Literature DB >> 17623264

Towards the molecular characterization of disease: comparison of molecular and histological analysis of esophageal epithelia.

Daniel Vallböhmer1, Paul Marjoram, Hidekazu Kuramochi, Daisuke Shimizu, Hsuan Jung, Steve R DeMeester, Daniel Oh, Parakrama T Chandrasoma, Kathleen D Danenberg, Tom R DeMeester, Peter V Danenberg, Jeffrey H Peters.   

Abstract

Reliable quantification of gene expression offers the possibility of more accurate and prognostically relevant characterization of tissues than potentially subjective interpretations of histopathologists. We measured the expression of 18 selected genes and compared them to histological features in a spectrum of esophageal disease to evaluate the feasibility of molecular characterization of normal and pathologic esophageal epithelia. Esophageal tissue biopsies from 82 patients with foregut symptoms were laser capture microdissected, and the expression levels of 18 selected genes were measured by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. Linear discriminant analysis, which uses combinations of genes to distinguish between histological groups, was performed to compare gene expression and the following five histological groups: (1) normal squamous epithelium (n = 35), (2) reflux esophagitis (n = 13), (3) non-dysplastic Barrett's (n = 33), (4) dysplastic Barrett's (n = 16), (5) adenocarcinoma (n = 31). A panel of seven genes had 90-94% predictive power to distinguish non-dysplastic and dysplastic Barrett's esophagus. Clustering analysis revealed structure in gene expression values even in the absence of histology. Expression levels in 17 genes differed significantly across histological groups. Classification based on gene expression agreed with histopathological assessment in the following percentage of cases: normal squamous epithelium = 53%, reflux esophagitis = 31%, non-dysplastic Barrett's = 76%, dysplastic Barrett's = 40%, and adenocarcinoma = 59%. Interestingly, predictive power improved markedly when inflammatory and dysplastic tissues were removed (77-94%). Gene expression classification agrees well with histopathological examination. When differences occur, it is unclear whether this effect is due to intraobserver variability in pathological diagnosis or to a genuine difference between gene expression and histopathology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17623264     DOI: 10.1007/s11605-007-0208-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg        ISSN: 1091-255X            Impact factor:   3.452


  29 in total

Review 1.  Expression profiling in cancer using cDNA microarrays.

Authors:  J Khan; L H Saal; M L Bittner; Y Chen; J M Trent; P S Meltzer
Journal:  Electrophoresis       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 3.535

2.  Prediction of cancer outcome with microarrays: a multiple random validation strategy.

Authors:  Stefan Michiels; Serge Koscielny; Catherine Hill
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Feb 5-11       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Cdx-2 expression in squamous and metaplastic columnar epithelia of the esophagus.

Authors:  D Vallböhmer; S R DeMeester; J H Peters; D S Oh; H Kuramochi; D Shimizu; J A Hagen; K D Danenberg; P V Danenberg; T R DeMeester; P T Chandrasoma
Journal:  Dis Esophagus       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 3.429

4.  Real time quantitative PCR.

Authors:  C A Heid; J Stevens; K J Livak; P M Williams
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 9.043

5.  p53 and thymidylate synthase expression in untreated stage II colon cancer: associations with recurrence, survival, and site.

Authors:  H J Lenz; K D Danenberg; C G Leichman; B Florentine; P G Johnston; S Groshen; L Zhou; Y P Xiong; P V Danenberg; L P Leichman
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 12.531

6.  EGFR protein overexpression and gene amplification in squamous cell carcinomas of the esophagus.

Authors:  Mitsuhiko Hanawa; Shioto Suzuki; Yoh Dobashi; Tetsu Yamane; Koji Kono; Nobuyuki Enomoto; Akishi Ooi
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2006-03-01       Impact factor: 7.396

7.  Barrett esophagus: risk factors for progression to dysplasia and adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Stefan Oberg; Jörgen Wenner; Jan Johansson; Bruno Walther; Roger Willén
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Quantitative, tissue-specific analysis of cyclooxygenase gene expression in the pathogenesis of Barrett's adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Hidekazu Kuramochi; Daniel Vallböhmer; Kazumi Uchida; Sylke Schneider; Nahid Hamoui; Daisuke Shimizu; Parakrama T Chandrasoma; Tom R DeMeester; Kathleen D Danenberg; Peter V Danenberg; Jeffrey H Peters
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 3.452

9.  Survivin, a potential biomarker in the development of Barrett's adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Daniel Vallböhmer; Jeffrey H Peters; Daniel Oh; Hidekazu Kuramochi; Daisuke Shimizu; Steven R Demeester; Jeffrey A Hagen; Parakrama T Chandrasoma; Kathleen D Danenberg; Tom R DeMeester; Peter Danenberg
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 3.982

10.  Differential SPARC mRNA expression in Barrett's oesophagus.

Authors:  J Brabender; R V Lord; R Metzger; J Park; D Salonga; K D Danenberg; P V Danenberg; A H Hölscher; P M Schneider
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2003-10-20       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  2 in total

1.  The columnar-lined mucosa at the gastroesophageal junction in non-human primates.

Authors:  Carlos A Rubio; Edward J Dick; Natalia E Schlabritz-Loutsevitch; Abiel Orrego; Gene B Hubbard
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Pathol       Date:  2008-01-20

2.  Accuracy of identification of tissue types in endoscopic esophageal mucosal biopsies used for molecular biology studies.

Authors:  Plauto Beck; George C Mayne; David Astill; Tanya Irvine; David I Watson; Willem A Dijckmeester; Bas Pl Wijnhoven; Damian J Hussey
Journal:  Clin Exp Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-02-09
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.