Comparative biomarker expression and RNA integrity in biospecimens derived from radical retropubic and robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomies

Carmela Ricciardelli, Tina Bianco-Miotto, Shalini Jindal, Thomas J Dodd, Penelope A Cohen, Villis R Marshall, Peter D Sutherland, Hemamali Samaratunga, James G Kench, Ying Dong, Hong Wang, Judith A Clements, Gail Petuna Risbridger, Robert L Sutherland, Wayne Tilley, David J Horsfall

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of preanalytic conditions that biospecimens are subjected to is critically important because novel surgical procedures, tissue sampling, handling, and storage might affect biomarker expression or invalidate tissue samples as analytes for some technologies. METHODS: We investigated differences in RNA quality, gene expression by quantitative real-time PCR, and immunoreactive protein expression of selected prostate cancer biomarkers between tissues from retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) and robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP). Sections of tissue microarray of 23 RALP and 22 RRP samples were stained with antibodies to androgen receptor (AR) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as intersite controls, and 14 other candidate biomarkers of research interest to three laboratories within the Australian Prostate Cancer BioResource tissue banking network. Quantitative real-time PCR was done for AR, PSA (KLK3), KLK2, KLK4, and HIF1A on RNA extracted from five RALP and five RRP frozen tissue cores. RESULTS: No histologic differences were observed between RALP and RRP tissue. Biomarker staining grouped these samples into those with increased (PSA, CK8/18, CKHMW, KLK4), decreased (KLK2, KLK14), or no change in expression (AR, ghrelin, Ki67, PCNA, VEGF-C, PAR2, YB1, p63, versican, and chondroitin 0-sulfate) in RALP compared with RRP tissue. No difference in RNA quality or gene expression was detected between RALP and RRP tissue. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in biomarker expression between RALP and RRP tissue exist at the immunoreactive protein level, but the etiology is unclear. Impact: Future studies should account for changes in biomarker expression when using RALP tissues, and mixed cohorts of RALP and RRP tissue should be avoided.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1755 - 1765
Number of pages11
JournalCancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
Volume19
Issue number7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2010

Cite this