4.6 Article

Identification of genomic alterations in nasopharyngeal carcinoma and nasopharyngeal carcinoma-derived Epstein-Barr virus by whole-genome sequencing

期刊

CARCINOGENESIS
卷 39, 期 12, 页码 1517-1528

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/carcin/bgy108

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. National High Technology Research and Development Program of China (863 Program) [2012AA02A206]
  2. Overseas Expertise Introduction Project for Discipline Innovation (111 Project) [111-2-12]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81572787, 81672683, 81672993, 81772928, 81702907, 81772901]
  4. Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province [2016JC2035, 2017SK2015, 2018JJ3704, 2018JJ3815]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is a common tumor in southern China with marked ethnic and geographic distributions and concomitant Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) infection. However, the molecular basis of NPC remains largely unknown, and the role of EBV genomic variations in the pathogenesis of NPC is unclear. Whole-genome sequencing of a collection of 12 EBV-positive paired NPC tumor/peripheral blood samples from Hunan Province was performed, and the FBXO11 gene was subjected to further functional analyses. We identified 69 missense mutations in signaling pathways typically altered in cancer, including NF-kappa B and Wnt/Hedgehog/Notch. Additionally, 122 variations were identified in non-coding regions. Among these, a subset of genes was confirmed as dysregulated in NPC by mining the NPC cDNA microarray database. The randomly selected gene, FBXO11, could promote the malignant progression of NPC in vitro. Full-length EBV genomes from 8 of the 12 patients with NPC were also successfully assembled, and latent EBV infection is a primary cause of NPC. The various subtypes of EBV detected exhibited clear correlations with its geographical distribution. This study has explored novel biological markers and tumorigenic pathways with substantial potential to enhance therapeutic strategies for NPC.

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

4.6
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