4.7 Article

The role of miRNAs in human papilloma virus (HPV)-associated cancers: bridging between HPV-related head and neck cancer and cervical cancer

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 106, 期 9, 页码 1526-1534

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2012.109

关键词

microRNA; human papilloma virus; cervical cancer; head and neck cancer; tonsillar cancer

类别

资金

  1. Oda Pedersens Foundation
  2. Beckett Foundation
  3. Hoerslev Foundation
  4. Aase and Ejnar Danielsen's Foundation
  5. Hans Skouby and Emma Skouby Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Although the role of human papilloma virus (HPV) in cervical squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) is well established, the role in head and neck SCC (HNSCC) is less clear. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) have a role in the cancer development, and HPV status may affect the miRNA expression pattern in HNSCC. To explore the influence of HPV in HNSCC, we made a comparative miRNA profile of HPV-positive (HPV+) and HPV-negative (HPV-) HNSCC against CSCC. METHODS: Fresh frozen and laser microdissected-paraffin-embedded samples obtained from patients with HPV+/HPV- HNSCC, CSCC and controls were used for microarray analysis. Differentially expressed miRNAs in the HPV+ and HPV- HNSCC samples were compared with the differentially expressed miRNAs in the CSCC samples. RESULTS: Human papilloma virus positive (+) HNSCC had a distinct miRNA profile compared with HPV- HNSCC. Significantly more similarity was seen between HPV+ HNSCC and CSCC than HPV- and CSCC. A set of HPV core miRNAs were identified. Of these especially the miR-15a/miR-16/miR195/miR-497 family, miR-143/miR-145 and the miR-106-363 cluster appear to be important within the known HPV pathogenesis. CONCLUSION: This study adds new knowledge to the known pathogenic pathways of HPV and substantiates the oncogenic role of HPV in subsets of HNSCCs. British Journal of Cancer (2012) 106, 1526-1534. doi:10.1038/bjc.2012.109 www.bjcancer.com Published online 3 April 2012 (C) 2012 Cancer Research UK

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