BACKGROUND: Using a novel cell culture technique, we established two new cell lines, BC44 and BC61, from papillary urothelial carcinoma and analyzed them for genetic changes typical of this tumor type. METHODS AND RESULTS: Karyotyping revealed aneuploid karyotypes with loss of chromosome 9 and rearranged chromosome 5p. Molecular analysis showed CDKN2A deletions but wild-type PIK3CA. BC61 contained a G372C FGFR3 mutation. TP53 was not mutated in either cell line and BC61 expressed normal full-length protein. In contrast, BC44 exclusively expressed cytoplasmic and nuclear p53Δ40 and 133 isoforms from the alternative promoter P2 as revealed by Western blotting, immunocytochemistry and PCR. The only discernible difference in TP53 in BC44 was homozygosity for the deletion allele of the rs17878362 polymorphism in the P2 promoter. Expression of p53 isoforms was also detected in a few other urothelial carcinoma cell lines and tumor cultures and in 4 out of 28 carcinoma tissues. CONCLUSION: In urothelial cancers, TP53 is typically inactivated by mutations in one allele and loss of the wildtype allele and more frequently in invasive compared to papillary carcinomas. We show that some urothelial carcinomas may predominantly or exclusively express isoforms which are not detected by commonly used antibodies to epitopes located in the p53 TA amino-terminal region. Expression of these isoforms may constitute a further mode of p53 inactivation in urothelial carcinoma. Our findings raise the question to which extent this mechanism may compromise wildtype p53 function in papillary tumors in particular, where point mutations in the gene are rare.
BACKGROUND: Using a novel cell culture technique, we established two new cell lines, BC44 and BC61, from papillary urothelial carcinoma and analyzed them for genetic changes typical of this tumor type. METHODS AND RESULTS: Karyotyping revealed aneuploid karyotypes with loss of chromosome 9 and rearranged chromosome 5p. Molecular analysis showed CDKN2A deletions but wild-type PIK3CA. BC61 contained a G372CFGFR3 mutation. TP53 was not mutated in either cell line and BC61 expressed normal full-length protein. In contrast, BC44 exclusively expressed cytoplasmic and nuclear p53Δ40 and 133 isoforms from the alternative promoter P2 as revealed by Western blotting, immunocytochemistry and PCR. The only discernible difference in TP53 in BC44 was homozygosity for the deletion allele of the rs17878362 polymorphism in the P2 promoter. Expression of p53 isoforms was also detected in a few other urothelial carcinoma cell lines and tumor cultures and in 4 out of 28 carcinoma tissues. CONCLUSION: In urothelial cancers, TP53 is typically inactivated by mutations in one allele and loss of the wildtype allele and more frequently in invasive compared to papillary carcinomas. We show that some urothelial carcinomas may predominantly or exclusively express isoforms which are not detected by commonly used antibodies to epitopes located in the p53 TA amino-terminal region. Expression of these isoforms may constitute a further mode of p53 inactivation in urothelial carcinoma. Our findings raise the question to which extent this mechanism may compromise wildtype p53 function in papillary tumors in particular, where point mutations in the gene are rare.
Authors: V Marcel; V Vijayakumar; L Fernández-Cuesta; H Hafsi; C Sagne; A Hautefeuille; M Olivier; P Hainaut Journal: Oncogene Date: 2010-03-01 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: Wolfgang Otto; Stefan Denzinger; Simone Bertz; Andreas Gaumann; Peter J Wild; Arndt Hartmann; Robert Stoehr Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2009-11-01 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Hans-Helge Seifert; Andrea Meyer; Marcus V Cronauer; Jiri Hatina; Mirko Müller; Harald Rieder; Michele J Hoffmann; Rolf Ackermann; Wolfgang A Schulz Journal: World J Urol Date: 2007-04-18 Impact factor: 3.661
Authors: Julie Earl; Daniel Rico; Enrique Carrillo-de-Santa-Pau; Benjamín Rodríguez-Santiago; Marinela Méndez-Pertuz; Herbert Auer; Gonzalo Gómez; Herbert Barton Grossman; David G Pisano; Wolfgang A Schulz; Luis A Pérez-Jurado; Alfredo Carrato; Dan Theodorescu; Stephen Chanock; Alfonso Valencia; Francisco X Real Journal: BMC Genomics Date: 2015-05-22 Impact factor: 3.969
Authors: Michèle J Hoffmann; Evangelia Koutsogiannouli; Margaretha A Skowron; Maria Pinkerneil; Günter Niegisch; Artur Brandt; Stefanie Stepanow; Harald Rieder; Wolfgang A Schulz Journal: Bladder Cancer Date: 2016-10-27
Authors: Alexander S Hölscher; Wolfgang A Schulz; Maria Pinkerneil; Günter Niegisch; Michèle J Hoffmann Journal: Clin Epigenetics Date: 2018-01-04 Impact factor: 6.551
Authors: Ulrike Kreimer; Wolfgang A Schulz; Annemarie Koch; Günter Niegisch; Wolfgang Goering Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2013-09-26 Impact factor: 6.244