scholarly journals Methylation profiling of normal individuals reveals mosaic promoter methylation of cancer-associated genes

Oncotarget ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 450-461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lasse Sommer Kristensen ◽  
Michael Raynor ◽  
Ida Candiloro ◽  
Alexander Dobrovic
Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 77-77
Author(s):  
Alberto J. Arribas ◽  
Andrea Rinaldi ◽  
Ivo Kwee ◽  
Afua A. Mensah ◽  
Luciano Cascione ◽  
...  

Abstract SMZL usually has an indolent clinical course. Transformation to aggressive lymphoma occurs in only 4-5% of cases. Tools to identify patients facing a more aggressive clinical course and targeted therapies are needed. In the last years, we have characterized SMZL by DNA profiling (Blood 2011) and RNA/miRNA expression profiling (Mod Path 2013), and shown that somatic mutations of NOTCH2 and other genes involved in the pathway are frequent and mutually exclusive with mutations affecting NKFB pathway (JEM 2012). Here, we report genome-wide DNA promoter methylation profiling of 137 SMZL samples with its clinical and biologic implications. Methods A test series of 101 samples, including 3 SMZL cell lines (Karpas1718, VL51, SSK41) and 98 clinical SMZL cases from 10 Centers and, a validation set of 36 SMZL cases from 2 additional Centers were analyzed with the Illumina Infinium HumanMethylation27 arrays, as described (BJH 2013). Gene GEP was available for a subset of 11/101 cases. Methylation profiles were correlated with the presence of the copy number aberrations (CNAs) and somatic mutations recurrent in SMZL, IGHV mutational status, HCV infection and clinical data. Probes mapped outside CpG islands were discarded. Supervised analyses were performed using a t-test on the continuous beta values, followed by multiple test correction. For Fisher’s test, probes were classified into unmethylated (beta-values <0.3) or methylated (beta-value >0.3). Results Unsupervised clustering analysis of 101 SMZL samples identified 2 clusters. Cluster one (23/101, 23%) comprised the 3 cell lines and included cases characterized by a generalized higher degree of promoter methylation (High-M), and had a significantly poorer overall survival (OS) than the remaining 79/101 (77%) cases (Low-M) (P=0.048; HR 2.4; 95% CI, 1-5.8). To better understand the biology underlying this clustering, supervised analysis comparing High-M to Low-M cases was performed. By combining t- and Fisher's tests, 3200 gene probes showed differential methylation status between High-M and Low-M lymphomas. This probes signature was significantly enriched of promoters of promoter regions of PRC2-complex targets, genes involved in chromatin remodeling, and HOX and SOX family genes, and genes down-regulated by CDH1. Genes coding for subunits of the PRC2-complex (EZH2, EED, SUZ12) appeared unmethylated in their promoter regions and over-expressed by GEP in the High-M set, while EZH2-target genes and genes harboring the H3K27me3 mark had methylated promoters and down-regulated expression. A number of reported tumor-suppressor genes were highly methylated in High-M cases, including KLF4, DAPK1, CDKN2A/B, CDKN1C, CDH1, CDH2 and TIMP3. Known pro-survival lymphoma genes, such as SYK, MCL1, CARD11, BIRC5, BTK, BCL10, FOXP1, CD40, TACI and TCL1A/B, were un-methylated and over-expressed in High-M cases. The prognostic relevance of the High-M phenotype was confirmed in an independent validation set. An unsupervised clustering using the top-100 differentially methylated probes obtained by t-test in the test series identified two clusters with one (11/36, 30%) bearing methylation profile similar to High-M and a poorer OS (P=0.038). All the samples were then pooled to improve the statistical power of further analyses regarding the impact of methylation on the clinical course and on the association with biologic variables. High-M was significantly associated with poorer OS (P=0.008; HR 2.58; 95% CI, 1.2-5.4), transformation into aggressive lymphoma (33% vs 0.02%, P<0.001) and with 7q31-33 loss (38% vs 16%, P=0.026). In addition, High-M showed a higher frequency of NOTCH-pathway somatic mutations (39% vs 16%, P=0.063). HCV was more frequent in Low-M (20% vs 4%, P=0.058). In a Cox regression model adjusted for the variables significantly associated with outcome at univariate analysis [High-M, age>60, Interguppo Italiano Linfomi (IIL) SMZL score, HCV infection], High-M (HR 16; 95% CI, 1.3-201) and IIL SMZL score (HR 4.5; 95% CI, 1.3-15) retained their prognostic significance on OS (P<0.001). Conclusions Genome-wide promoter-methylation profiling in splenic MZL identified a subset of patients with poorer OS, characterized by a high promoter methylation and by specific genetic and biologic features. These data may provide the rational to explore epigenetic drugs in SMZL. *, AJA and AR equally contributed. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9009-9009
Author(s):  
H. A. Tawbi ◽  
S. Buch ◽  
P. Pancoska ◽  
Y. Lin ◽  
M. Saul ◽  
...  

9009 Background: Temozolomide and dacarbazine (TMZ and DTIC) remain the mainstay of alkylator-based chemotherapy for MM, despite response rates of 10–15% and the absence of any impact on survival. Classification of patients according to responsiveness can guide the individualization of therapy and inform approaches to abrogate mechanisms of chemotherapy resistance. Epigenetic mechanisms play an important role in regulation of genes associated with resistance and were evaluated in tandem with gene expression profiling in biological samples from MM patients (pts) to refine our understanding of the epigenomic-genomic-phenotypic interplay. Methods: We examined promoter methylation and gene expression in tumor tissues of 21 pts with MM treated with TMZ or DTIC, using high throughput technologies (Illumina Inc). The cases were divided into responder (R) and non-responder (NR) groups based on clinical response. The data were analyzed using Prediction Analysis of Microarrays (PAM) from BRB array tools. Results: Differential promoter methylation analysis revealed that 63.6% of promoter sites were hypomethylated in tumors obtained from R pts (p<0.0001). PAM analysis of gene expression data revealed that a classifier set consisting of 82 genes was able to predict NRs from Rs with 83% sensitivity and 89% specificity. Promoter methylation profiling did not independently correlate with R status. A simultaneous analysis of the promoter methylation and gene expression values first stratified into 3 data-driven categories and then combined into a 3 by 3 matrix allowed us to identify a common gene expression/methylation signature of 15 genes that classified both NR and R groups accurately 100% of the time. Conclusions: Gene expression signatures independently predict response to chemotherapy in MM, however promoter methylation profiling alone does not. Analysis of combined gene expression and promoter methylation in a well- annotated clinical data set dichotomized according to response identified a highly predictive signature. The findings from this study are qualified by the relatively small sample size and are currently being validated in an expanded sample set. Supported in part by the ECOG Paul Carbone, MD, Fellowship Award. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2004 ◽  
Vol 95 (12) ◽  
pp. 962-968 ◽  
Author(s):  
Junichi Furuta ◽  
Yoshihiro Umebayashi ◽  
Kazuaki Miyamoto ◽  
Kanako Kikuchi ◽  
Fujio Otsuka ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seyedeh Elham Norollahi ◽  
Maryam Gholamniya Foumani ◽  
Maryam Khoshbakht Pishkhan ◽  
Afshin Shafaghi ◽  
Majid Alipour ◽  
...  

Epigenetic modifications particularly DNA methylation is a common place and remarkable factor in carcinogenesis transformation. Conspicuously, previous findings have presented a cluster of irregular promoter methylation alterationsrelated with silencing of TSG (tumor suppressor genes), little is accepted regarding their sequential DNA methylation (Hypo and Hyper) modifications during the cancer progression. In this way, fluctuations of DNA methylation of many certain genes especially MYC, SMAD2/3 and DNMT3A have an impressive central key role in many different cancers like colorectal (CRC)one. CRC is distinguished by DNA methylation, which is related with tumorigenesis and also genomic instability. Importantly, molecular heterogeneity between multiple adenomas in different patients with CRC may show diverse developmental phenotypes for these kinds of tumors. Conclusively, studying of factors which are involved in CRC carcinogenesis, especially the alterations in epigenetic elements, such as DNA methylation besides the RNA remodeling, histone modification, histone acetylation and histone phosphorylation can be influential in order to find new therapeutic and diagnostic biomarkers in this type of malignancy. In this account, we tried to discuss and address the potential significant methylated modifications of these genes and their importance during the development of CRC carcinogenesis.


1985 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 260-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lee Ann Laraway

The purpose of this study was to determine whether there is a statistically significant difference between the auditory selective attention abilities of normal and cerebral-palsied individuals. Twenty-three cerebral-palsied and 23 normal subjects between the ages of 5 and 21 were asked to repeat a series of 30 items consisting of from 2 to 4 digits in the presence of intermittent white noise. Results of the study indicate that cerebral-palsied individuals perform significantly poorer than normal individuals when the stimulus is accompanied by noise. Noise was not a significant factor in the performance of the normal subjects regardless of age.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document