4.5 Article

Gene expression abnormalities in histologically normal breast epithelium from patients with luminal type of breast cancer

期刊

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY REPORTS
卷 42, 期 5, 页码 977-988

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11033-014-3834-x

关键词

Breast cancer; Luminal type; Gene expression; Disease risk

资金

  1. Ministry of Education [UK 243/2012, VEGA 1/0243/12]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The gene expression profile of breast cancer has been described as a great breakthrough on the way to comprehend differences in cancer origin, behavior and therapy. However, gene expression profile in histologically normal epithelium (HNEpi) which could harbor genetic abnormalities predisposing breast tissue to develop malignancy was minor scope for scientists in the past. Thus, we aimed to analyze gene expressions in HNEpi and breast cancer tissue (BCTis) in order to establish its value as potential diagnostic marker for cancer development. We evaluated a panel of disease-specific genes in luminal type (A/B) of breast cancer and tumor surrounding HNEpi by qRT-PCR Array in 32 microdissected samples. There was 20.2 and 2.4 % deregulation rate in genes with at least 2-fold or 5-fold over-expression between luminal (A/B) type breast carcinomas and tumor surrounding HNEpi, respectively. The high-grade luminal carcinomas showed higher number of deregulated genes compared to low-grade cases (50.6 vs. 23.8 % with at least 2-fold deregulation rate). The main overexpressed genes in HNEpi were KLK5, SCGB1D2, GSN, EGFR and NGFR. The significant differences in gene expression between BCTis and HNEpi samples were revealed for BAG1, C3, CCNA2, CD44, FGF1, FOSL1, ID2, IL6R, NGFB, NGFR, PAPPA, PLAU, SERPINB5, THBS1 and TP53 gene (p < 0.05) and BCL2L2, CTSB, ITGB4, JUN, KIT, KLF5, SCGB1D2, SCGB2A1, SERPINE1 (p < 0.01), and EGFR, GABRP, GSN, MAP2K7 and THBS2 (p < 0.001), and GSN, KLK5 (p < 0.0001). The ontological gene analyses revealed high deregulations in gene group directly associated with breast cancer prognosis and origin.

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

4.5
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