4.6 Article

Frequent loss of heterozygosity and altered expression of the candidate tumor suppressor gene 'FAT' in human astrocytic tumors

Journal

BMC CANCER
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-9-5

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Department of Science and Technology (DST), India

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: We had earlier used the comparison of RAPD (Random Amplification of Polymorphic DNA) DNA fingerprinting profiles of tumor and corresponding normal DNA to identify genetic alterations in primary human glial tumors. This has the advantage that DNA fingerprinting identifies the genetic alterations in a manner not biased for locus. Methods: In this study we used RAPD-PCR to identify novel genomic alterations in the astrocytic tumors of WHO grade II (Low Grade Diffuse Astrocytoma) and WHO Grade IV (Glioblastoma Multiforme). Loss of heterozygosity (LOH) of the altered region was studied by microsatellite and Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) markers. Expression study of the gene identified at the altered locus was done by semi-quantitative reverse-transcriptase-PCR (RT-PCR). Results: Bands consistently altered in the RAPD profile of tumor DNA in a significant proportion of tumors were identified. One such 500 bp band, that was absent in the RAPD profile of 33% (4/12) of the grade II astrocytic tumors, was selected for further study. Its sequence corresponded with a region of FAT, a putative tumor suppressor gene initially identified in Drosophila. Fifty percent of a set of 40 tumors, both grade II and IV, were shown to have Loss of Heterozygosity (LOH) at this locus by microsatellite (intragenic) and by SNP markers. Semi-quantitative RT-PCR showed low FAT mRNA levels in a major subset of tumors. Conclusion: These results point to a role of the FAT in astrocytic tumorigenesis and demonstrate the use of RAPD analysis in identifying specific alterations in astrocytic tumors.

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