AIM: To study the different gene expression profiles in rats with Barrett's esophagus (BE) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA) induced by gastro-duodeno-esophageal reflux. METHODS: Esophagoduodenostomy was performed in 8-wk old Sprague-Dawley rats to induce gastro-duodeno-esophageal reflux, and a group of rats that received sham operation served as control. Esophageal epithelial pathological tissues were dissected and frozen in liquid nitrogen immediately. The expression profiles of 4096 genes in EA and BE tissues were compared to normal esophagus epithelium in normal control (NC) by cDNA microarray. RESULTS: Four hundred and forty-eight genes in BE were more than three times different from those in NC, including 312 upregulated and 136 downregulated genes. Three hundred and seventy-seven genes in EA were more than three times different from those in NC, including 255 upregulated and 142 downregulated genes. Compared to BE, there were 122 upregulated and 156 downregulated genes in EA. In the present study, the interested genes were those involved in carcinogenesis. Among them, the upregulated genes included cathepsin C, aminopeptidase M, arachidonic acid epoxygenase, tryptophan-2,3-dioxygenase, ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme, cyclic GMP-stimulated phosphodiesterase, tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-1, betaine-homocysteine methyltransferase, lysozyme, complement 4b binding protein, complement 9 protein, insulin-like growth factor binding protein, UDP-glucuronosyltransferase, tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-3, aldolase B, retinoid X receptor gamma, carboxylesterase and testicular cell adhesion molecule 1. The downregulated genes included glutathione synthetase, lecithin-cholesterol acyltransferase, p55CDC, heart fatty acid binding protein, cell adhesion regulator and endothelial cell selectin ligand. CONCLUSION: Esophageal epithelium exposed excessively to harmful ingredients of duodenal and gastric reflux may develop into BE and even EA gradually. The gene expression level is different between EA and BE, and may be related to the occurrence and progression of EA.
AIM: To study the different gene expression profiles in rats with Barrett's esophagus (BE) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA) induced by gastro-duodeno-esophageal reflux. METHODS: Esophagoduodenostomy was performed in 8-wk old Sprague-Dawley rats to induce gastro-duodeno-esophageal reflux, and a group of rats that received sham operation served as control. Esophageal epithelial pathological tissues were dissected and frozen in liquid nitrogen immediately. The expression profiles of 4096 genes in EA and BE tissues were compared to normal esophagus epithelium in normal control (NC) by cDNA microarray. RESULTS: Four hundred and forty-eight genes in BE were more than three times different from those in NC, including 312 upregulated and 136 downregulated genes. Three hundred and seventy-seven genes in EA were more than three times different from those in NC, including 255 upregulated and 142 downregulated genes. Compared to BE, there were 122 upregulated and 156 downregulated genes in EA. In the present study, the interested genes were those involved in carcinogenesis. Among them, the upregulated genes included cathepsin C, aminopeptidase M, arachidonic acid epoxygenase, tryptophan-2,3-dioxygenase, ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme, cyclic GMP-stimulated phosphodiesterase, tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-1, betaine-homocysteine methyltransferase, lysozyme, complement 4b binding protein, complement 9 protein, insulin-like growth factor binding protein, UDP-glucuronosyltransferase, tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-3, aldolase B, retinoid X receptor gamma, carboxylesterase and testicular cell adhesion molecule 1. The downregulated genes included glutathione synthetase, lecithin-cholesterol acyltransferase, p55CDC, heart fatty acid binding protein, cell adhesion regulator and endothelial cell selectin ligand. CONCLUSION: Esophageal epithelium exposed excessively to harmful ingredients of duodenal and gastric reflux may develop into BE and even EA gradually. The gene expression level is different between EA and BE, and may be related to the occurrence and progression of EA.
Authors: Oliver M Fisher; Angelique J Levert-Mignon; Sarah J Lord; Natalia K Botelho; Araluen K Freeman; Melissa L Thomas; Dan Falkenback; Antony Wettstein; David C Whiteman; Yuri V Bobryshev; Reginald V Lord Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2014-10-28 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Joana T de Oliveira; Ana L Santos; Catarina Gomes; Rita Barros; Cláudia Ribeiro; Nuno Mendes; Augusto J de Matos; M Helena Vasconcelos; Maria José Oliveira; Celso A Reis; Fátima Gärtner Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-04-07 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: John W Crabb; Bo Hu; John S Crabb; Pierre Triozzi; Yogen Saunthararajah; Raymond Tubbs; Arun D Singh Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-08-25 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Juliann E Kosovec; Ali H Zaidi; Yoshihiro Komatsu; Pashtoon M Kasi; Kyle Cothron; Diane V Thompson; Edward Lynch; Blair A Jobe Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-04-04 Impact factor: 3.240