4.7 Article

Gsα overexpression and loss of Gsα imprinting in human somatotroph adenomas:: Association with tumor size and response to pharmacologic treatment

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 121, 期 6, 页码 1245-1252

出版社

WILEY-LISS
DOI: 10.1002/ijc.22816

关键词

imprinting; pituitary adenomas; exon 1A; GNAS; gsp oncogene; methylation

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gs alpha, the alpha-subunit of the heterotrimeric GTP-binding protein, is coded from the GNAS gene, which is imprinted in a tissue-specific manner. Gs alpha is paternally silenced in normal pituitary, but Gs alpha imprinting relaxation is found in some tumoral tissue. In addition, Gs alpha mRNA levels are high in some somatotroph adenomas not bearing the active Gs alpha mutant, the gsp oncogene. In this study, the impact of loss of imprinting on Gs alpha expression level and on tumoral phenotype has been investigated. We compared the expression and imprinting of 4 transcripts of GNAS locus (NESP55, XL alpha s, exon IA, Gs alpha) of 60 somatotroph adenomas with those of 23 lactotroph adenomas. The paternal and maternal transcripts were quantified using allele-specific real-time PCR and FokI polymorphism. Moreover, the methylation of exon IA DMR was analyzed. As is the case for the gsp oncogene, high Gs alpha expression in gsp-tumors was associated with smaller tumor size and better octreotide sensitivity. A strong imprinting relaxation (percentage of paternal Gs alpha expression >= 7.5%) was found only in gsp-tumors. The loss of Gs alpha imprinting was associated with a decrease in exon 1A mRNA expression. Unexpectedly, the methylation status of exon 1A DMR was not modified in relaxed tumors. Maternal Gs alpha mRNA level decreased with exon IA level, and consequently the loss of Gs alpha imprinting did not induce the expected Gs alpha: overexpression. Finally, XLas mRNA level correlated with that of paternal Gs alpha: and of NESP55 showing the complexity of gene regulation in the GNAS locus. (c) 2007 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

4.7
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