4.8 Article

MicroRNA Expression, Chromosomal Alterations, and Immunoglobulin Variable Heavy Chain Hypermutations in Mantle Cell Lymphomas

期刊

CANCER RESEARCH
卷 69, 期 17, 页码 7071-7078

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-09-1095

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Instituto de Salud Carlos III [FIS 01/3046, FIS 05/050224]
  2. Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion [SAF 08/03630]
  3. Instituto de Salud Carlos III-RETIC [2006RET2039]
  4. RETICS [RD07/0020/2004]
  5. University of Wurzburg

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The contribution of microRNAs (miR) to the pathogenesis of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is not well known. We investigated the expression of 86 mature miRs mapped to frequently altered genomic regions in MCL in CD5(+)/CD5(-) normal B cells, reactive lymph nodes, and purified tumor cells of 17 leukemic MCL, 12 nodal MCL, and 8 MCL cell lines. Genomic alterations of the tumors were studied by single nucleotide polymorphism arrays and comparative genomic hybridization. Leukemic and nodal tumors showed a high number of differentially expressed mills compared with purified normal B cells, but only some of them were commonly deregulated in both tumor types. An unsupervised analysis of mill expression profile in purified leukemic MCL cells revealed two clusters of tumors characterized by different mutational status of the immunoglobulin genes, proliferation signature, and number of genomic alterations. The expression of most mills was not related to copy number changes in their respective chromosomal loci. Only the levels of mills included in the miR-17-92 cluster were significantly related to genetic alterations at 13q31. Moreover, overexpression of miR-17-5p/miR-20a from this cluster was associated with high MYC mRNA levels in tumors with a more aggressive behavior. In conclusion, the mill expression pattern of MCL is deregulated in comparison with normal lymphoid cells and distinguishes two subgroups of tumors with different biological features. [Cancer Res 2009;69(17):7071-8]

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