BACKGROUND & AIMS: Colon cancers with defective DNA mismatch repair (MMR) have peculiar molecular, pathologic, and clinical features, including high-level microsatellite instability, conspicuous lymphocytic infiltration, preferential location in the proximal colon, and better prognosis. Our aim was to characterize the transcriptional profile of this colon cancer subset. METHODS: An oligonucleotide microarray containing 12,625 probes was used to evaluate gene expression in 25 proximal colon cancers, 10 samples of normal colon mucosa, and 14 colon cancer cell lines. Transcriptional profiles of MMR-deficient cancers and cell lines were compared with those of their MMR-proficient counterparts. RESULTS: Unsupervised analysis of microarray data showed that MMR status exerts a predominant influence on the gene expression profile of proximal colon cancers. Hierarchical clustering divided the cancers into 2 groups corresponding almost perfectly with their MMR status. Supervised analysis identified numerous gene expression changes that represent a genetic signature of MMR-deficient colon cancers. Changes in genes involved in apoptosis and the immune response were consistent with the better prognosis of MMR-deficient cancers. In MMR-deficient cancers and cell lines, 4-1BBL, a crucial gene in the anti-tumor immune response, was, respectively, 2.4 and 6.0 times more expressed than in their MMR-proficient counterparts. This difference was confirmed by quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction and flow cytometric assessment of 4-1BBL protein expression in colon cancer cell lines. Our analysis also showed novel possible gene targets of microsatellite instability. CONCLUSIONS: MMR inactivation produces distinct changes in the cellular messenger RNA pool, which is consistent with a unique tumorigenesis pathway.
BACKGROUND & AIMS:Colon cancers with defective DNA mismatch repair (MMR) have peculiar molecular, pathologic, and clinical features, including high-level microsatellite instability, conspicuous lymphocytic infiltration, preferential location in the proximal colon, and better prognosis. Our aim was to characterize the transcriptional profile of this colon cancer subset. METHODS: An oligonucleotide microarray containing 12,625 probes was used to evaluate gene expression in 25 proximal colon cancers, 10 samples of normal colon mucosa, and 14 colon cancer cell lines. Transcriptional profiles of MMR-deficient cancers and cell lines were compared with those of their MMR-proficient counterparts. RESULTS: Unsupervised analysis of microarray data showed that MMR status exerts a predominant influence on the gene expression profile of proximal colon cancers. Hierarchical clustering divided the cancers into 2 groups corresponding almost perfectly with their MMR status. Supervised analysis identified numerous gene expression changes that represent a genetic signature of MMR-deficient colon cancers. Changes in genes involved in apoptosis and the immune response were consistent with the better prognosis of MMR-deficient cancers. In MMR-deficient cancers and cell lines, 4-1BBL, a crucial gene in the anti-tumor immune response, was, respectively, 2.4 and 6.0 times more expressed than in their MMR-proficient counterparts. This difference was confirmed by quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction and flow cytometric assessment of 4-1BBL protein expression in colon cancer cell lines. Our analysis also showed novel possible gene targets of microsatellite instability. CONCLUSIONS: MMR inactivation produces distinct changes in the cellular messenger RNA pool, which is consistent with a unique tumorigenesis pathway.
Authors: Michal Kovac; Endre Laczko; Ritva Haider; Josef Jiricny; Hansjakob Mueller; Karl Heinimann; Giancarlo Marra Journal: Fam Cancer Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 2.375
Authors: Shu-Dong Zhang; Cian M McCrudden; Hiu-Fung Yuen; Ka Lai Leung; Wan-Jin Hong; Hang Fai Kwok Journal: Oncol Lett Date: 2015-12-03 Impact factor: 2.967
Authors: J Kantelinen; M Kansikas; M K Korhonen; S Ollila; K Heinimann; R Kariola; M Nyström Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2010-02-16 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Ziqiang Yuan; Joongho Shin; Andrew Wilson; Sanjay Goel; Yi-He Ling; Naseem Ahmed; Higinio Dopeso; Minaxi Jhawer; Shannon Nasser; Cristina Montagna; Kenneth Fordyce; Leonard H Augenlicht; Lauri A Aaltonen; Diego Arango; Thomas K Weber; John M Mariadason Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2009-09-29 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Mingyang Song; Reiko Nishihara; Yin Cao; Eunyoung Chun; Zhi Rong Qian; Kosuke Mima; Kentaro Inamura; Yohei Masugi; Jonathan A Nowak; Katsuhiko Nosho; Kana Wu; Molin Wang; Edward Giovannucci; Wendy S Garrett; Charles S Fuchs; Shuji Ogino; Andrew T Chan Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2016-09-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Don A Delker; Austin C Wood; Angela K Snow; N Jewel Samadder; Wade S Samowitz; Kajsa E Affolter; Kenneth M Boucher; Lisa M Pappas; Inge J Stijleman; Priyanka Kanth; Kathryn R Byrne; Randall W Burt; Philip S Bernard; Deborah W Neklason Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2017-11-06
Authors: Sofia Sagredou; Panagiotis Dalezis; Eirini Papadopoulou; Maria Voura; Maria V Deligiorgi; Michail Nikolaou; Mihalis I Panayiotidis; George Nasioulas; Vasiliki Sarli; Dimitrios T Trafalis Journal: Pharmaceutics Date: 2021-06-15 Impact factor: 6.321