4.7 Article

Gene expression analysis uncovers similarity and differences among Burkitt lymphoma subtypes

Journal

BLOOD
Volume 117, Issue 13, Pages 3596-3608

Publisher

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2010-08-301556

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Centro Interdipartimentale per la Ricerca sul Cancro G. Prodi. BolognAIL, AIRC [IG4987, IG10007, 5xMille]
  2. RFO
  3. Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio in Bologna
  4. Fondazione della Banca del Monte e Ravenna
  5. Progetto Strategico di Ateneo
  6. Fondazione Monte dei Paschi di Siena

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Burkitt lymphoma (BL) is classified into 3 clinical subsets: endemic, sporadic, and immunodeficiency-associated BL. So far, possible differences in their gene expression profiles (GEPs) have not been investigated. We studied GEPs of BL subtypes, other B-cell lymphomas, and B lymphocytes; first, we found that BL is a unique molecular entity, distinct from other B-cell malignancies. Indeed, by unsupervised analysis all BLs clearly clustered apart of other lymphomas. Second, we found that BL subtypes presented slight differences in GEPs. Particularly, they differed for genes involved in cell cycle control, B-cell receptor signaling, and tumor necrosis factor/nuclear factor kappa B pathways. Notably, by reverse engineering, we found that endemic and sporadic BLs diverged for genes dependent on RBL2 activity. Furthermore, we found that all BLs were intimately related to germinal center cells, differing from them for molecules involved in cell proliferation, immune response, and signal transduction. Finally, to validate GEP, we applied immunohistochemistry to a large panel of cases and showed that RBL2 can cooperate with MYC in inducing a neoplastic phenotype in vitro and in vivo. In conclusion, our study provided substantial insights on the pathobiology of BLs, by offering novel evidences that may be relevant for its classification and possibly future treatment. (Blood. 2011;117(13):3596-3608)

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