4.2 Article

DNA Methylation of KV 1.3 Potassium Channel Gene Promoter is Associated with Poorly Differentiated Breast Adenocarcinoma

Journal

CELLULAR PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOCHEMISTRY
Volume 24, Issue 1-2, Pages 25-32

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000227810

Keywords

Breast; Cancer; Human; Potassium channels; DNA methylation

Funding

  1. CHU of Amiens
  2. Tumorotheque de Picardie
  3. Canceropole Nord-Ouest
  4. Ministere de la Recherche
  5. Conseil Regional de Picardie

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: DNA methylation is an important mechanism for gene silencing and has already been described for several genes in breast cancer. A previous immunohistochemistry study demonstrated a decrease of K-V 1.3 potassium channel expression in breast adenocarcinoma compared to normal breast tissue. Methods: Methyl-specific PCR (MSP), immunohistochemistry and RNA extraction were performed on breast adenocarcinoma. MSP and DNA extraction were also performed on one breast carcinoma cell line and on primary culture normal cells. Results: DNA methylation of K-V 1.3 gene promoter was observed in 42.3% of samples (22/52). The methylated status was associated with poorly differentiated tumors (p=0.04) and younger patients (p=0.048). Decreased K-V 1.3 expression was observed in grade III tumors, at both the mRNA and protein levels, while methylation increased in grade III tumors. Finally, K-V 1.3 gene promoter was methylated in the MCF-7 breast carcinoma cell line while promoter methylation was absent in primary culture of normal breast cells (HMEpC). Conclusion: We report, for the first time, the methylation of the K-V 1.3 gene promoter in breast adenocarcinoma. Our data suggest that DNA methylation is responsible for a decrease of K-V 1.3 gene expression in breast adenocarcinoma and is associated with poorly differentiated tumors and younger patients. Copyright (C) 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available