4.7 Article

Alternative splicing in colon, bladder, and prostate cancer identified by exon array analysis

期刊

MOLECULAR & CELLULAR PROTEOMICS
卷 7, 期 7, 页码 1214-1224

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1074/mcp.M700590-MCP200

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Alternative splicing enhances proteome diversity and modulates cancer-associated proteins. To identify tissue- and tumor-specific alternative splicing, we used the GeneChip Human Exon 1.0 ST Array to measure whole-genome exon expression in 102 normal and cancer tissue samples of different stages from colon, urinary bladder, and prostate. We identified 2069 candidate alternative splicing events between normal tissue samples from colon, bladder, and prostate and selected 15 splicing events for RT-PCR validation, 10 of which were successfully validated by RT-PCR and sequencing. Furthermore 23, 19, and 18 candidate tumor-specific splicing alterations in colon, bladder, and prostate, respectively, were selected for RT-PCR validation on an independent set of 81 normal and tumor tissue samples. In total, seven genes with tumor-specific splice variants were identified (ACTN1, CALD1, COL6A3, LRRFIP2, PIK4CB, TPM1, and VCL). The validated tumor-specific splicing alterations were highly consistent, enabling clear separation of normal and cancer samples and in some cases even of different tumor stages. A subset of the tumor-specific splicing alterations (ACTN1, CALD1, and VCL) was found in all three organs and may represent general cancer-related splicing events. In silico protein predictions suggest that the identified cancers-pecific splice variants encode proteins with potentially altered functions, indicating that they may be involved in pathogenesis and hence represent novel therapeutic targets. In conclusion, we identified and validated alternative splicing between normal tissue samples from colon, bladder, and prostate in addition to cancer-specific splicing events in colon, bladder, and prostate cancer that may have diagnostic and prognostic implications.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据