4.7 Article

Evidence for the early onset of aberrant promoter methylation in urothelial carcinoma

Journal

JOURNAL OF PATHOLOGY
Volume 209, Issue 3, Pages 336-343

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/path.1991

Keywords

methylation; bladder cancer; carcinoma in situ

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There is evidence that carcinoma in situ (CIS) is the precursor of invasive urothelial carcinoma, a tumour characterized by frequent gene promoter methylation. The timing of altered DNA methylation is unknown in this pathway. Here we investigate gene methylation in 196 consecutive samples of normal urothelium, CIS, and tumours from 104 patients with both CIS and invasive urothelial carcinoma using quantitative methyl-sensitive polymerase chain reaction for six genes (p16, p14, E-cadherin, RAR beta 2, PASSF1a, and GSTP1). Control normal urothelial samples from 15 patients with no history of urothelial carcinoma were also analysed. Immunohistochemistry established the expression of well-characterized CIS markers p53 and cytokeratin 20. Promoter methylation occurred frequently in both normal urothelium and CIS samples from patients with urothelial carcinoma, and increased with progression from normal to invasive urothelial carcinoma, at both specific loci (X 2 test: E-cadherin, p = 0.0001; RASSF1 alpha, p = 0.003, RAR beta 2, p = 0.007, p16, p = 0.024) and in general (methylation indices [t-test, p < 0.00011). Methylation was associated with cytokeratin 20 expression Q-test, p = 0.004) and poor prognosis, and with increased progression to tumour death in patients whose CIS samples showed methylation, in comparison with those without methylation (log rank p < 0.03). Promoter methylation occurs early in the urothelial carcinogenic pathway and appears to be a good biomarker of the invasive urothelial carcinoma phenotype. Copyright (c) 2006 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

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