Epithelium percentage estimation facilitates epithelial quantitative protein measurement in tissue specimens

Clinical Proteomics

Hui Zhang²  Xingde Li¹  Qing Kay Li²  George Steven Bova³  Shadi Toghi Eshghi¹  Jing Chen² 

[1] Department of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA;Department of Pathology, Clinical Chemistry Division, Johns Hopkins University, 1550 Orleans Street, Cancer Research Building II, Room 3M-03, Baltimore, MD 21231, USA;Institute of Biomedical Technology, MBPCG, University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland

关键词: Computer-aided classification;    Stroma;    Cancer;    Epithelium;   

Others  :  1026332
DOI  :  10.1186/1559-0275-10-18

 received in 2013-09-05, accepted in 2013-10-26,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

The rapid advancement of high-throughput tools for quantitative measurement of proteins has demonstrated the potential for the identification of proteins associated with cancer. However, the quantitative results on cancer tissue specimens are usually confounded by tissue heterogeneity, e.g. regions with cancer usually have significantly higher epithelium content yet lower stromal content.

Objective

It is therefore necessary to develop a tool to facilitate the interpretation of the results of protein measurements in tissue specimens.

Methods

Epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) and cathepsin L (CTSL) are two epithelial proteins whose expressions in normal and tumorous prostate tissues were confirmed by measuring staining intensity with immunohistochemical staining (IHC). The expressions of these proteins were measured by ELISA in protein extracts from OCT embedded frozen prostate tissues. To eliminate the influence of tissue heterogeneity on epithelial protein quantification measured by ELISA, a color-based segmentation method was developed in-house for estimation of epithelium content using H&E histology slides from the same prostate tissues and the estimated epithelium percentage was used to normalize the ELISA results. The epithelium contents of the same slides were also estimated by a pathologist and used to normalize the ELISA results. The computer based results were compared with the pathologist’s reading.

Results

We found that both EpCAM and CTSL levels, measured by ELISA assays itself, were greatly affected by epithelium content in the tissue specimens. Without adjusting for epithelium percentage, both EpCAM and CTSL levels appeared significantly higher in tumor tissues than normal tissues with a p value less than 0.001. However, after normalization by the epithelium percentage, ELISA measurements of both EpCAM and CTSL were in agreement with IHC staining results, showing a significant increase only in EpCAM with no difference in CTSL expression in cancer tissues. These results were obtained with normalization by both the computer estimated and pathologist estimated epithelium percentage.

Conclusions

Our results show that estimation of tissue epithelium percentage using our color-based segmentation method correlates well with pathologists' estimation of tissue epithelium percentages. The epithelium contents estimated by color-based segmentation may be useful in immuno-based analysis or clinical proteomic analysis of tumor proteins. The codes used for epithelium estimation as well as the micrographs with estimated epithelium content are available online.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Chen et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Zhang H, Chan DW: Cancer biomarker discovery in plasma using a tissue-targeted proteomic approach. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007, 16:1915-1917.
• [2]Society AC: Cancer Facts and Figures 2013. In Book Cancer Facts and Figures 2013. City: American Cancer Society; 2013.
• [3]Veltri RW, Park J, Miller MC, Marks L, Kojima M, Van Rootselaar C, Khan MA, Partin AW: Stromal-epithelial measurements of prostate cancer in native Japanese and Japanese-American men. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2004, 7:232-237.
• [4]Gurcan MN, Boucheron LE, Can A, Madabhushi A, Rajpoot NM, Yener B: Histopathological image analysis: a review. IEEE Revi Biomed Eng 2009, 2:147-171.
• [5]Baeuerle PA, Gires O: EpCAM (CD326) finding its role in cancer. Br J Cancer 2007, 96:417-423.
• [6]Chauhan SS, Goldstein LJ, Gottesman MM: Expression of cathepsin L in human tumors. Cancer Res 1991, 51:1478-1481.
• [7]Went PT, Lugli A, Meier S, Bundi M, Mirlacher M, Sauter G, Dirnhofer S: Frequent EpCam protein expression in human carcinomas. Hum Pathol 2004, 35:122-128.
• [8]Woelfle U, Breit E, Zafrakas K, Otte M, Schubert F, Muller V, Izbicki JR, Loning T, Pantel K: Bi-specific immunomagnetic enrichment of micrometastatic tumour cell clusters from bone marrow of cancer patients. J Immunol Methods 2005, 300:136-145.
• [9]Went P, Vasei M, Bubendorf L, Terracciano L, Tornillo L, Riede U, Kononen J, Simon R, Sauter G, Baeuerle PA: Frequent high-level expression of the immunotherapeutic target Ep-CAM in colon, stomach, prostate and lung cancers. Br J Cancer 2006, 94:128-135.
• [10]Trzpis M, McLaughlin PM, De Leij LM, Harmsen MC: Epithelial cell adhesion molecule: more than a carcinoma marker and adhesion molecule. Am J Pathol 2007, 171:386-395.
• [11]Colella R, Jackson T, Goodwyn E: Matrigel invasion by the prostate cancer cell lines, PC3 and DU145, and cathepsin L + B activity. Biotech Histochem 2004, 79:121-127.
• [12]Colella R, Casey SF: Decreased activity of cathepsins L + B and decreased invasive ability of PC3 prostate cancer cells. Biotech Histochem 2003, 78:101-108.
• [13]Friedrich B, Jung K, Lein M, Turk I, Rudolph B, Hampel G, Schnorr D, Loening SA: Cathepsins B, H, L and cysteine protease inhibitors in malignant prostate cell lines, primary cultured prostatic cells and prostatic tissue. Eur J Cancer 1999, 35:138-144.
• [14]Tian Y, Bova GS, Zhang H: Quantitative glycoproteomic analysis of optimal cutting temperature-embedded frozen tissues identifying glycoproteins associated with aggressive prostate cancer. Analytical Chem 2011, 83:7013-7019.
• [15]Chen J, Xi J, Tian Y, Bova GS, Zhang H: Identification, prioritization and evaluation of glycoproteins for aggressive prostate cancer using quantitative glycoproteomics and antibody-based assays on tissue specimens. Proteomics 2013, 13(15):2268-2277.