PURPOSE: LOH at the p53 locus has been reported to be associated with esophageal squamous cell carcinogenesis. The aim of this study is to identify potential mechanisms resulting in LOH around the p53 locus in its carcinogenesis. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We investigated 10 esophageal cancer cell lines and 91 surgically resected specimens, examining them for LOH at the p53 locus on chromosome 17. We examined the p53 gene by using microsatellite analysis, comparative genomic hybridization (CGH), FISH, and single-nucleotide polymorphism-CGH (SNP-CGH). RESULTS: In an analysis of specimens by microsatellite markers, a close positive correlation was found between p53 mutations and LOH at the p53 locus (P < 0.01). Although four cell lines were found to be homozygous for p53 mutations, LOH at the p53 locus was not detected by CGH. Among two p53 mutant cancer cell lines and five p53 mutant/LOH cancer specimens analyzed by FISH, both the cell lines and four of the specimens exhibited no obvious copy number loss at the p53 locus. SNP-CGH analysis, which allows both determination of DNA copy number and detection of copy-neutral LOH, showed that LOHs without copy number change were caused by whole or large chromosomal alteration. CONCLUSIONS: LOH without copy number change at the p53 locus was observed in p53 mutant esophageal squamous cell carcinomas. Our data suggest that copy-neutral LOH occurring as a result of chromosomal instability might be the major mechanism for inactivation of the intact allele in esophageal squamous cell carcinogenesis associated with p53 mutation.
PURPOSE: LOH at the p53 locus has been reported to be associated with esophageal squamous cell carcinogenesis. The aim of this study is to identify potential mechanisms resulting in LOH around the p53 locus in its carcinogenesis. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We investigated 10 esophageal cancer cell lines and 91 surgically resected specimens, examining them for LOH at the p53 locus on chromosome 17. We examined the p53 gene by using microsatellite analysis, comparative genomic hybridization (CGH), FISH, and single-nucleotide polymorphism-CGH (SNP-CGH). RESULTS: In an analysis of specimens by microsatellite markers, a close positive correlation was found between p53 mutations and LOH at the p53 locus (P < 0.01). Although four cell lines were found to be homozygous for p53 mutations, LOH at the p53 locus was not detected by CGH. Among two p53 mutant cancer cell lines and five p53 mutant/LOH cancer specimens analyzed by FISH, both the cell lines and four of the specimens exhibited no obvious copy number loss at the p53 locus. SNP-CGH analysis, which allows both determination of DNA copy number and detection of copy-neutral LOH, showed that LOHs without copy number change were caused by whole or large chromosomal alteration. CONCLUSIONS: LOH without copy number change at the p53 locus was observed in p53 mutant esophageal squamous cell carcinomas. Our data suggest that copy-neutral LOH occurring as a result of chromosomal instability might be the major mechanism for inactivation of the intact allele in esophageal squamous cell carcinogenesis associated with p53 mutation.
Authors: M Kano; K Matsushita; B Rahmutulla; S Yamada; H Shimada; S Kubo; T Hiwasa; H Matsubara; F Nomura Journal: Gene Ther Date: 2015-08-04 Impact factor: 5.250
Authors: Bernard Leroy; Luc Girard; Antoinette Hollestelle; John D Minna; Adi F Gazdar; Thierry Soussi Journal: Hum Mutat Date: 2014-05-06 Impact factor: 4.878
Authors: Neha Parikh; Susan Hilsenbeck; Chad J Creighton; Tajhal Dayaram; Ryan Shuck; Eve Shinbrot; Liu Xi; Richard A Gibbs; David A Wheeler; Lawrence A Donehower Journal: J Pathol Date: 2014-01-29 Impact factor: 7.996
Authors: Paola Ulivi; Luca Saragoni; Chiara Molinari; Gianluca Tedaldi; Francesca Rebuzzi; Paolo Morgagni; Laura Capelli; Sara Ravaioli; Maria Maddalena Tumedei; Emanuela Scarpi; Anna Tomezzoli; Riccardo Bernasconi; Maria Raffaella Ambrosio; Alessia D'Ignazio; Leonardo Solaini; Francesco Limarzi; Giorgio Ercolani; Giovanni Martinelli Journal: Gastric Cancer Date: 2020-11-06 Impact factor: 7.370
Authors: Yadav Sapkota; Sunita Ghosh; Raymond Lai; Bradley P Coe; Carol E Cass; Yutaka Yasui; John R Mackey; Sambasivarao Damaraju Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-01-16 Impact factor: 3.240