Prognostic significance of proteomics and multi-omics studies in renal carcinoma

ABSTRACT

Introduction

Renal carcinoma, and in particular its most common variant, the clear cell subtype, is often diagnosed incidentally through abdominal imaging and frequently, the tumor is discovered at an early stage. However, 20% to 40% of patients undergoing nephrectomy for clinically localized renal cancer, even after accurate histological and clinical classification, will develop metastasis or recurrence, justifying the associated mortality rate. Therefore, even if renal carcinoma is not among the most frequent nor deadly cancers, a better prognostication is needed.

Areas covered

Recently proteomics or other omics combinations have been applied to both cancer tissues, on the neoplasia itself and surrounding microenvironment, cultured cells, and biological fluids (so-called liquid biopsy) generating a list of prognostic molecular tools that will be reviewed in the present paper.

Expert opinion

Although promising, none of the approaches listed above has been yet translated in clinics. This is likely due to the peculiar genetic and phenotypic heterogeneity of this cancer, which makes nearly each tumor different from all the others. Attempts to overcome this issue will be also revised. In particular, we will discuss how the application of omics-integrated approaches could provide the determinants of response to the different targeted drugs.

KEYWORDS:

• Cancer heterogeneity
• liquid biopsy
• multi-omics
• proteomics
• renal cell carcinoma

Article highlights

• The prognostic requirements for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are even more critical than for other common cancers

• The issue of genomic and phenotypic cancer-associated heterogeneity strongly affects the research for prognostic markers in RCC

• Application of proteomics to tissues, cultured cells, and biological fluids has provided some advancement into RCC prognostic significance assessment

• The integration of different omic strategies and system biology can contribute to identifying sound prognostic panels

• None of the newly proposed prognostic factors, either single or in combination has reached enough acceptance to be applied in the patients’ follow-up

Declaration of interest

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

Reviewer declarations

Peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial or other relationships to disclose.

Additional information

Funding

This paper was not funded.