Pope Whitney B, Chen Jenny H, Dong Jun, Carlson Marc R J, Perlina Alla, Cloughesy Timothy F, Liau Linda M, Mischel Paul S, Nghiemphu Phioanh, Lai Albert, Nelson Stanley F
Department of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California-Los Angeles (UCLA) Medical Center, 10833 Le Conte Ave, BL-428/CHS, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1721, USA.
Radiology. 2008 Oct;249(1):268-77. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2491072000.
To determine the difference in gene expression between completely versus incompletely enhancing glioblastoma multiforme (GBM).
Gene expression was determined for 52 newly diagnosed GBMs by using DNA microarrays, and the relationship to enhancement pattern and survival was analyzed. This study was approved by the institutional review board and was HIPAA compliant; informed consent was obtained.
Thirty-eight percent (20 of 52) of GBMs were incompletely enhancing (IE). The expression of eight genes was increased more than twofold in IE GBM when compared with completely enhancing (CE) GBM. Among these were tight junction protein-2 (2.2-fold increase, P = .019), and the oligodendroglioma markers oligodendrocyte lineage transcription factor 2 (2.4-fold increase, P = .029) and Achaete-scute complex-like 1 (ASCL1; 2.7-fold increase, P = .023). The expression of 71 genes showed relative overexpression in CE when compared with IE GBM. These included several proangiogenic and edema-related genes, including vascular endothelial growth factor (2.1-fold, P = .005) and neuronal pentraxin-2 (3.0-fold, P = .029). Several genes associated with primary GBM were overexpressed in CE tumors, whereas ASCL1, which is associated with secondary GBM, was overexpressed in IE tumors. Many genes overexpressed in IE GBM were associated with longer survival, whereas several genes overexpressed in CE GBM correlated with shortened survival.
The enhancement pattern divides GBM in two groups with differing prognoses. By comparing gene expression between IE and CE GBMs, it was possible to identify genes that may affect magnetic resonance imaging features of edema and enhancement, and genes whose expression levels are predictive of both improved and shortened survival.
确定完全强化与不完全强化的多形性胶质母细胞瘤(GBM)之间的基因表达差异。
使用DNA微阵列对52例新诊断的GBM进行基因表达测定,并分析其与强化模式及生存的关系。本研究经机构审查委员会批准,符合健康保险流通与责任法案(HIPAA)要求;已获得知情同意。
38%(52例中的20例)的GBM为不完全强化(IE)。与完全强化(CE)的GBM相比,IE GBM中有8个基因的表达增加了两倍以上。其中包括紧密连接蛋白-2(增加2.2倍,P = 0.019),以及少突胶质细胞瘤标志物少突胶质细胞谱系转录因子2(增加2.4倍,P = 0.029)和achaete-scute复合体样1(ASCL1;增加2.7倍,P = 0.023)。与IE GBM相比,71个基因的表达在CE中显示相对过表达。这些基因包括几个促血管生成和与水肿相关的基因,如血管内皮生长因子(2.1倍,P = 0.005)和神经元五聚体蛋白-2(3.0倍,P = 0.029)。几个与原发性GBM相关的基因在CE肿瘤中过表达,而与继发性GBM相关的ASCL1在IE肿瘤中过表达。在IE GBM中过表达的许多基因与较长生存期相关,而在CE GBM中过表达的几个基因与生存期缩短相关。
强化模式将GBM分为两组,预后不同。通过比较IE和CE GBM之间的基因表达,可以识别可能影响水肿和强化的磁共振成像特征的基因,以及其表达水平可预测生存期延长和缩短的基因。