Exploring urine sediments as a non-invasive method for DNA methylation detection in bladder cancer

• Published in: African journal of urology Vol. 28; no. 1; pp. 1 - 5
• Main Authors: El azzouzi, Meryem, El ahanidi, Hajar, Hafidi Alaoui, Chaimae, Chaoui, Imane, Benbacer, Laila, Tetou, Mohamed, Hassan, Ilias, Bensaid, Mounia, Oukabli, Mohamed, Ameur, Ahmed, Al bouzidi, Abderrahmane, El mzibri, Mohammed, Attaleb, Mohammed
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin/Heidelberg Springer Berlin Heidelberg 01-12-2022; Springer; SpringerOpen
• Subjects: Analysis; Bladder cancer; Cancer; Development and progression; Diagnosis; DNA; DNA methylation; Epigenetic inheritance; Genes; Genetic aspects; Genetic research; Imaging; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Methods; Methylation; Non-invasive test; Original Research; Radiology; Surgery; Urine sediments; Urology; Morocco; DNA methylation; Urine sediments; Non-invasive test; Bladder cancer
• ISSN: 1110-5704; 1961-9987
• DOI: 10.1186/s12301-022-00298-3

Background
The main epigenetic event occurring during the bladder carcinogenesis process is DNA methylation, affecting genes involved in various metabolic pathways and cell regulation. The use of biological fluids such as urine sediments could be used as a non-invasive approach to enhance bladder cancer management. In this study, we aim to determine the promoter methylation status of a panel of genes in bladder cancer on tumor biopsies and urine sediments to evaluate the usefulness of urine samples as a non-invasive approach for methylation status assessment.
Methods
Using the methylation-specific PCR technique, we explored the promoter methylation status of
hTERT
,
TWIST1
,
VIM
and
NID2
genes in 40 tumor biopsies and their paired urine samples from Moroccan bladder cancer patients.
Results
In this study, bladder tumors showed promoter hypermethylation frequency of individual genes as 90%, 85%, 62.5% and 72.5% in
TWIST1, hTERT, NID2
and
VIM
genes, respectively.
Interestingly, the specificity of methylation detection in urine samples was 100% and the sensitivity to detect hypermethylation of
TWIST1
,
hTERT
,
NID2
and
VIM
genes reached 91.7%; 97.1%; 84% and 82.8%, respectively.
Conclusions
Our results clearly show that the assessment of promoter hypermethylation in urine samples is highly specific and has high sensitivity. Furthermore, urine sediments would be a useful approach to detect the DNA methylation status of genes and its potential association with bladder cancer development.