4.7 Article

Evaluation of acetylation and methylation in oral rinse of patients with head and neck cancer history exposed to valproic acid

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-95845-3

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [2015/12990-0]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluated the biological action of valproic acid in HNSCC patients and found that the use of valproic acid in oral rinse led to a significant decrease in DCC gene methylation.
Evaluate the biological action of valproic acid in the acetylation of histones and in the methylation of tumor suppressor genes via oral rinse in patients with a previous history of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Forty-two active or former smokers were included in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Oral rinse samples were collected prior to treatment with valproic acid or placebo and after 90 days of treatment. The methylation status of five tumor suppressor genes and histone acetylation were evaluated by pyrosequencing and ELISA techniques, respectively. Differences between the 90-day and baseline oral rinse acetylation and methylation results were analyzed by comparing groups. Thirty-four patients were considered for analysis. The mean percentage adherence in the valproic and placebo groups was 93.4 and 93.0, respectively (p = 0.718). There was no statistically significant difference between groups when comparing the medians of the histone acetylation ratio and the methylation ratio for most of the studied genes. A significant reduction in the DCC methylation pattern was observed in the valproic group (p = 0.023). The use of valproic acid was safe and accompanied by good therapeutic adherence. DCC methylation was lower in the valproic acid group than in the placebo group.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available