Article

Methylation of BNIP3 and DAPK indicates lower response to chemotherapy and poor prognosis in gastric cancer.

Department of Surgical Oncology, Graduate School, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8519, Japan.
Oncology Reports (Impact Factor: 2.3). 02/2011; 25(2):513-8. DOI: 10.3892/or.2010.1085
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Aberrant promoter hypermethylation (methylation) is an epigenetic change that silences the expression of crucial genes, thus inactivating the apoptotic pathway in various cancers. Inactivation of the apoptotic pathway has been considered to be associated with chemoresistance. The objective of the present study was to clarify the effect of the methylation of the apoptosis-related genes, Bcl-2/adenovirus E1B 19 kDa-interacting protein 3 (BNIP3) and death-associated protein kinase (DAPK), on the response to chemotherapy in metastatic or recurrent gastric cancers. Tumor samples were obtained from 80 gastric cancer patients who were treated with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy for distant metastatic or recurrent disease, after surgical resection of the primary tumor. The methylation status of the apoptosis-related genes, BNIP3 and DAPK, was investigated by methylation-specific PCR. Methylation in BNIP3 was detected in 31 tumors (39%) and in DAPK in 33 tumors (41%). There was no correlation between the methylation status of BNIP3 and that of DAPK. The response rate was significantly lower in patients with methylation of DAPK, than in those without (21 vs. 49% p=0.012). Progression-free survival time (PFS) was shorter in patients with methylation of DAPK than in those without (p=0.007). The overall survival time (OS) was shorter in patients with methylation of BNIP3 than in those without (p=0.031). The response rate was significantly lower in patients with methylation of either DAPK or BNIP3, or both, than in those without methylation (p=0.003). PFS and OS were significantly shorter in patients with methylation of either or both of these genes than in those without (p=0.002, p=0.001). The methylation of BNIP3 and DAPK can predict lower response to chemotherapy and poor prognosis in gastric cancer.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
157 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chromatin alterations are fundamental hallmarks of cancer. To study chromatin alterations in primary gastric adenocarcinomas, we perform nanoscale chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing of multiple histone modifications in five gastric cancers and matched normal tissues. We identify hundreds of somatically altered promoters and predicted enhancers. Many cancer-associated promoters localize to genomic sites lacking previously annotated transcription start sites (cryptic promoters), driving expression of nearby genes involved in gastrointestinal cancer, embryonic development and tissue specification. Cancer-associated promoters overlap with embryonic stem cell regions targeted by polycomb repressive complex 2, exhibiting promoter bivalency and DNA methylation loss. We identify somatically acquired elements exhibiting germline allelic biases and non-coding somatic mutations creating new promoters. Our findings demonstrate the feasibility of profiling chromatin from solid tumours with limited tissue to identify regulatory elements, transcriptional patterns and regulatory genetic variants associated with cancer.
    Nature Communications 07/2014; 5:4361. · 10.74 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Promoter methylation is an alternative mechanism of gene silencing in human tumorigenesis. Although a number of methylated genes have been found in gastric cancer, useful methylation markers for early diagnosis and prognostic evaluation of this cancer remain largely unknown. Using quantitative methylation-specific PCR (Q-MSP), we examined promoter methylation of 6 genes, including CALCA, DAPK1, RARbeta, RASSF1A, TIMP3, and PAX6, and explored their association with clinical outcome in gastric cancer. We found that most of the genes investigated in the present study had significantly higher methylation level in tumor tissues than normal gastric tissues, including CALCA, RARbeta, RASSF1A, TIMP3, and PAX6. With more focus on specificity compared to sensitivity, all genes were hypermethylated in gastric cancer, ranging from 12.8% to 36.9%. Methylation of TIMP3 and PAX6 was strongly associated with differentiation and lymph node metastasis, respectively. Importantly, most of gene methylation, except for DAPK1, was closely associated with poor survival in gastric cancer. We found that a panel of genes was specifically methylated in gastric cancer, and demonstrated the effect of promoter methylation of some genes on clinical outcome in gastric cancer, indicating these methylated genes may be useful biomarkers for prognostic evaluation in this cancer.
    Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry 04/2012; 413(7-8):787-94. · 2.54 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Gastric cancer is considered one of the most deadly tumors worldwide. Even with the decline in its incidence, the mortality rate of this disease has remained high, mainly due to its late diagnosis and to the lack of precise prognostic markers. The main purpose of this review is to present genetic, epigenetic and proteomic molecular markers that may be used in a diagnostic and prognostic manner and to discuss the pros and cons of each type of marker for improving clinical practice. In this sense, we observed that the use of genetic markers, especially mutations and polymorphisms, should be carefully considered, as they are strongly affected by ethnicity. Proteomic-based markers show promise, but the higher costs of the associated techniques continue to make this approach expensive for routine use. Alternatively, epigenetic markers appear to be very promising, as they can be detected in bodily fluids as well as tissues. However, such markers must be used carefully because epigenetic changes may occur due to environmental factors and aging. Despite the advances in technology and its access, to date, there are few defined biomarkers of prognostic and diagnostic use for gastric tumors. Therefore, the use of a panel of several approaches (genetic, epigenetic and proteomic) should be considered the best alternative for clinical practice.
    World journal of gastroenterology : WJG. 09/2014; 20(33):11574-11585.