4.5 Article

p16 promoter methylation is a potential predictor of malignant transformation in oral epithelial dysplasia

Journal

CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION
Volume 17, Issue 8, Pages 2174-2179

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-2867

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. British Association for Oral and Mxillofacial Surgeons
  2. National Health service Research and Development
  3. Roy Castle Lung Foundation
  4. MRC [G9900432] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Medical Research Council [G9900432] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Management of the patient with oral epithelial dysplasia depends on the ability to predict malignant transformation. Histologic grading of this condition fails in this regard and is also subject to interpathologist and intrapathologist variability. This study uses longitudinal clinical samples to explore the prognostic value of a previously validated panel of methylation biomarkers in a cohort of patients with histologically proven oral dysplasia. Methylation enrichment pyrose-quencing assays were used to provide the sensitivity of traditional methylation-specific PCR with the additional specificity advantages of a subsequent confirmatory sequencing reaction. In 57% (8 of 14) patients with a lesion that transformed to oral squamous cell carcinoma, 26% (26 of 100) of longitudinal samples collected over >= 3 years showed p16 methylation. Only 1% (2 of 184) of samples from 8% of patients (2 of 24) not undergoing malignant transformation within 3 years had p16 methylation. Both of these samples with p16 promoter methylation were the most recently collected and the patients remain under continuing clinical review. Promoter methylation of MGMT, CYGB, and CCNA1 did not correlate with malignant progression. We thus conclude that methylation of the p16 gene promoter shows promise as a predictor for malignant transformation (Fisher's exact, P = 0.002) in a subset of patients.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available