4.6 Article

Correlated Downregulation of Estrogen Receptor Beta and the Circadian Clock Gene Per1 in Human Colorectal Cancer

Journal

MOLECULAR CARCINOGENESIS
Volume 48, Issue 7, Pages 642-647

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mc.20510

Keywords

circadian rhythm; colon carcinoma; tumor progression; estrogen receptor alpha and beta

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There is a growing body of evidence that disturbed circadian clock gene expression is associated with tumor development and tumor progression. Based on our initial experiments demonstrating decreased period 1 (Peri) expression in colon cancer, we evaluated clock gene and estrogen receptor (ER) alpha/beta expression in colon cancer cells of primary colorectal tumors and adjacent normal colon mucosa (NM) by real-time RT-PCR. Analysis of gene expression in G(2) and G(3) colorectal tumors revealed a decrease of Per1 mRNA compared with paired NM (G(2): 0.52-fold; P=n.s. and G(3): 0.48-fold; P=0.03). A significant gender specific difference of Per1 expression was observed in G(2) tumors as compared with NM (female: 0.38-fold; P=0.004 vs. male: 0.73-fold; P=n.s.). Expression of CLOCK was significantly elevated in G2 tumors of male patients (1.63-fold, P=0.01). The expression of ER-beta was significantly decreased in G(2) and G(3) tumors (G(2): 0.32-fold; P=0.003 and 0.27; P=0.001). No significant gender specific differences of ER-beta reduction in tumors were observed. A significant correlation between the decrease of Per1 and ER-beta in colorectal tumors (r=0.61; P<0.001) was found. No changes in gene expression were detected for ER-alpha and Per2. Our data demonstrate a correlated decrease of Per1 and ER-beta in colorectal tumors, mediated probably by epigenetic mechanisms. The observed gender differences in the expression of CLOCK and Per1 in G(2) tumors might suggest a gender-specific, distinctive role of the cellular clock in colorectal tumorigenesis. (C) 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available