4.7 Article

CDNA microarray analysis of gene expression in pathologic stage IA nonsmall cell lung carcinomas

Journal

CANCER
Volume 97, Issue 11, Pages 2798-2805

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.11406

Keywords

microarray; lung carcinoma; gene chip; mRNA expression; cancer; cytokine; matrix metalloproteinase; collagen; cell adhesion molecule

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND. The relationship between altered gene expression and tumor progression in lung carcinoma has yet to be characterized. Gene expression in pathologic Stage IA nonsmall cell lung carcinoma specimens was analyzed using a cDNA microarray. METHODS. Surgical specimens were used for the current study. The pathologic stage was IA (AJCC) in five tumors, IB in two, IIA in one, IIIA in one, and IIIB in one. Seven tumor specimens were adenocarcinomas and three were squamous cell carcinomas. Paired mRNAs from carcinoma cells and normal lung tissue specimens from the same lobe were labeled with different fluorochromes during cDNA probe synthesis in a reverse-transcription reaction. Both synthesized, labeled cDNA probes were mixed and hybridized to the microarray. The signal intensity of each spot was measured by laser scanner and gene expression was quantified as the tumor-to-normal fluorescence ratio (T:N ratio). The gene was overexpressed when the TV ratio was greater than 2.0 and underexpressed when the ratio was less than 0.5. RESULTS. Overall, 40 (9.4%) of the 425 genes evaluated were overexpressed, and 74 genes (17.4%) were underexpressed. In the 5 Stage IA tumor specimens, 31 (7.3%) genes were overexpressed and 76 (17.9%) were underexpressed. For 30 genes (7.1%), expression was different in Stage IA tumor specimens compared with more advanced tumor specimens. CONCLUSIONS. The cDNA microarray system showed that numerous alterations of gene expression were present in early-stage nonsmall cell lung carcinoma specimens. 0 2003 American Cancer Society.

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