4.8 Article

Hsa-miR-9 methylation status is associated with cancer development and metastatic recurrence in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma

期刊

ONCOGENE
卷 29, 期 42, 页码 5724-5728

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/onc.2010.305

关键词

renal cell carcinoma; microRNA; methylation; metastasis; miR-9

资金

  1. National Institute of Health [R01 CA098897]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The long-term prognosis for clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is dramatically altered by the development of metastatic recurrence. However, there are very few indicators that can predict which patient will develop a recurrence. MicroRNAs regulate many cellular processes and have been shown to be associated with cancer development and recurrence. More recently it has been shown that microRNA genes can be epigenetically modified in cancer, resulting in aberrant silencing of microRNA genes with tumor suppressor functions. In this study, we show that two genes encoding for hsa-miR-9 are significantly hypermethylated in ccRCC tumors compared with adjacent normal tissues (P-value <0.001 for both miR-9-1 and miR-9-3) resulting in decreased expression, and that the methylation of these genes was more significant in DNA obtained from the primary tumor for patients who developed a recurrence (P-value: 0.012 and 0.009 for miR-9-1 and miR-9-3, respectively) than in tumors from nonrecurrent patients. Furthermore, methylation of miR-9-3 was significantly associated with an increased risk of recurrence (hazard ratio: 5.85, 95% confidence intervals: 1.30-26.35) and high methylation levels of either miR-9-1 or miR-9-3 resulted in a significant, nearly 30-month decrease in recurrence-free survival time (P-value: 0.034 and 0.007 for miR-9-1 and miR-9-3, respectively). Our results demonstrate that hsa-miR-9 is involved in the development of ccRCC while also having a role in the development of metastatic recurrence. Oncogene (2010) 29, 5724-5728; doi:10.1038/onc.2010.305; published online 2 August 2010

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

4.8
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