4.6 Article

Telomere Length Is Related to Alternative Splice Patterns of Telomerase in Thyroid Tumors

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PATHOLOGY
卷 179, 期 3, 页码 1415-1424

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajpath.2011.05.056

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R21 CA137550]
  2. American Cancer Society [RSG-08-003-01-CCE]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Telomere dysfunction and aberrant telomerase expression play important roles in tumorigenesis. In thyroid tumors, three possibly inhibitory splice variants of the active full-length isoform of human telomerase reverse transcriptase hTERT) may be expressed. These variants might regulate telomerase activity and telomere length because it is the fraction of the full-length isoform, rather than the total transcript level, that correlates with enzymatic activity. Telomerase reactivation may be critical in the early stages of tumorigenesis, when progressive telomere shortening may be limiting cell viability. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between telomere length and hTERT splice variant expression patterns in benign and well-differentiated malignant thyroid tumors. Telomere lengths of 61 thyroid tumors were examined by fluorescence in situ hybridization, comparing tumors with adjacent normal thyroid tissue on the same slide. Expression patterns of hTERT splice variants were evaluated by quantitative and nested RT-PCR. Telomere length was inversely correlated with percentage of full-length hTERT expression rather than with total hTERT expression levels. Short telomeres and high fractions of full-length hTERT transcripts were associated with follicular and papillary thyroid carcinomas, whereas long telomeres and low levels of full-length hTERT were associated with benign thyroid nodules. Intermediate levels of full-length hTERT and telomere length were found in follicular variant of papillary thyroid carcinomas and follicular adenomas. (Am J Pathol 2011, 179: 1415-1424; DOI: 10.1016/j.ajpath.2011.05.056)

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

4.6
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