Abstract
Expression profiling was the first application of DNA arrays, with high hopes for clinical applications but also serious technical and statistical issues in the initial studies. Once these problems were under control, several potentially useful tests emerged and obtained regulatory approval, in particular, the Agendia MammaPrint test designed to evaluate the risk of metastasis in breast cancer (and suffering competition from the Genomic Health Oncotype test based on qPCR), as well as other tests aimed at tumours of unknown origin, myeloid leukaemia or very early diagnosis of lung cancer, to give a few examples. Expression profiling tests, while they have met with some success, have not enjoyed the wide acceptance anticipated in the early 2000s, largely because of the difficulty of proving clinical utility as well as of competition from PCR approaches and, in the near future, of new-generation sequencing.
As indicated in the preceding chapter, it is useful to consider separately expression profiling and genotyping applications since many technical and regulatory issues are markedly different between them. In this chapter, we will discuss expression profiling, as this was historically the first major application of DNA arrays. Chapter 4 will examine genotype characterisation (simple and complex), and the important field of whole-genome assay for copy number variations (CNVs) will be treated in a specific chapter, Chap. 5, as it includes many clinical applications and generates a high level of scientific and commercial activity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
IVDMIA is an acronym coined by the FDA to designate array tests in which the clinical implication of the result requires the use of proprietary algorithms and cannot be derived from the data by the scientist or clinician. See Chap. 12 for a discussion of these issues.
- 2.
Figures based on sales information released by Agendia in documents for an IPO planned for June 2011 but subsequently withdrawn. Based on the “list price” of the test, and on the income figure quoted in the IPO documents, a large fraction of these tests must have been sold at highly discounted prices.
- 3.
Currently being acquired by Qiagen.
- 4.
The Skyline test uses expression levels of a large number of genes to assess translocations, mutations and overexpression of critical AML markers.
References
Alizadeh AA, Eisen MB, Davis RE, Ma C, Lossos IS et al (2000) Distinct types of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma identified by gene expression profiling. Nature 403:503–511
Buyse M, Loi S, van’t Veer L, Viale G, Delorenzi M et al (2006) Validation and clinical utility of a 70-gene prognostic signature for women with node-negative breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 98:1183–1192
Campbell G (2004) Some issues in the statistical evaluation of genetic and genomic tests. J Biopharm Stat 14:539–552
Cardoso F, Piccart-Gebhart M, Van’t Veer L, Rutgers E, TRANSBIG Consortium (2007) The MINDACT trial: the first prospective clinical validation of a genomic tool. Mol Oncol 1:246–251
Chapman MA, Lawrence MS, Keats JJ, Cibulskis K, Sougnez C et al (2011) Initial genome sequencing and analysis of multiple myeloma. Nature 471:467–472
Chen E, Tong KB, Malin JL (2010) Cost-effectiveness of 70-gene MammaPrint signature in node-negative breast cancer. Am J Manag Care 16:e333–42
Dumur CI, Lyons-Weiler M, Sciulli C, Garrett CT, Schrijver I et al (2008) Interlaboratory performance of a microarray-based gene expression test to determine tissue of origin in poorly differentiated and undifferentiated cancers. J Mol Diagn 10:67–77
EGAPP (Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Working Group) (2009) Recommendations from the EGAPP Working Group: can tumor gene expression profiling improve outcomes in patients with breast cancer? Genet Med 11:66–73
Ein-Dor L, Zuk O, Domany E (2006) Thousands of samples are needed to generate a robust gene list for predicting outcome in cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:5923–5928
EORTC (2009) http://www.eortc.be/services/unit/mindact/MINDACT_websiteii.asp#Current. Accessed 28 July 2011
Koscielny S (2010) Why most gene expression signatures of tumors have not been useful in the clinic. Sci Transl Med 2:14 ps2
MINDACT progress report (2009) http://www.breastinternationalgroup.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=UsF4HCJsbKQ%3d&tabid=2193. Accessed 25 July 2011
Mook S, Van't Veer LJ, Rutgers EJ, Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Cardoso F (2007) Individualization of therapy using Mammaprint: from development to the MINDACT Trial. Cancer Genomics Proteomics 4:147–155
Morozova O, Hirst M, Marra MA (2009) Applications of new sequencing technologies for transcriptome analysis. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet 10:135–151
Negrini M, Nicoloso MS, Calin GA (2009) MicroRNAs and cancer–new paradigms in molecular oncology. Curr Opin Cell Biol 21:470–479
Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, Kim C, Baker J et al (2004) A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 351:2817–2826
Perou CM, Sørlie T, Eisen MB, van de Rijn M, Jeffrey SS (2000) Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 406:747–752
Quackenbush J (2006) Microarray analysis and tumor classification. N Engl J Med 354:2463–2472
Simon R (2008) Lost in translation: problems and pitfalls in translating laboratory observations to clinical utility. Eur J Cancer 44:2707–2713
Simon R, Radmacher MD, Dobbin K, McShane LM (2003) Pitfalls in the use of DNA microarray data for diagnostic and prognostic classification. J Natl Cancer Inst 95:14–18
Sotiriou C, Wirapati P, Loi S, Harris A, Fox S et al (2006) Gene expression profiling in breast cancer: understanding the molecular basis of histologic grade to improve prognosis. J Natl Cancer Inst 98:262–272
Spira A, Beane JE, Shah V, Steiling K, Liu G et al (2007) Airway epithelial gene expression in the diagnostic evaluation of smokers with suspect lung cancer. Nat Med 13:361–366
Tan PK, Downey TJ, Spitznagel EL Jr, Xu P, Fu D et al (2003) Evaluation of gene expression measurements from commercial microarray platforms. Nucleic Acids Res 31:5676–5684
Valk PJ, Verhaak RG, Beijen MA, Erpelinck CA, van Waalwijk B, van Doorn-Khosrovani S et al (2004) Prognostically useful gene-expression profiles in acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med 350:1617–1628
van de Vijver MJ, He YD, van’t Veer LJ, Dai H, Hart AA et al (2002) A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347:1999–2009
Wooster R, Bachman KE (2010) Catalogue, cause, complexity and cure; the many uses of cancer genome sequence. Curr Opin Genet Dev 20:336–341
Zujewski JA, Kamin L (2008) Trial assessing individualized options for treatment for breast cancer: the TAILORx trial. Future Oncol 4:603–610
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jordan, B. (2012). Expression Profiling for Diagnostics. In: Jordan, B. (eds) Microarrays in Diagnostics and Biomarker Development. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28203-4_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28203-4_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-28202-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-28203-4
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)