3.9 Article

Expression of Invasion-Related Extracellular Matrix Molecules in Human Glioblastoma Versus Intracerebral Lung Adenocarcinoma Metastasis

期刊

CENTRAL EUROPEAN NEUROSURGERY
卷 71, 期 4, 页码 173-180

出版社

GEORG THIEME VERLAG KG
DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1249698

关键词

glioblastoma; metastasis; lung cancer; tumor invasion; extracellular matrix

资金

  1. Hungarian Ministry of Education (OTKA) [F-049050]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tumor cell invasion into the surrounding brain tissue is mainly responsible for the failure of radical surgical resection, with tumor recurrence in the form of microdisseminated disease. Extracellular matrix (ECM)-related molecules and their receptors predominantly participate in the invasion process, including cell adhesion to the surrounding microenvironment and cell migration. The extent of infiltration of the healthy brain by malignant tumors strongly depends on the tumor cell type. Malignant gliomas show much more intensive peritumoral invasion than do metastatic tumors. In this study, the mRNA expression of 30 invasion-related molecules (twenty-one ECM components, two related receptors, and seven ECM-related enzymes) was investigated by quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. Fresh frozen human tissue samples from glioblastoma (GBM), intracerebral lung adenocarcinoma metastasis, and normal brain were evaluated. Significant differences were established for 24 of the 30 molecules. To confirm our results at the protein level, immunohistochemical analysis of seven molecules was performed (agrin, neurocan, syndecan, versican, matrix metalloproteinase 2 [MMP-2], MMP-9, and hyaluronan). Determining the differences in the levels of invasion-related molecules for tumors of different origins can help to identify the exact molecular mechanisms that facilitate peritumoral infiltration by glioblastoma cells. These results should allow the selection of target molecules for potential chemotherapeutic agents directed against highly invasive malignant gliomas.

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

3.9
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