Cargando…

Distinctions in gastric cancer gene expression signatures derived from laser capture microdissection versus histologic macrodissection

BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer samples obtained by histologic macrodissection contain a relatively high stromal content that may significantly influence gene expression profiles. Differences between the gene expression signature derived from macrodissected gastric cancer samples and the signature obtain...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kim, Hark Kyun, Kim, Joseph, Korolevich, Susie, Choi, Il Ju, Kim, Chang Hee, Munroe, David J, Green, Jeffrey E
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3141377/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21635755
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1755-8794-4-48
_version_ 1782208666436370432
author Kim, Hark Kyun
Kim, Joseph
Korolevich, Susie
Choi, Il Ju
Kim, Chang Hee
Munroe, David J
Green, Jeffrey E
author_facet Kim, Hark Kyun
Kim, Joseph
Korolevich, Susie
Choi, Il Ju
Kim, Chang Hee
Munroe, David J
Green, Jeffrey E
author_sort Kim, Hark Kyun
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer samples obtained by histologic macrodissection contain a relatively high stromal content that may significantly influence gene expression profiles. Differences between the gene expression signature derived from macrodissected gastric cancer samples and the signature obtained from isolated gastric cancer epithelial cells from the same biopsies using laser-capture microdissection (LCM) were evaluated for their potential experimental biases. METHODS: RNA was isolated from frozen tissue samples of gastric cancer biopsies from 20 patients using both histologic macrodissection and LCM techniques. RNA from LCM was subject to an additional round of T7 RNA amplification. Expression profiling was performed using Affymetrix HG-U133A arrays. Genes identified in the expression signatures from each tissue processing method were compared to the set of genes contained within chromosomal regions found to harbor copy number aberrations in the tumor samples by array CGH and to proteins previously identified as being overexpressed in gastric cancer. RESULTS: Genes shown to have increased copy number in gastric cancer were also found to be overexpressed in samples obtained by macrodissection (LS P value < 10(-5)), but not in array data generated using microdissection. A set of 58 previously identified genes overexpressed in gastric cancer was also enriched in the gene signature identified by macrodissection (LS P < 10(-5)), but not in the signature identified by microdissection (LS P = 0.013). In contrast, 66 genes previously reported to be underexpressed in gastric cancer were enriched in the gene signature identified by microdissection (LS P < 10(-5)), but not in the signature identified by macrodissection (LS P = 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: The tumor sampling technique biases the microarray results. LCM may be a more sensitive collection and processing method for the identification of potential tumor suppressor gene candidates in gastric cancer using expression profiling.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3141377
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31413772011-07-23 Distinctions in gastric cancer gene expression signatures derived from laser capture microdissection versus histologic macrodissection Kim, Hark Kyun Kim, Joseph Korolevich, Susie Choi, Il Ju Kim, Chang Hee Munroe, David J Green, Jeffrey E BMC Med Genomics Research Article BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer samples obtained by histologic macrodissection contain a relatively high stromal content that may significantly influence gene expression profiles. Differences between the gene expression signature derived from macrodissected gastric cancer samples and the signature obtained from isolated gastric cancer epithelial cells from the same biopsies using laser-capture microdissection (LCM) were evaluated for their potential experimental biases. METHODS: RNA was isolated from frozen tissue samples of gastric cancer biopsies from 20 patients using both histologic macrodissection and LCM techniques. RNA from LCM was subject to an additional round of T7 RNA amplification. Expression profiling was performed using Affymetrix HG-U133A arrays. Genes identified in the expression signatures from each tissue processing method were compared to the set of genes contained within chromosomal regions found to harbor copy number aberrations in the tumor samples by array CGH and to proteins previously identified as being overexpressed in gastric cancer. RESULTS: Genes shown to have increased copy number in gastric cancer were also found to be overexpressed in samples obtained by macrodissection (LS P value < 10(-5)), but not in array data generated using microdissection. A set of 58 previously identified genes overexpressed in gastric cancer was also enriched in the gene signature identified by macrodissection (LS P < 10(-5)), but not in the signature identified by microdissection (LS P = 0.013). In contrast, 66 genes previously reported to be underexpressed in gastric cancer were enriched in the gene signature identified by microdissection (LS P < 10(-5)), but not in the signature identified by macrodissection (LS P = 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: The tumor sampling technique biases the microarray results. LCM may be a more sensitive collection and processing method for the identification of potential tumor suppressor gene candidates in gastric cancer using expression profiling. BioMed Central 2011-06-02 /pmc/articles/PMC3141377/ /pubmed/21635755 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1755-8794-4-48 Text en Copyright ©2011 Kim et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Kim, Hark Kyun
Kim, Joseph
Korolevich, Susie
Choi, Il Ju
Kim, Chang Hee
Munroe, David J
Green, Jeffrey E
Distinctions in gastric cancer gene expression signatures derived from laser capture microdissection versus histologic macrodissection
title Distinctions in gastric cancer gene expression signatures derived from laser capture microdissection versus histologic macrodissection
title_full Distinctions in gastric cancer gene expression signatures derived from laser capture microdissection versus histologic macrodissection
title_fullStr Distinctions in gastric cancer gene expression signatures derived from laser capture microdissection versus histologic macrodissection
title_full_unstemmed Distinctions in gastric cancer gene expression signatures derived from laser capture microdissection versus histologic macrodissection
title_short Distinctions in gastric cancer gene expression signatures derived from laser capture microdissection versus histologic macrodissection
title_sort distinctions in gastric cancer gene expression signatures derived from laser capture microdissection versus histologic macrodissection
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3141377/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21635755
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1755-8794-4-48
work_keys_str_mv AT kimharkkyun distinctionsingastriccancergeneexpressionsignaturesderivedfromlasercapturemicrodissectionversushistologicmacrodissection
AT kimjoseph distinctionsingastriccancergeneexpressionsignaturesderivedfromlasercapturemicrodissectionversushistologicmacrodissection
AT korolevichsusie distinctionsingastriccancergeneexpressionsignaturesderivedfromlasercapturemicrodissectionversushistologicmacrodissection
AT choiilju distinctionsingastriccancergeneexpressionsignaturesderivedfromlasercapturemicrodissectionversushistologicmacrodissection
AT kimchanghee distinctionsingastriccancergeneexpressionsignaturesderivedfromlasercapturemicrodissectionversushistologicmacrodissection
AT munroedavidj distinctionsingastriccancergeneexpressionsignaturesderivedfromlasercapturemicrodissectionversushistologicmacrodissection
AT greenjeffreye distinctionsingastriccancergeneexpressionsignaturesderivedfromlasercapturemicrodissectionversushistologicmacrodissection