AIM: To identify molecular biologic differences between two gastric adenocarcinoma subgroups presenting different prognoses through the analysis of microRNA and protein expression. METHODS: Array technologies were used to generate 1146 microRNAs and 124 proteins expression profiles of samples from 60 patients with gastric cancer. For the integrative analysis, we used established mRNA expression data published in our previous study. Whole mRNA expression levels were acquired from microarray data for 60 identical gastric cancer patients. Two gastric adenocarcinoma subgroups with distinct mRNA expression profiles presented distinctly different prognoses. MicroRNA and protein expression patterns were compared between gastric cancer tissue and normal gastric tissue and between two different prognostic groups. Aberrantly expressed microRNA, associated mRNA, and protein in patients with poor-prognosis gastric cancer were validated by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and immunochemistry in independent patients. RESULTS: We obtained the expression data of 1146 microRNAs and 124 cancer-related proteins. Four microRNAs were aberrantly expressed in the two prognostic groups and in cancer vs non-cancer tissues (P < 0.05). In the poor-prognosis group, miR-196b, miR-135b, and miR-93 were up-regulated and miR-29c* was down-regulated. miR-196b expression positively correlated with Homeobox A10 (HOXA10) expression (r = 0.726, P < 0.001), which was significantly increased in poor-prognosis patients (P < 0.001). Comparing gastric cancer with non-cancer tissues, 46/124 proteins showed differential expression (P < 0.05); COX2 (P < 0.001) and cyclin B1 (P = 0.017) were clearly over-expressed in the poor-prognosis group. CONCLUSION: Co-activation of miR-196b and HOXA10 characterized a poor-prognosis subgroup of patients with gastric cancer. Elucidation of the biologic function of miR-196b and HOXA10 is warranted.
AIM: To identify molecular biologic differences between two gastric adenocarcinoma subgroups presenting different prognoses through the analysis of microRNA and protein expression. METHODS: Array technologies were used to generate 1146 microRNAs and 124 proteins expression profiles of samples from 60 patients with gastric cancer. For the integrative analysis, we used established mRNA expression data published in our previous study. Whole mRNA expression levels were acquired from microarray data for 60 identical gastric cancerpatients. Two gastric adenocarcinoma subgroups with distinct mRNA expression profiles presented distinctly different prognoses. MicroRNA and protein expression patterns were compared between gastric cancer tissue and normal gastric tissue and between two different prognostic groups. Aberrantly expressed microRNA, associated mRNA, and protein in patients with poor-prognosis gastric cancer were validated by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and immunochemistry in independent patients. RESULTS: We obtained the expression data of 1146 microRNAs and 124 cancer-related proteins. Four microRNAs were aberrantly expressed in the two prognostic groups and in cancer vs non-cancer tissues (P < 0.05). In the poor-prognosis group, miR-196b, miR-135b, and miR-93 were up-regulated and miR-29c* was down-regulated. miR-196b expression positively correlated with Homeobox A10 (HOXA10) expression (r = 0.726, P < 0.001), which was significantly increased in poor-prognosis patients (P < 0.001). Comparing gastric cancer with non-cancer tissues, 46/124 proteins showed differential expression (P < 0.05); COX2 (P < 0.001) and cyclin B1 (P = 0.017) were clearly over-expressed in the poor-prognosis group. CONCLUSION: Co-activation of miR-196b and HOXA10 characterized a poor-prognosis subgroup of patients with gastric cancer. Elucidation of the biologic function of miR-196b and HOXA10 is warranted.
Authors: Jaqueline Carvalho de Oliveira; Carlos Alberto Scrideli; María Sol Brassesco; Andressa Gois Morales; Julia Alejandra Pezuk; Rosane de Paula Queiroz; José Andres Yunes; Silvia Regina Brandalise; Luiz Gonzaga Tone Journal: Leuk Res Date: 2011-11-17 Impact factor: 3.156
Authors: Raoul Tibes; Yihua Qiu; Yiling Lu; Bryan Hennessy; Michael Andreeff; Gordon B Mills; Steven M Kornblau Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Lin He; J Michael Thomson; Michael T Hemann; Eva Hernando-Monge; David Mu; Summer Goodson; Scott Powers; Carlos Cordon-Cardo; Scott W Lowe; Gregory J Hannon; Scott M Hammond Journal: Nature Date: 2005-06-09 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: George Adrian Calin; Cinzia Sevignani; Calin Dan Dumitru; Terry Hyslop; Evan Noch; Sai Yendamuri; Masayoshi Shimizu; Sashi Rattan; Florencia Bullrich; Massimo Negrini; Carlo M Croce Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2004-02-18 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Amanda Ferreira Vidal; Aline M P Cruz; Leandro Magalhães; Adenilson L Pereira; Ana K M Anaissi; Nélisson C F Alves; Paulo J B S Albuquerque; Rommel M R Burbano; Samia Demachki; Ândrea Ribeiro-dos-Santos Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2016-02-14 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Manoela Carrera; Carolina C Bitu; Carine Ervolino de Oliveira; Nilva K Cervigne; Edgard Graner; Aki Manninen; Tuula Salo; Ricardo D Coletta Journal: Int J Clin Exp Pathol Date: 2015-04-01
Authors: Amanda L Treece; Daniel L Duncan; Weihua Tang; Sandra Elmore; Douglas R Morgan; Ricardo L Dominguez; Olga Speck; Michael O Meyers; Margaret L Gulley Journal: Lab Invest Date: 2016-03-07 Impact factor: 5.662