Gene expression profiling of advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinomas and two squamous cell carcinoma cell lines under radio/chemotherapy using cDNA arrays

Hartmann, Karl; Modlich, Olga; Prisack, Hans Bernd; Gerlach, B.; Bojar, Hans

doi:10.1016/s0167-8140(02)00128-7

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A variety of techniques, including differential hybridization, differential display PCR, serial analysis of gene expression (SAGE), and gene array, have been used to identify the genes whose expression is selectively altered after radiation [17][18][19] . Recently, a new method termed gene trap strategy has also been used to predict radiation responsive genes [20] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differentially expressed proteins of gamma-ray irradiated mouse intestinal epithelial cells by two-dimensional electrophoresis and MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry

Zhang

Su²,

Ai³

et al. 2003

WJG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AIM:To identify the differentially expressed proteins involved in ionizing radiation in mice and to explore new ways for studying radiation-related proteins. METHODS:Bal B/c mice grouped as sham-irradiation, 3 h and 72 h irradiation were exposed to 9.0Gy single dose of γ-irradiation. Intestinal epithelia were isolated from mice, and total proteins were extracted with urea containing solution. A series of methods were used, including twodimensional electrophoresis, PDQuest 2-DE software analysis, peptide mass fingerprinting based on matrixassisted laser desorption/ionization time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF-MS) and SWISS-PROT database searching, to separate and identify the differential proteins. Western blotting and RT-PCR were used to validate the differentially expressed proteins. RESULTS:Mouse intestine was severely damaged by 9.0 Gy γ-irradiation. Image analysis of two-dimensional gels revealed that averages of 638±39, 566±32 and 591±29 protein spots were detected in 3 groups, respectively, and the majority of these protein spots were matched. About 360 protein spots were matched between normal group and 3 h irradiation group, and the correlation coefficient was 0.78 by correlation analysis of gels. Also 312 protein spots matched between normal group and 72 h irradiation group, and 282 protein spots between 3 h and 72 h irradiation groups. Twenty-eight differential protein spots were isolated from gels, digested with trypsin, and measured with MALDI-TOF-MS. A total of 25 spots yielded good spectra, and 19 spots matched known proteins after database searching. These proteins were mainly involved in anti-oxidation, metabolism, signal transduction, and protein post-translational processes. Western-blotting confirmed that enolase was up-regulated by γ-irradiation. Upregulation of peroxiredoxin I was verified by applying RT-PCR technique, but no change occurred in Q8VC72. CONCLUSION:These differentially expressed proteins might play important roles when mouse intestine was severely injured by γ-irradiation. It is suggested that differential proteomic analysis may be a useful tool to study the proteins involved in radiation damage of mouse intestinal epithelia.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differentially expressed proteins of gamma-ray irradiated mouse intestinal epithelial cells by two-dimensional electrophoresis and MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry

Zhang

Su²,

Ai³

et al. 2003

WJG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Instead, our results suggested potentially novel genes, or even new pathways, that may or may not interact with the known DNA damage response routes (detection, repair, cell cycle, apoptosis) that can putatively lead to sensitivity or resistance to XR (1). Several studies have attempted to address the genetic basis of radiation response, either in cell lines or tumor biopsies, using cDNA microarray as high throughput screening (4)(5)(6)(7)(8)12). These studies have provided candidates of radiation-responsive molecules.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…More recent efforts to examine the genetic basis of cellular resistance or sensitivity to XR have employed high throughput, genome-wide screening using cDNA or oligonucleotide microarrays (4)(5)(6)(7)(8). However, except for Kitahara et al (6), the number of genes screened (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, except for Kitahara et al (6), the number of genes screened (e.g. 558 and 1176 genes) (4,5,7) was usually too small to allow a meaningful global analysis of genetic response following XR. In addition, the well-documented heterogeneity often present in tumor cells/tissues in vivo is another factor that can affect the unequivocal identification of an XR-resistant or -sensitive genetic signature(s) from these studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Transcriptomic profiling of radiation-resistant or -sensitive human colorectal cancer cells: Acute effects of a single X-radiation dose

Ng¹,

Liu²,

Qutob³

et al. 2007

Int J Oncol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We previously isolated several clones that were closely-related genetically from a human colorectal tumor (HCT116) cell line. These clones displayed significantly different X-radiation response phenotypes. In this paper, we investigated how a single dose of X-radiation modulated the transcriptomic profiles of either the radiation-resistant (HCT116 Clone2_XRR ) or the radiation-sensitive (HCT116 CloneK_XRS ) clone when each was compared to a reference clone, HCT116Clone10_control . The latter represented a control clone that displayed a similar X-radiation response as the parental HCT116 cells. Pooled RNAs were obtained from HCT116 Clone2_XRR , HCT116 CloneK_XRS or HCT116 Clone10_control cells either before or at 10 min, 6 or 24 h after treatment with 4-Gy X-radiation. Transcriptomic profiles were assessed by cDNA microarrays. At least three independent experiments were carried out for each time point and statistical analysis was performed by paired t-test (p<0.05). From 19,200 genes/ ESTs examined, we identified only 120 genes/ESTs that were differentially expressed at any one of these four time points. Interestingly, different patterns of gene modulation were observed between the radiation-sensitive and radiationresistant clones. However, the fold changes of gene modulation were generally small (2-3 fold). Surprisingly, only 12.7% of 79 genes involved in DNA damage sensor/repair and cell cycle and between 2.6 and 9.2% of 76 genes involved in apoptosis, were significantly modulated in these early time points following irradiation. By comparison, up to 10% of 40 known housekeeping genes were differentially expressed. Thus in our experimental model, we were able to detect the up-regulation or down-regulation of mostly novel genes and/or pathways in the acute period (up to 24 h) following a single dose of 4-Gy X-radiation.

show abstract

Current Awareness on Comparative and Functional Genomics

2003

Comparative and Functional Genomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gene expression profiling of advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinomas and two squamous cell carcinoma cell lines under radio/chemotherapy using cDNA arrays

Cited by 7 publications

References 17 publications

Differentially expressed proteins of gamma-ray irradiated mouse intestinal epithelial cells by two-dimensional electrophoresis and MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry

Differentially expressed proteins of gamma-ray irradiated mouse intestinal epithelial cells by two-dimensional electrophoresis and MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry

Transcriptomic profiling of radiation-resistant or -sensitive human colorectal cancer cells: Acute effects of a single X-radiation dose

Current Awareness on Comparative and Functional Genomics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About