4.8 Article

Epigenetic silencing of the tumor suppressor cystatin M occurs during breast cancer progression

期刊

CANCER RESEARCH
卷 66, 期 16, 页码 7899-7909

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-0576

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [R21CA102220, R01CA114229] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cystatin M is a secreted inhibitor of lysosomal cysteine proteases. Several lines of evidence indicate that cystatin M is a tumor suppressor important in breast malignancy; however, the mechanism(s) that leads to inactivation of cystatin M during cancer progression is unknown. Inspection of the human cystatin M locus uncovered a large and dense CpG island within the 5' region of this gene (termed CST6). Analysis of cultured human breast tumor lines indicated that cystatin M expression is either undetectable or in low abundance in several lines; however, enhanced gene expression was measured in cells cultured on the DNA demethylating agent 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine (5-aza-dC). Increased cystatin M expression does not correlate with a cytotoxic response to 5-aza-dC; rather, various molecular approaches indicated that the CST6 gene was aberrantly methylated in these tumor lines as well as in primary breast tumors. Moreover, 60% (12 of 20) of primary tumors analyzed displayed CST6 hypermethylation, indicating that this aberrant characteristic is common in breast malignancies. Finally, preinvasive and invasive breast tumor cells were microdissected from nine archival breast cancer specimens. Of the five tumors displaying CST6 gene methylation, four tumors displayed methylation in both ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast carcinoma lesions and reduced expression of cystatin M in these tumors was confirmed by immunohistochemistry. In summary, this study establishes that the tumor suppressor cystatin M is a novel target for epigenetic silencing during mammary tumorigenesis and that this aberrant event can occur before development of invasive breast cancer.

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

4.8
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