4.4 Article

CpG island hypermethylation at multiple gene sites in diagnosis and prognosis of prostate cancer

期刊

UROLOGY
卷 71, 期 1, 页码 161-167

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.09.056

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVES CpG island hype methylation causes gene silencing and could be decisive in prostate carcinogenesis and progression. We investigated its role at multiple gene sites during prostate carcinogenesis. METHODS A quantitative, methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction was used to analyze the hypermethylation patterns at nine gene loci (Annexin2, APC, EDNRB, GSTP1, PTGS2, MDR1, RARbeta, Reprimo, and TIG1) in 80 patients with prostate cancer (PCa) and 26 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). RESULTS Hypermethylation was more frequent in PCa than in BPH tissues (EDNRB, 100% versus 88%; TIG1, 96% versus 12%; RARbeta, 95% versus 35%; GSTP1, 93% versus 15%; APC, 80% versus 50%; MDR1, 80% versus 31%; PTGS2, 68% versus 15%; Reprimo, 59% versus 19%; and Annexing, 4% versus 0%). TIG1 and GSTP1 hypermethylation distinguished between PCa and BPH with a specificity of greater than 85% and sensitivity of greater than 93%. Hypermethylation at a single gene locus did not correlate with any clinicopathologic variables. In contrast, hypermethylation at two genes (eg, APC and TIG1, APC and GSTP1, APC and PTGS2, APC or MDR, GSTP1 or PTGS2) correlated significantly with the pathologic stage and/or Gleason score (P = 0.033 to 0.045). Hypermethylation at APC and Reprimo, as well as DNA hypermethylation at more than five genes, correlated significantly with the rate of prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy (P = 0.0078 and P = 0.0074, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Our results have confirmed that the hypermethylation patterns are helpful in the diagnosis and prognosis of PCa. Increases in CpG island hypermethylation at multiple gene sites occur during PCa progression and indicate early biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy.

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