 Dec 15;13(12):14141-14148. (PMID: 35035759)
Lancet. 2021 Jun 5;397(10290):2182-2193. (PMID: 33991479)
Ginekol Pol. 2014 Feb;85(2):121-30. (PMID: 24745158)
Med Oncol. 2008;25(3):279-83. (PMID: 18071928)
J Ovarian Res. 2017 Jun 29;10(1):39. (PMID: 28662671)
Int J Mol Sci. 2022 Oct 10;23(19):. (PMID: 36233339)
J Clin Med. 2021 Apr 01;10(7):. (PMID: 33916127)
J Int Med Res. 2020 Jan;48(1):300060519825983. (PMID: 31099295)
Gynecol Endocrinol. 2000 Feb;14(1):25-31. (PMID: 10813103)
Ann Oncol. 2023 Oct;34(10):833-848. (PMID: 37597580)
Sci Rep. 2019 Aug 12;9(1):11677. (PMID: 31406154)
J Ovarian Res. 2019 Mar 27;12(1):28. (PMID: 30917847)
J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci. 2017 Dec;37(6):891-894. (PMID: 29270749)
J Clin Med. 2023 Mar 30;12(7):. (PMID: 37048701)
Pol Merkur Lekarski. 2010 May;28(167):354-8. (PMID: 20568396)
Folia Histochem Cytobiol. 2011;49(1):125-31. (PMID: 21526499)
Gynecol Oncol. 2023 Dec;179:123-130. (PMID: 37980767)
J Pers Med. 2021 Oct 29;11(11):. (PMID: 34834467)
Front Oncol. 2022 Jan 03;11:796588. (PMID: 35047406)
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006 Sep-Oct;16(5):1794-800. (PMID: 17009974)
J Ovarian Res. 2013 Jul 02;6(1):45. (PMID: 23819707)
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2012 Dec;286(6):1537-43. (PMID: 22832979)
Anticancer Res. 2019 Apr;39(4):1821-1827. (PMID: 30952722)
Am J Pathol. 2010 Sep;177(3):1053-64. (PMID: 20651229)
Reproduction. 2015 Aug;150(2):R55-64. (PMID: 25918438)
Folia Histochem Cytobiol. 2012 Jul 04;50(2):213-9. (PMID: 22763962)
Horm Mol Biol Clin Investig. 2019 Nov 6;41(3):. (PMID: 31693493)
Cancer Manag Res. 2022 Nov 30;14:3359-3382. (PMID: 36474934)
Anat Rec (Hoboken). 2020 Jun;303(6):1557-1572. (PMID: 31168956)
Anticancer Res. 2019 May;39(5):2575-2582. (PMID: 31092455)

Keywords: CA125; HE4; MMP-11; MMP-2; MMP-26; MMP-3; ROMA algorithm; Serous cystadenomas; ovarian cancer; plasma concentration

0 (CA-125 Antigen)
0 (WFDC2 protein, human)
0 (WAP Four-Disulfide Core Domain Protein 2)
0 (Biomarkers, Tumor)
EC 3.4.24.24 (Matrix Metalloproteinase 2)
0 (Proteins)
EC 3.4.24.- (Matrix Metalloproteinases)
EC 3.4.24.17 (Matrix Metalloproteinase 3)
0 (MUC16 protein, human)
0 (Membrane Proteins)
EC 3.4.24.24 (MMP2 protein, human)
EC 3.4.24.- (Matrix Metalloproteinase 11)

Date Created: 20240619 Date Completed: 20240619 Latest Revision: 20240708

20240708

PMC11173327

10.3390/ijms25116265

38892452