Diagnostic performance of CDO1 and ZSCAN12 methylation in endometrial versus cervical samples for endometrial cancer and atypical hyperplasia: a comparative study.

Authors

Fang Yu, Peng Gan, Hong Tao, Saiping Mao, Zhengjiao Tong, Juxiang Xiong, Xing Fan, Rong Wang

Published in

Annals of medicine. Volume 58. Issue 1. Pages 2716939. Epub Aug 12, 2026.

Abstract

This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of CDO1 and ZSCAN12 methylation in paired endometrial (Em) and exfoliated cervical (Cx) samples for detecting endometrial cancer (EC) and endometrial atypical hyperplasia (EAH).
We analysed 127 histologically confirmed women (43 EC, 13 EAH, 71 benign). Methylation levels were measured using bisulfite-conversion real-time PCR. Agreement, robustness, and diagnostic accuracy were assessed.
Methylation levels increased stepwise from benign to EC across all sample types (all p < 0.001). For EC detection, CDO1^m_Em and ZSCAN12^m_Em achieved AUCs of 0.858 and 0.832, with ORs of 21.0 and 19.7, respectively. Bootstrap validation confirmed robustness. For the same sample source (Em or Cx), the clinical performance of CDO1^m and ZSCAN12^m was comparable (all p > 0.05). However, significant differences were noted between Em and Cx samples for ZSCAN12^m's negative predictive value (NPV) in EC detection (p = 0.045), and for CDO1^m's sensitivity, NPV, and negative likelihood ratio (nLR) in EAH/EC detection (p = 0.029, 0.026, and 0.031, respectively). The Em-based two-gene combination showed 97.5% sensitivity for EC (39 of 40 evaluable cases), failing to detect only 1 of 40 cases.
CDO1 and ZSCAN12 methylation demonstrated robust diagnostic performance for EC and EAH. The Em-based two-gene combination showed excellent sensitivity. Most diagnostic metrics were comparable between sample sources, with Em showing advantages specifically in NPV-related measures. Given that these differences may be assay-dependent and that most performance metrics showed no significant differences, cervical sampling remains a promising less invasive option but warrants cautious interpretation and further validation.

PMID:
42584228
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 12 Aug 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.