| Literature DB >> 24373183 |
Janette Mareska Rumbajan, Toshiyuki Maeda, Ryota Souzaki, Kazumasa Mitsui, Ken Higashimoto, Kazuhiko Nakabayashi, Hitomi Yatsuki, Kenichi Nishioka, Ryoko Harada, Shigehisa Aoki, Kenichi Kohashi, Yoshinao Oda, Kenichiro Hata, Tsutomu Saji, Tomoaki Taguchi, Tatsuro Tajiri, Hidenobu Soejima1, Keiichiro Joh.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aberrant methylation at imprinted differentially methylated regions (DMRs) in human 11p15.5 has been reported in many tumors including hepatoblastoma. However, the methylation status of imprinted DMRs in imprinted loci scattered through the human genome has not been analyzed yet in any tumors.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24373183 PMCID: PMC3880457 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-13-608
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Clinical information of hepatoblastoma cases
| HB01 | F/1y3m | Combined fetal and embryonal type | III | CITA4 | III | Alive | |
| HB02 | F/3y2m | Fetal typec | III | CITA4 | III | Aive | |
| HB03 | F/7y11m | Hepatoblastoma (NOS)d | III | CITA5 | III | Alive | Small for gestational age |
| HB04 | M/1y4m | Mixed epithelial and mesenchymal with teratoid featurec | IV | CITA4 + ITEC2 | IV | Alive | |
| HB05 | M/1y2m | Mixed epithelial and mesenchymal with teratoid feature | III | CITA5 | II | Alive | |
| HB06 | M/10m | Mixed epithelial and mesenchymal with teratoid feature | III | CITA4 | III | Alive | |
| HB07 | M/8m | Combined fetal and embryonal type | II | CITA2 | II | Alive | |
| HB08 | F/28d | Combined fetal and embryonal type | II | | | Alive | |
| HB09 | M/1y6m | Combined fetal and embryonal type | II | | | Treatment related death | Small for gestational age |
| HB10 | F/6y6m | Fetal type | II | CITA2 | II | Alive | |
| HB11 | F/3m | Combined fetal and embryonal type | IV | CITA7 | III | Treatment related death | |
| BWS109 | F/1y0m | Hepatoblastoma (NOS)d | IV,M(+) | CITA7 + ITEC1 | IV | Alive | Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome, liver transplantation at 1 year old |
aage at diagnosis, bCITA: cisplatin-pirarubicin, ITEC: Ifosfamide, pirarubicin, etoposide, and carboplatin. The numerals indicate the cycle numbers of the chemotherapy. cdifficult to diagnose due to chemotherapy, dnot otherwise specified.
Figure 1Representative results of methylation analyses by MALDI-TOF MS and pyrosequencing. (A and B) Representative samples of aberrant hypomethylation. KvDMR1 of HB08 and PEG10 of HB11 are shown. KvDMR1 was hypomethylated in both adjacent normal liver and tumor tissues, whereas PEG10-DMR was hypomethylated only in tumor tissue. (C and D) Representative samples of aberrant hypermethylation. INPP5Fv2-DMR in HB05 and RB1-DMR in HB11 are shown. Only tumors showed hypermethylation at these DMRs. Aberrant methylation of a DMR was defined as when more than 60% of total CpG units or CpG sites were aberrantly methylated. Aberrant methylation of a CpG unit or CpG site was defined as occurring when the difference of its methylation indexes in two samples exceeded 0.15. The vertical axis represents the methylation index; the horizontal axis represents CpG units (MALDI-TOF MS) or CpG sites (pyrosequencing) analyzed. Green line: average of normal control livers; blue line: adjacent normal liver; red line: tumor (hepatoblastoma).
Figure 2Aberrant methylations and genetic alterations of 33 imprinted DMRs in 12 hepatoblastomas. Aberrant hypomethylation and aberrant hypermethylation found in each comparison are indicated by blue and red boxes, respectively. Aberrant methylation was identified by comparing adjacent normal liver tissue with normal control livers: AxC; tumors compared with normal control livers: TxC; and tumors compared with adjacent normal livers: TxA. The classes of these DMRs in previous reports are shown in Pat/Mat and Gametic/Somatic rows. ZDBF2-DMR was tentatively assigned as a somatic DMR based on experiments from mice [35]. MALDI-TOF MS revealed that 13 DMRs, such as TP73-DMR, SPTBN1-DMR, IGF2R-DMR2, IGF2-DMR0, IGF2-DMR2, WT1-AS-DMR, DLK1-DMR, IG-DMR-CG4, IG-DMR-CG6, TCEB3C-DMR, USP29-DMR, NNAT-DMR, and GNASXL-DMR did not show differential methylation in control livers. Most of these methylation statuses were confirmed by pyrosequencing analysis. Mat: maternally methylated DMR; Pat: paternally methylated DMR; gametic: gametic DMR; somatic: somatic DMR. ACN: abnormal copy number; LOH: loss of heterozygosity; UPD: paternal uniparental disomy; DD: difficult to decide.
Figure 3Comparison of aberrant methylations of DMRs in hepatoblastoma. (A) Comparison of the numbers of aberrantly hypomethylated (blue bars) and hypermethylated (red bars) DMRs. Hypomethylation, but not hypermethlation, was observed in adjacent normal tissues. Hypermethylation was observed more frequently than hypomethylation in tumors compared to adjacent normal tissues. (B) Comparison of the frequencies of aberrant methylations between the paternally methylated DMRs (black bars) and the maternally methylated DMRs (white bars). Left and right panels indicate hypomethylation and hypermethylation, respectively. There was no significant difference in both hypomethylation and hypermethylation. (C) Comparison of the frequencies of aberrant methylations between gametic DMRs (yellow bars) and somatic DMRs (green bars). Left and right panels indicate hypomethylation and hypermethylation, respectively. Hypermethylation was observed more frequently at gametic DMRs with statistically significant difference in tumors compared to control livers. The frequencies were compared in (B) and (C) because of the difference in the total numbers of DMRs in the two categories compared; that is, the paternal and the maternal DMRs or the gametic and the somatic DMRs. The asterisks indicated significant difference. The p values are shown above the comparisons. b: binomial test, c: chi squared test.
Figure 4Methylation status of LINE-1. Methylation levels of four successive CpG sites in LINE-1 were analyzed in hepatoblastomas (T), paired adjacent normal liver tissues (A), and three normal control livers (C) by pyrosequencing. The normal controls were analyzed in triplicate and the average values were plotted with standard deviations. The average values of methylation (%) are shown for each sample groups. The asterisks indicated significant differences (p < 0.0167). Bonfferoni correction was applied for this statistical analysis.