Abstract
Objectives: The aim of the study is to review biotechnology advances in gene expression profiling on prostate cancer (PCa), focusing on experimental platform development and gene discovery, in relation to different study designs and outcomes in order to understand how they can be exploited to improve PCa diagnosis and clinical management.
Methods: We conducted a systematic literature review on gene expression profiling studies through PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science between 2000 and 2016. Tissue biopsy and clinical gene profiling studies with different outcomes (e.g., recurrence, survival) were included.
Results: Over 3,000 papers were screened and 137 full-text articles were selected. In terms of technology used, microarray is still the most popular technique, increasing from 50 to 70% between 2010 and 2015, but there has been a rise in the number of studies using RNA sequencing (13% in 2015). Sample sizes have increased, as well as the number of genes that can be screened all at once, but we have also observed more focused targeting in more recent studies. Qualitative analysis on the specific genes found associated with PCa risk or clinical outcomes revealed a large variety of gene candidates, with a few consistent cross-studies.
Conclusions: The last 15 years of research in gene expression in PCa have brought a large volume of data and information that has been decoded only in part, but advancements in high-throughput sequencing technology are increasing the amount of data that can be generated. The variety of findings warrants the execution of both validation studies and meta-analyses. Genetic biomarkers have tremendous potential for early diagnosis of PCa and, if coupled with other diagnostics (e.g., imaging), can effectively be used to concretize less-invasive, personalized prediction of PCa risk and progression.
Published In | Biomedicine Hub |
Date | May 1, 2017 |
DOI | 10.1159/000472146 |
Citation
Chen Z, Gerke TA, Bird V, Prosperi M. Trends in gene expression profiling for prostate cancer risk assessment: a systematic review. Biomed Hub 2017; 2:472146.