| Literature DB >> 22672838 |
Min Yang1, Wei Li, Yi-Ying Liu, Shuang Fu, Guang-Bin Qiu, Kai-Lai Sun, Wei-Neng Fu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: MYCT1, previously named MTLC, is a novel candidate tumor suppressor gene. MYCT1 was cloned from laryngeal squamous cell cancer (LSCC) and has been found to be down-regulated in LSCC; however, the regulatory details have not been fully elucidated.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22672838 PMCID: PMC3472177 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-12-219
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Figure 1Detection of promoter methylation ofin LSCC and Hep-2 cells. A. Schematic representation of the location of the CpG sites and the AccII restriction site in the MYCT1 gene. Arabic numerals 1 to 12 represent the number of CpG dinucleotides in the region. B. Statistical result of DNA methylation in 10 LSCC paired samples and Hep-2 cells by BSP-based sequencing. C. Representative electrophoresis image of paired LSCC samples by BSP-based RFLP.
Correlation of CGCG (−695~-692) methylaton with case characteristics
| Sample | | | | |
| Cancer tissue | 73 | 59 | 14 | P<0.01 |
| Paired normal tissue | 73 | 13 | 60 | |
| Age at surgery | | | | |
| <60 | 35 | 28 | 7 | 0.864 |
| >60 | 38 | 31 | 7 | |
| Gender | | | | |
| Male | 58 | 47 | 11 | 0.928 |
| Female | 15 | 12 | 3 | |
| Histological classification | | | | |
| Poorly differentiated | 49 | 46 | 3 | P<0.01 |
| Well differentiated | 24 | 13 | 11 | |
| T classification | | | | |
| T1 | 13 | 10 | 3 | 0.980 |
| T2 | 26 | 21 | 5 | |
| T3 | 28 | 23 | 5 | |
| T4 | 6 | 5 | 1 | |
| Lymph node metastasis | | | | |
| Negative | 55 | 44 | 11 | 0.755 |
| Positive | 18 | 15 | 3 | |
| Distant metastasis | | | | |
| Negative | 69 | 56 | 13 | 0.761 |
| Positive | 4 | 3 | 1 | |
| Clinical stage | | | | |
| I | 13 | 9 | 4 | 0.533 |
| II | 22 | 17 | 5 | |
| III | 30 | 26 | 4 | |
| IV | 8 | 7 | 1 |
Figure 2Effect of 5-zaz onexpression in Hep-2 cells. A. BSP-based sequencing result of all of 12 CpG sites methlated or demethylated of in Hep-2 cells of the absence or presence of 5-aza. B. MYCT1 mRNA levels in Hep-2 cells. +5-zaz indicates Hep-2 ells were treated with 5-zaz; MYCT1 mRNA levels were significantly different.** p < 0.01.
Figure 3Effect of mutation and methylation of site CGCG (−695~-692) onpromoter activity in Hep-2 cells. A. Schematic representation of the plasmid constructs P852-mutB created by site-directed mutagenesis. The arrows indicate the primers used for constructing the mutant construct. B. Luciferase activities in Hep-2 cells of the presence or absence of 5-aza transfected with wild-type and mutant vectors of MYCT1.
Figure 4Effect of methylation of site CGCG (−695~-692) onpromoter banding to c-Myc in Hep-2 cells. A. Binding ability of site CGCG (−695~-692) to c-Myc. End-labeled M.SssI-treated methylated and unmethylated MYCT1 promoter region probes containing CGCG (−695~-692) were mixed with nuclear proteins from Hep2 cells and separated on a 6% polyacrylamide gel. Lane 1, end-labeled M.SssI-treated methylated free probe; Lane 2, end-labeled M.SssI-treated methylated probe mixed with nuclear proteins; Lane 3,4, the unlabeled M.SssI-treated methylated wild-type competitor DNA was mixed with the nuclear proteins before adding end-labeled probe; Lane 5, c-Myc antibody was mixed with the nuclear proteins before adding end-labeled probe; B. Binding of E-box B to c-Myc in vivo detected by ChIP. The percentage of the MYCT1 promoter occupied by c-Myc was significantly different in Hep-2 cells of present or absent 5-zaz..** p < 0.01.
Difference between CGCG (−695~-692) methylation and mRNA level ofin LSCC
| Cancer tissue | + | 59 | 0.31 ± 0.09 | 18.620 | P < 0.01 |
| - | 14 | 0.88 ± 0.15 | |||
| Paired tissue | + | 13 | 0.25 ± 0.11 | 14.289 | P < 0.01 |
| - | 60 | 0.96 ± 0.17 |