4.7 Article

Methylation profiling of archived non-small cell lung cancer: A promising prognostic system

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 11, 期 12, 页码 4400-4405

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-04-2378

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Enhanced prognostication power is becoming more desirable in clinical oncology. In this study, we explored the prognostic potential of multigene hypermethylation profiling in non-small-cell lung cancer. Experimental Design: We evaluated a panel of eight genes (p16, APC, ATM, hMLH1, MGMT DAPK, ECAD, and RASSF1A) using methylation-specific PCR in 105 archived specimens of non-small-cell lung cancer representing all stages of the illness, We analyzed the effect of gene methylation status on outcome individually in a cumulative manner and in a combinatorial approach using recursive partitioning to identify methylation profiles, which affect overall survival. Results: In this data set, tumors harboring promoter hypermethylation at two or more genes exhibit similar survival trends to others in the cohort. Using recursive partitioning, three genes (APC, ATM, and RASSF1A) emerged as determinants of prognostic groups. This designation retained its statistical significance even when disease stage and age were entered into a multivariate analysis. Using this approach, patients whose tumors were hypermethylated at APC and those hypermethylated at only ATM (not also at APC or RASSF1A) enjoyed substantially longer 1- and 2-year survival than patients in the remaining groups. In 32 adjacent histologically normal lung tissue specimens, we detected similar methylation abnormalities. Conclusion: Assessment of promoter hypermethylation aberrations may facilitate prognostic profiling of lung tumors, but validation in independent data sets is needed to verify these profiles. This system uses material that is abundantly available with linked outcome data and can be used to generate reliable epigenetic determinants.

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