4.4 Article

The Increased Expression of Periostin During Early Stages of Prostate Cancer and Advanced Stages of Cancer Stroma

期刊

PROSTATE
卷 69, 期 13, 页码 1398-1403

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pros.20988

关键词

prostate cancer; 3D culture; microarray; periostin; stroma

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND. Three-dimensional culture (3DC) is a relevant in vitro model used to study prostate development and carcinogenesis. Recent studies have indicated that 3DC-associated genes would be more sensitive as prognostic markers for cancer; however, no 3DC-associated genes in prostate cancer (CaP) have thus far been elucidated. METHODS. Candidate 3DC-associated genes in non-malignant prostatic epithelial cells, RWPE-1 and TA2, were selected, based on a comparison of microarray gene expression data between cells grown in two-dimensional culture (2DC) and in 3DC. To extract CaP-associated genes among the 3DC-associated genes, gene expression levels from the microdissected tissue samples were compared between 20 well-differentiated or 20 poorly differentiated CaP, as well as matched normal prostate epithelium. The expression levels of CaP-associated genes in 3DC were validated by quantitative RT-PCR using TA2 cells in 2DC and 3DC. Protein expression of periostin (POSTN), which is one of the 3DC CaP-associated genes, was further evaluated in the clinical samples by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS. Several genes including POSTN were identified as CaP-associated genes using a 3DC system. Immunohistochemical analyses revealed that POSTN expression was increased in the early stages of CaP (Gleason score 6-7), but not in the advanced stages of CaP. Furthermore, the positive ratio observed for the expression of POSTN in tumor-associated stroma was significantly correlated with the degree of malignancy. CONCLUSIONS. POSTN, one of the 3DC-associated genes, may serve as a potential biomarker for predicting the pathological grade and prognosis of CaP. Prostate 69: 1398-1403, 2009. (C) 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

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

4.4
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