Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34930473›Full record

ArticleBiomarker research2021

Brush swab as a noninvasive surrogate for tissue biopsies in epigenomic profiling of oral cancer.

Chi T Viet, Xinyu Zhang, Ke Xu, Gary Yu, Kesava Asam, Carissa M Thomas, Nicholas F Callahan, Coleen Doan, Paul C Walker, Khanh Nguyen and 13 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomarker research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

23 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.

Chi T VietDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Loma Linda University School of Dentistry, Loma Linda, CA, USA. cviet@llu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5078-7807
Xinyu ZhangDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Ke XuDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Gary YuNew York University Rory Meyers College of Nursing, New York, NY, USA.
Kesava AsamDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, New York University College of Dentistry, New York, NY, USA.
Carissa M ThomasDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Nicholas F CallahanDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Illinois Chicago, College of Dentistry, Chicago, IL, USA.
Coleen DoanDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Loma Linda University School of Dentistry, Loma Linda, CA, USA.
Paul C WalkerDepartment of Otolaryngology, Loma Linda University School of Medicine, Loma Linda, CA, USA.
Khanh NguyenDepartment of Otolaryngology, Loma Linda University School of Medicine, Loma Linda, CA, USA.
Stephanie C KiddDepartment of Otolaryngology, Loma Linda University School of Medicine, Loma Linda, CA, USA.
Steve C LeeDepartment of Otolaryngology, Loma Linda University School of Medicine, Loma Linda, CA, USA.
Anupama GrandhiDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Loma Linda University School of Dentistry, Loma Linda, CA, USA.
Clint T AllenSection on Translational Tumor Immunology, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD, USA.
Simon YoungDepartment of Oral, Head and Neck Oncology and Microvascular Reconstructive Surgery, School of Dentistry, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
James C MelvilleDepartment of Oral, Head and Neck Oncology and Microvascular Reconstructive Surgery, School of Dentistry, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Jonathan W ShumDepartment of Oral, Head and Neck Oncology and Microvascular Reconstructive Surgery, School of Dentistry, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Dan T VietRocky Vista University, Ivins, UT, USA.
Alan S HerfordDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Loma Linda University School of Dentistry, Loma Linda, CA, USA.
Dylan F RodenDepartment of Otolaryngology, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, USA.
Manuel L GonzalezDepartment of Pathology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Jiang F ZhongDepartment of Basic Sciences, Loma Linda University, School of Medicine, Loma Linda, CA, USA.
Bradley E AouizeratDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Loma Linda University · USThe University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston · USYale University · USUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · USCenter for Clinical Research (United States) · USNational Institutes of Health · USNew York University · USRocky Vista University · USRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · USUniversity of Illinois Chicago · US

Funding

The REASON Score: An Epigenetic And Clinicopathologic Score to Predict Risk of Poor Survival in Early Stage Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma PatientsR01DE031395 · NIDCR · LOMA LINDA UNIVERSITY · PI Chi T. Viet · 2022 to 2026
$3.7M
Feature selection of DNA methylation biosignatures for neuropathy with comorbid drug abuse in the setting of HIV infectionR01DA047820 · NIDA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI AOUIZERAT, BRADLEY E, XU, KE · 2018 to 2022
$2.9M
Defining the impact of injection drug use on antiretroviral therapy and HIV treatment outcomes: an (epi)genomic approachR01DA047063 · NIDA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI AOUIZERAT, BRADLEY E, XU, KE · 2018 to 2022
$2.4M
Methylome-wide and mQTL analysis of HIV progression in the context of cocaine useR01DA042691 · NIDA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI XU, KE · 2016 to 2019
$1.6M
Clinical study to evaluate the methylation signature of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma painK23DE030250 · NIDCR · LOMA LINDA UNIVERSITY · PI VIET, CHI T. · 2021 to 2025
$865k
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA042691NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA047063NIDA NIH HHS R01DA047063NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA047820NIDA NIH HHS R01DA047820NIDCR NIH HHS K23 DE030250NIDCR NIH HHS K23DE030250NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE031395
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) has poor survival rates. There is a pressing need to develop more precise risk assessment methods to tailor clinical treatment. Epigenome-wide association studies in OSCC have not produced a viable biomarker. These studies have relied on methylation array platforms, which are limited in their ability to profile the methylome. In this study, we use MethylCap-Seq (MC-Seq), a comprehensive methylation quantification technique, and brush swab samples, to develop a noninvasive, readily translatable approach to profile the methylome in OSCC patients.

methodsThree OSCC patients underwent collection of cancer and contralateral normal tissue and brush swab biopsies, totaling 4 samples for each patient. Epigenome-wide DNA methylation quantification was performed using the SureSelectXT Methyl-Seq platform. DNA quality and methylation site resolution were compared between brush swab and tissue samples. Correlation and methylation value difference were determined for brush swabs vs. tissues for each respective patient and site (i.e., cancer or normal). Correlations were calculated between cancer and normal tissues and brush swab samples for each patient to determine the robustness of DNA methylation marks using brush swabs in clinical biomarker studies.

resultsThere were no significant differences in DNA yield between tissue and brush swab samples. Mapping efficiency exceeded 90% across all samples, with no differences between tissue and brush swabs. The average number of CpG sites with at least 10x depth of coverage was 2,716,674 for brush swabs and 2,903,261 for tissues. Matched tissue and brush swabs had excellent correlation (r = 0.913 for cancer samples and r = 0.951 for normal samples). The methylation profile of the top 1000 CpGs was significantly different between cancer and normal samples (mean p-value = 0.00021) but not different between tissues and brush swabs (mean p-value = 0.11).

conclusionsOur results demonstrate that MC-Seq is an efficient platform for epigenome profiling in cancer biomarker studies, with broader methylome coverage than array-based platforms. Brush swab biopsy provides adequate DNA yield for MC-Seq, and taken together, our findings set the stage for development of a non-invasive methylome quantification technique for oral cancer with high translational potential.

Indexed as

BiomarkerBrush biopsyBrush swabEpigenetic biomarkerHead and neck cancerMethylation arrayMethylation biomarkerMethylCap-SeqOral cancer

Identifiers

PMID34930473
PMCPMC8686381
OpenAlexW4200575596

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.