![](/uploads/1/2/5/8/125805703/213073108.jpg)
Abstract
Despite its many therapeutic qualities, arsenic trioxide has been more commonly remembered as Madame Bovary's poison than as an anticancer drug. The ability of arsenic trioxide to treat acute promyelocytic leukaemia has radically changed this view, providing new insights into the pathogenesis of this malignancy and raising hopes that arsenicals might be useful in treating other cancers.
Key Points
- Arsenicals are some of the oldest drugs known to man. For more than 2,000 years, physicians have progressively switched from natural sulphur derivatives, to white arsenic, from ointments to oral forms, culminating in the massive use of organic arsenicals against syphilis in the 1900s.
- In the 1990s, Chinese scientists revived arsenic trioxide therapy by showing that it induces marked responses in patients with acute promyelocytic leukaemia (APL). Such exquisite sensitivity of APL to arsenic is likely to relate to its effects on the PML gene product, which is fused to the retinoic-acid receptor during the APL-specific t(15;17) translocation.
- The ability of arsenic to treat APL has shed new light on the pathogenesis of this disease, emphasizing the role of transcriptional derepression. APL, which is also exquisitely sensitive to retinoic-acid-induced differentiation, has become a model for both differentiation therapy and oncogene-targeted treatments.
- Continuing studies are trying to broaden the use of arsenic in cancer therapies.
たくさんのご参加ありがとうございました! 皆様からの投票を全て集計し、上位5曲が決定致しました。 そして、2013年12月4日発売のベストアルバム『Road to The Independent King』の収録楽曲31曲を遂に発表!. And i love you so - ak-69 - road to the independent king 2013 Label: MS Entertainment - VCCM-2073/2074/2075. Format: 2x, CD Compilation, Limited Edition.
Access optionsAccess options
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
All prices include VAT for Germany.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
from$8.99
All prices are NET prices.
References
- 1Micca, G. Arsenic, or rather, arsenious anhydride, the preferred poison of the Borgias. Minerva Med.60, IX–XI (1969).
- 2Keynes, M. Did Napoleon die from arsenical poisoning? Lancet344, 276 (1994).
- 3Alpert, M. A touch of poison. Sci. Am.284, 20–21 (2001).
- 4Huff, J., Chan, P. & Nyska, A. Is the human carcinogen arsenic carcinogenic to laboratory animals? Toxicol. Sci.55, 17–23 (2000).
- 5Bode, A. M. & Dong, Z. The paradox of arsenic: molecular mechanisms of cell transformation and chemotherapeutic effects. Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol.42, 5–24 (2002).
- 6Haller, J. S. Therapeutic mule: the use of arsenic in the nineteenth century materia medica. Pharm. Hist. 17, 87–100 (1975).
- 7Kwong, Y. L. & Todd, D. Delicious poison: arsenic trioxide for the treatment of leukemia. Blood89, 3487–3488 (1997).
- 8Waxman, S. & Anderson, K. C. History of the development of arsenic derivatives in cancer therapy. Oncologist6, 3–10 (2001).
- 9Sun, H. D. et al. Ai-ling 1 treated 32 cases of acute promyelocytic leukemia. Chin. J. Integrat. Trad. Chin. West. Med. 12, 170–171 (1992).First report of As2O3 therapy in APL.
- 10Zhang, P. et al. Treatment of 72 cases of acute promyelocytic leukemia with intravenous arsenic trioxide. Chin. J. Hematol.17, 58–62 (1996).
- 11Chen, G.-Q. et al. In vitro studies on cellular and molecular mechanisms of arsenic trioxide (As2O3) in the treatment of acute promyelocytic leukemia. As2O3 induces NB4 cell apoptosis with downregulation of Bcl-2 expression and modulation of PML-RAR α/PML proteins. Blood88, 1052–1061 (1996).
- 12Chen, G.-Q. et al. Use of arsenic trioxide (As2O3) in the treatment of acute promyelocytic leukaemia (APL). I. As2O3 exerts dose-dependent dual effects on APL cells. Blood89, 3345–3353 (1997).First demonstration of differentiation triggered by low doses of As2O3, specifically in APL cells. Greater doses induce apoptosis, as in various non-APL cell lines.
- 13Espinoza, E., Mann, M. & Bleasdell, B. Arsenic and mercury in traditional chinese herbal balls. N. Engl. J. Med.333, 803–804 (1995).
- 14Soignet, S. L. et al. Complete remission after treatment of acute promyelocytic leukemia with arsenic trioxide. N. Engl. J. Med.339, 1341–1348 (1998).
- 15Lu, D. P. et al. Tetra-arsenic tetra sulfide for the treatment of acute promyelocytic leukemia: a pilot report. Blood99, 3136–3143 (2002).
- 16Warrell, R., de Thé, H., Wang, Z. & Degos, L. Acute promyelocytic leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med.329, 177–189 (1993).
- 17de Thé, H. et al. The t(15;17) translocation of acute promyelocytic leukemia fuses the retinoic acid receptor-α gene to a novel transcribed locus. Nature347, 558–561 (1990).
- 18Borrow, J., Goddart, A., Sheer, D. & Solomon, E. Molecular analysis of acute promyelocytic leukemia breakpoint cluster region on chromosome 17. Science249, 1577–1580 (1990).
- 19Huang, M. et al. Use of all trans retinoic acid in the treatment of acute promyelocytic leukaemia. Blood72, 567–572 (1988).First demonstration that retinoic acid induces the differentiation of acute promyelocytic leukaemia cells in vivo, resulting in complete remission in patients with this cancer.
- 20Rochette-Egly, C. et al. Stimulation of RARα activation function AF-1 through binding to the general transcription factor TFIIH and phosphorylation by CDK7. Cell90, 97–107 (1997).
- 21de Thé, H., Marchio, A., Tiollais, P. & Dejean, A. Differential expression and ligand regulation of the retinioc acid receptor α and β genes. EMBO J.8, 429–433 (1989).
- 22Zhu, J. et al. Lineage restriction of the RARα gene expression in myeloid differentiation. Blood98, 2563–2567 (2001).
- 23Johnson, B. S., Mueller, L., Si, J. & Collins, S. J. The cytokines IL-3 and GM-CSF regulate the transcriptional activity of retinoic acid receptors in different in vitro models of myeloid differentiation. Blood99, 746–753 (2002).
- 24Kastner, P. et al. Positive and negative regulation of granulopoiesis by endogenous RARα. Blood97, 1314–1320 (2001).Demonstration of an accelerated granulocytic maturation in Rarα−/− mice.
- 25de Thé, H. et al. The PML–RARα fusion mRNA generated by the t(15;17) translocation in acute promyelocytic leukemia encodes a functionally altered RAR. Cell66, 675–684 (1991).
- 26Kakizuka, A. et al. Chromosomal translocation t(15;17) in human acute promyelocytic leukemia fuses RARα with a novel putative transcription factor, PML. Cell66, 663–674 (1991).
- 27Grignani, F. et al. Fusion proteins of the retinoic acid receptor-α recruit histone deacetylase in promyelocytic leukaemia. Nature391, 815–818 (1998).
- 28Lin, R. J. et al. Role of the histone deacetylase complex in acute promyelocytic leukaemia. Nature391, 811–814 (1998).
- 29He, L.-Z. et al. Distinct interactions of PML–RARα and PLZF–RARα with co-repressors determine differential responses to RA in APL. Nature Genet.18, 126–135 (1998).
- 30Hong, S. H. et al. SMRT corepressor interacts with PLZF and with the PML-retinoic acid receptor-α (RARα) and PLZF-RARα oncoproteins associated with acute promyelocytic leukemia. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA94, 9028–9033 (1997).
- 31Lin, R. & Evans, R. Acquisition of oncogenic potential by RAR chimeras in acute promyelocytic leukemia through formation of homodimers. Mol. Cell5, 821–830 (2000).
- 32Minucci, S. et al. Oligomerization of RAR and AML1 transcription factors as a novel mechanism of oncogenic activation. Mol. Cell5, 811–820 (2000).
- 33Chen, Z. et al. Fusion between a novel Kruppel-like zinc finger gene and the retinoic acid receptor-α locus due to a variant t(11; 17) translocation in acute promyelocytic leukemia. EMBO J.12, 1161–1167 (1993).
- 34Gu, B. W. et al. Variant-type PML-RARα fusion transcript in acute promyelocytic leukemia: use of a cryptic coding sequence from intron 2 of the RARα gene and identification of a new clinical subtype resistant to retinoic acid therapy. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA99, 7640–7645 (2002).
- 35Slack, J. L. et al. Molecular analysis and clinical outcome of adult APL patients with the type V PML–RARα isoform: results from Intergroup protocol 0129. Blood95, 398–403 (2000).
- 36Perez, A. et al. PML–RAR homodimers: distinct binding properties and heteromeric interactions with RXR. EMBO J.12, 3171–3182 (1993).
- 37Jansen, J. H. et al. Multimeric complexes of the PML–retinoic acid receptor-α fusion protein in acute promyelocytic leukemia cells and interference with retinoid and peroxisome-proliferator signaling pathways. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA92, 7401–7405 (1995).
- 38Kogan, S. C. et al. BCL-2 cooperates with promyelocytic leukemia retinoic acid receptor-α chimeric protein (PML–RARα) to block neutrophil differentiation and initiate acute leukemia. J. Exp. Med.193, 531–544 (2001).As export formats, HTML, EPUB, JPG or RTF are supported. Ashampoo pdf business 2019 crack. Ashampoo PDF always creates excellent results regardless of whether you work with text or images, replace fonts, change layers or redistribute pages in a document.Do not copy – convert!Ashampoo PDF converts your PDF into text documents for editing in MS Office or Ashampoo Office.
- 39Le Beau, M. M., Bitts, S., Davis, E. M. & Kogan, S. C. Recurring chromosomal abnormalities in leukemia in PML–RARA transgenic mice parallel human acute promyelocytic leukemia. Blood99, 2985–2991 (2002).
- 40Wang, Z.-G. et al. PML is essential for multiple apoptotic pathways. Nature Genet.20, 266–272 (1998).Cells devoid of the promyelocytic leukaemia gene product are apoptosis resistant and their myeloid differentiation is impaired.
- 41Wang, Z. G. et al. Role of PML in cell growth and the retinoic acid pathway. Science279, 1547–1551 (1998).
- 42Quignon, F. et al. PML induces a caspase-independent cell death process. Nature Genet.20, 259–265 (1998).
- 43Gottifredi, V. & Prives, C. p53 and PML: new partners in tumor suppression. Trends Cell. Biol.11, 184–187 (2001).
- 44Mu, Z. M. et al. PML, a growth suppressor disrupted in acute promyelocytic leukemia. Mol. Cell. Biol.14, 6858–6867 (1994).
- 45Koken, M. H. M. et al. The PML growth-suppressor has an altered expression in human oncogenesis. Oncogene10, 1315–1324 (1995).
- 46Terris, B. et al. PML nuclear bodies are general targets for inflammation and cell proliferation. Cancer Res.55, 1590–1597 (1995).
- 47Daniel, M.-T. et al. PML protein expression in hematopoietic and acute promyelocytic leukemia cells. Blood82, 1858–1867 (1993).
- 48Koken, M. H. M. et al. The t(15;17) translocation alters a nuclear body in a RA-reversible fashion. EMBO J.13, 1073–1083 (1994).
- 49Weis, K. et al. Retinoic acid regulates aberrant nuclear localization of PML/RARα in acute promyelocytic leukemia cells. Cell76, 345–356 (1994).
- 50Dyck, J. A. et al. A novel macromolecular structure is a target of the promyelocyte–retinoic acid receptor oncoprotein. Cell76, 333–343 (1994).References 47–50 were the first to demonstrate the retinoic acid-reversible abnormal localization of the promyelocytic leukaemia gene product in acute promyelocytic leukaemia cells.
- 51Grignani, F. et al. The acute promyelocytic leukemia specific PML/RARα fusion protein inhibits differentiation and promotes survival of myeloid precursor cells. Cell74, 423–431 (1993).
- 52Yoshida, H. et al. Accelerated degradation of PML–retinoic acid receptor-α (PML-RARα) oncoprotein by all-trans retinoic acid in acute promyelocytic leukemia. Possible role of the proteasome pathway. Cancer Res.56, 2945–2948 (1996).
- 53Raelson, J. V. et al. The PML–RARα oncoprotein is a direct molecular target of retinoic acid in acute promyelocytic leukemia cells. Blood88, 2826–2832 (1996).
- 54Zhu, J. et al. Retinoic acid induces proteasome-dependent degradation of retinoic acid receptorα (RARα) and oncogenic RARα fusion proteins. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA96, 14807–14812 (1999).
- 55Zhu, J. et al. Arsenic-induced PML targeting onto nuclear bodies: implications for the treatment of acute promyelocytic leukemia. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA94, 3978–3983 (1997).Arsenic degrades PML–RARα by targeting its PML moiety.
- 56vom Baur, E. et al. Differential ligand-dependent interactions between the AF-2 activating domain of nuclear receptors and the putative transcriptional intermediary factors mSUG1 and TIF1. EMBO J.15, 110–124 (1996).
- 57Thomas, D. & Tyers, M. Transcriptional regulation: Kamikaze activators. Curr. Biol.10, R341–R343 (2000).
- 58Altucci, L. et al. Retinoic acid-induced apoptosis in leukemia cells is mediated by paracrine action of tumor-selective death ligand TRAIL. Nature Med.7, 680–686 (2001).
- 59Liu, T. X. et al. Gene expression networks underlying retinoic acid-induced differentiation of acute promyelocytic leukemia cells. Blood96, 1496–1504 (2000).
- 60Muto, A. et al. A novel differentiation-inducing therapy for acute promyelocytic leukemia with a combination of arsenic trioxide and GM-CSF. Leukemia15, 1176–1184 (2001).
- 61Zhu, Q. et al. Synergic effects of arsenic trioxide and cAMP during acute promyelocytic leukemia cell maturation subtends a novel signaling cross-talk. Blood99, 1014–1022 (2002).
- 62Germolec, D. R. et al. Arsenic enhancement of skin neoplasia by chronic stimulation of growth factors. Am. J. Pathol. 153, 1775–1785 (1998).
- 63Kinjo, K. et al. Arsenic trioxide (As2O3)-induced apoptosis and differentiation in retinoic acid-resistant acute promyelocytic leukemia model in hGM-CSF-producing transgenic SCID mice. Leukemia14, 431–438 (2000).
- 64Lallemand-Breitenbach, V. et al. Retinoic acid and arsenic synergize to eradicate leukemic cells in a mouse model of acute promyelocytic leukemia. J. Exp. Med.189, 1043–1052 (1999).A mouse model of APL predicts synergy between RA and As2O3.
- 65Camacho, L. H. et al. Leukocytosis and the retinoic acid syndrome in patients with acute promyelocytic leukemia treated with arsenic trioxide. J. Clin. Oncol.18, 2620–2625 (2000).
- 66Lallemand-Breitenbach, V. et al. Role of promyelocytic leukemia (PML) sumoylation in nuclear body formation, 11S proteasome recruitment, and As2O3-induced PML or PML–retinoic acid receptor-α degradation. J. Exp. Med.193, 1361–1372 (2001).
- 67Shao, W. et al. Arsenic trioxide as an inducer of apoptosis and loss of PML–RARα protein in acute promyelocytic leukemia cells. J. Natl Cancer Inst.90, 124–133 (1998).
- 68Muller, S., Matunis, M. J. & Dejean, A. Conjugation with the ubiquitin-related modifier SUMO-1 regulates the partitioning of PML within the nucleus. EMBO J.17, 61–70 (1998).
- 69Zhu, J., Lallemand-Breitenbach, V. & de The, H. Pathways of retinoic acid- or arsenic trioxide-induced PML–RARα catabolism, role of oncogene degradation in disease remission. Oncogene20, 7257–7265 (2001).
- 70Hong, S. H., Yang, Z. & Privalsky, M. L. Arsenic trioxide is a potent inhibitor of the interaction of SMRT corepressor with its transcription factor partners, including the PML–retinoic acid receptor-α oncoprotein found in human acute promyelocytic leukemia. Mol. Cell. Biol.21, 7172–7182 (2001).
- 71Rego, E. M. et al. Retinoic acid (RA) and As2O3 treatment in transgenic models of acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL) unravel the distinct nature of the leukemogenic process induced by the PML–RARα and PLZF–RARα oncoproteins. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA97, 10173–10178 (2000).
- 72Jing, Y. et al. Combined effect of all-trans retinoic acid and arsenic trioxide in acute promyelocytic leukemia cells in vitro and in vivo. Blood97, 264–269 (2001).
- 73Au, W. Y. et al. Combined arsenic trioxide and all-trans retinoic acid treatment for acute promyelocytic leukaemia recurring from previous relapses successfully treated using arsenic trioxide. Br. J. Haematol. 117, 130–132 (2002).
- 74Koide, T. et al. Active repression of RAR signaling is required for head formation. Genes Dev. 15, 2111–2121 (2001).
- 75Du, C. et al. Overexpression of wild-type retinoic acid receptor-α (RARα) recapitulates retinoic acid-sensitive transformation of primary myeloid progenitors by acute promyelocytic leukemia RARα-fusion genes. Blood94, 793–802 (1999).
- 76Shao, W. et al. A retinoid-resistant acute promyelocytic leukemia subclone expresses a dominant negative PML–RARα mutation. Blood89, 4282–4289 (1997).
- 77Licht, J. D. et al. Clinical and molecular characterization of a rare syndrome of acute promyelocytic leukemia associated with translocation (11;17). Blood85, 1083–1094 (1995).
- 78Koken, M. H. M. et al. Retinoic acid, but not arsenic trioxide, degrades the PLZF–RARα fusion protein, without inducing terminal differentiation or apoptosis, in a RA-therapy resistant t(11;17)(q23;q21) APL patient. Oncogene18, 1113–1118 (1999).
- 79Jansen, J. H. et al. Complete remission of t(11;17) positive acute promyelocytic leukemia induced by all-trans retinoic acid and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor. Blood94, 39–45 (1999).
- 80He, L. Z. et al. Myeloid leukemias in PLZF–RARα transgenic mice. Blood90, 320a (1997).
- 81Petti, M. et al. Complete remission through blast cell differentiation in PLZF–RARα positive acute promyelocytic leukemia: in vitro and in vivo studies. Blood100, 1065–1067 (2002).
- 82Fogal, V. et al. Regulation of p53 activity in nuclear bodies by a specific PML isoform. EMBO J.19, 6185–6195 (2000).
- 83Guo, A. et al. The function of PML in p53-dependent apoptosis. Nature Cell Biol.2, 730–736 (2000).
- 84Kroemer, G. & de Thé, H. Arsenic trioxide, a novel mitochondriotoxic anti-cancer agent? J. Natl Cancer Inst.91, 743–745 (1999).
- 85Chou, W. C. et al. Arsenic inhibition of telomerase transcription leads to genetic instability. J. Clin. Invest.108, 1541–1547 (2001).
- 86Bazarbachi, A. et al. Arsenic trioxide and interferon-α synergize to induce cell cycle arrest and apoptosis in HTLV-1 transformed cells. Blood93, 278–283 (1999).
- 87El-Sabban, M. E. et al. Arsenic–interferon-α-triggered apoptosis in HTLV-1 transformed cells is associated with Tax down-regulation and reversal of NF-κB activation. Blood96, 2849–2855 (2000).In another leukaemia, acute T-cell leukaemia (ATL), As2O3 combined with interferon-α induces both apoptosis and selective degradation of the Tax retroviral oncogene.
- 88Ishov, A. M. et al. PML is critical for ND10 formation and recruits the PML-interacting protein Daxx to this nuclear structure when modified by SUMO-1. J. Cell Biol.147, 221–234 (1999).
- 89Zhong, S. et al. Role of SUMO-1-modified PML in nuclear body formation. Blood95, 2748–2752 (2000).
- 90Salomoni, P. & Pandolfi, P. P. The role of PML in tumor suppression. Cell108, 165–170 (2002).
- 91Fabunmi, R. P., Wigley, W. C., Thomas, P. J. & DeMartino, G. N. Interferon-γ regulates accumulation of the proteasome activator PA28 and immunoproteasomes at nuclear PML bodies. J. Cell Sci.114, 29–36 (2001).
- 92Baumann, C. T. et al. The glucocorticoid receptor interacting protein 1 (GRIP1) localizes in discrete nuclear foci that associate with ND10 bodies and are enriched in components of the 26S proteasome. Mol. Endocrinol. 15, 485–500 (2001).
- 93Grobelny, J. V., Godwin, A. K. & Broccoli, D. ALT-associated PML bodies are present in viable cells and are enriched in cells in the G2/M phase of the cell cycle. J. Cell Sci.113, 4577–4585 (2000).
- 94Lombard, D. B. & Guarente, L. Nijmegen breakage syndrome disease protein and MRE11 at PML nuclear bodies and meiotic telomeres. Cancer Res.60, 2331–2334 (2000).
- 95Bischof, O. et al. Regulation and localization of the bloom syndrome protein in response to DNA damage. J. Cell Biol. 153, 367–380 (2001).
- 96Wu, G., Lee, W. H. & Chen, P. L. NBS1 and TRF1 colocalize at promyelocytic leukemia bodies during late S/G2 phases in immortalized telomerase-negative cells. Implication of NBS1 in alternative lengthening of telomeres. J. Biol. Chem.275, 30618–30622 (2000).
- 97Muller, S., Hoege, C., Pyrowolakis, G. & Jentsch, S. SUMO, ubiquitin's mysterious cousin. Nature Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2, 202–210 (2001).
- 98Mahajan, R. et al. A small ubiquitin-related polypeptide involved in targeting RanGAP1 to nuclear pore complex protein RanBP2. Cell88, 97–107 (1997).
- 99Pichler, A. et al. The nucleoporin RanBP2 has SUMO1 E3 ligase activity. Cell108, 109–120 (2002).
- 100Reymond, A. et al. The tripartite motif family identifies cell compartments. EMBO J.20, 2140–2151 (2001).
- 101Lehembre, F., Muller, S., Pandolfi, P. P. & Dejean, A. Regulation of Pax3 transcriptional activity by SUMO-1-modified PML. Oncogene20, 1–9 (2001).
- 102Brown, D. et al. A PML RARα transgene initiates murine acute promyelocytic leukemia. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA94, 2551–2556 (1997).
- 103He, L.-Z. et al. Acute leukemia with promyelocytic features in PML/RARα transgenic mice. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA94, 5302–5307 (1997).
- 104Merghoub, T., Gurrieri, C., Piazza, F. & Pandolfi, P. P. Modeling acute promyelocytic leukemia in the mouse: new insights in the pathogenesis of human leukemias. Blood Cells Mol. Dis.27, 231–248 (2001).
- 105Kogan, S. C. et al. Leukemia initiated by PML/RARα: the PML domain plays a critical role while retinoic acid-mediated transactivation is dispensable. Blood95, 1541–1550 (2000).
- 106He, L. Z. et al. Histone deacetylase inhibitors induce remission in transgenic models of therapy-resistant acute promyelocytic leukemia. J. Clin. Invest.108, 1321–1330 (2001).
- 107Quenech'Du, N. et al. A sustained increase in the endogenous level of cAMP reduces the retinoid concentration required for APL cell maturation to near physiological levels. Leukemia12, 1829–1833 (1998).
- 108Gianni, M. et al. Phosphorylation by p38MAPK and recruitment of SUG-1 are required for RA-induced RARα degradation and transactivation. EMBO J. 21, 3760–3769 (2002).
- 109Recher, C. et al. In vitro and in vivo effectiveness of arsenic trioxide against murine T- cell prolymphocytic leukaemia. Br. J. Haematol. 117, 343–350 (2002).
- 110Jing, Y., Xia, L. & Waxman, S. Targeted removal of PML-RARα protein is required prior to inhibition of histone deacetylase for overcoming all-trans retinoic acid differentiation resistance in acute promyelocytic leukemia. Blood100, 1008–1013(2002).
Acknowledgements
We thank M.T. Daniel for pictures of APL cells, and A. Bazarbachi, L. Degos, H. Dombret and M. Koken for critical reading of the manuscript. We also thank A.M. Pichon for help with the bibliography, L. Marandin for the analysis of DNA arrays and ARECA for supporting the animal facility. J.Z. is supported by the Fondation de France and V.L. by the ARC. The authors' laboratories are supported by the Pôle Sino-Français en Sciences du vivant et en génomique and PRA.
Author information
Correspondence to Hugues de Thé.
Related links
Related links
DATABASES
LocusLink
Medscape DrugInfo
OMIM
FURTHER INFORMATION
Rights and permissions
About this article
Issue Date
DOI
Further reading
Epigenetic drug library screening identified an LSD1 inhibitor to target UTX-deficient cells for differentiation therapy
Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy (2019)Acute Promyelocytic Leukemia: A History over 60 Years—From the Most Malignant to the most Curable Form of Acute Leukemia
Oncology and Therapy (2019)An Overview on Arsenic Trioxide-Induced Cardiotoxicity
Cardiovascular Toxicology (2019)Arsenic targets Pin1 and cooperates with retinoic acid to inhibit cancer-driving pathways and tumor-initiating cells
Nature Communications (2018)Differentiation therapy revisited
Nature Reviews Cancer (2018)
Article Tools
Article metrics
Altmetric
![Ak-69 Ak-69](/uploads/1/2/5/8/125805703/760161842.png)
48
Published online 2018 Feb 12. doi: 10.5501/wjv.v7.i1.1
PMID: 29468136
Abstract
Cervical cancer is one of the leading causes of death in women worldwide, particularly in developing countries. Human papillomavirus has been reported as one of the key etiologic factors in cervical carcinoma. Likewise, epigenetic aberrations have ability to regulate cancer pathogenesis and progression. Recent research suggested that methylation has been detected already at precancerous stages, which methylation markers may have significant value in cervical cancer screening. The retinoic acid receptor beta (RARβ) gene, a potential tumor suppressor gene, is usually expressed in normal epithelial tissue. Methylation of CpG islands in the promoter region of the RARβ gene has been found to be associated with the development of cervical cancer. To investigate whether RARβ methylation is a potential biomarker that predicts the progression of invasive cancer, we reviewed 14 previously published articles related to RARβ methylation. The majority of them demonstrated that the frequency of RARβ promoter methylation was significantly correlated with the severity of cervical epithelium abnormalities. However, methylation of a single gene may not represent the best approach for predicting disease prognosis. Analyzing combinations of aberrant methylation of multiple genes may increase the sensitivity, and thus this approach may serve as a better tool for predicting disease prognosis.
Keywords: Methylation, Cervical cancer, Retinoic acid receptor beta, Human papillomavirus, Risk correlation, Promoter
Core tip: The frequency of retinoic acid receptor beta promoter methylation was significantly correlated with the severity of cervical epithelium abnormalities. However, a single gene may not represent the best approach for predicting disease prognosis. Thus, combinations of aberrant methylation of multiple genes may as a better tool for predicting disease.
INTRODUCTION
Cervical cancer is the leading cause of death in women worldwide. The prevalence is high in women in low- to middle-income countries[]. In 2012, approximately 522000 women globally were diagnosed with cervical cancer, and the mortality rate due to cervical cancer was reported to be 266,000 cases/year[]. The highest incidence occurred in sub-Saharan Africa while in Asia, cervical cancer remains the third most common cancer (after breast and lung cancer), with an estimated 285000 new cases and 144000 deaths in 2012[]. The age-standardized incidence rates (ASRs) of cervical cancer estimated by GLOBOSCAN in 2012 indicated that the ASR is higher in less developed compared to more developed regions[]. In Thailand, the age group with the highest incidence is 45-70 years[].
Several studies had found that cervical cancer is preceded by a pre-invasive stage, in which abnormal cells are confined to the cervical epithelium. The pre-invasive stage is also known as cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). The 2014 Bethesda System categorizes squamous epithelial cell abnormalities as atypical squamous cell of undetermined significance (AS-CUS); low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL), which was previously known as CIN I; high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL), which was previously known as CIN II and III; or squamous cell carcinoma (SCC)[]. SCC represents > 80% of cervical cancers, while adenocarcinoma (AC) accounts for the rest.
The standard method for screening for early-stage cervical neoplasia is cytological morphologic assessment of cervical scrapings. The sensitivity of the conventional Pap smear for identifying CIN II+ is 55.2%, while the sensitivity of liquid-based cytology is 57.1%[]. High-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing in combination with the conventional Pap smear increases the sensitivity. Furthermore, biomarkers of oncogenic progression would improve the accuracy of cancer progression predictions. Epigenetic biomarkers may help to fulfil this role, and they have the additional benefit predicting the stage of cervical carcinogenesis progression[].
GENOME OF HPV
HPV is a small, non-enveloped and circular double-stranded DNA virus with a genome of approximately 8 kb in length[]. The HPV genome comprises eight protein-coding genes and a noncoding region that is referred to as the regulatory long control region[]. Only one strand of the DNA carries the protein-coding sequence[]. Regarding the protein-coding genes, the genes are designated as early (E) or late (L) to indicate when the proteins are expressed in the viral life cycle[]. The eight protein-coding gene consist of E1, E2, E4, E5, E6, E7, L1 and L2[]. E1 and E2 are highly conserved and involved in viral DNA replication[-]. L1 and L2, which both have a high degree of sequence variation, encode for viral packaging proteins[]. E4 releases the viral particle from the epithelial cells[]. E6 and E7 are viral oncogenes that are involved in the integration of the HPV genome into the host genome[]. There are more than 130 genotypes of HPV, which are categorized based on sequence variation in their L1 region[]. Of the 130 genotypes, at least 40 genotypes infect the genital areas of humans via sexual transmission. HPV can also be classified into cutaneous or mucosal types[]. The mucosal type can be subdivided into high-, intermediate-, or low-risk types[].
HPV AND CERVICAL CANCER
The most important risk factor for cervical cancer is HPV infection, which has been found in 90.7% of cervical cancer patients worldwide[]. HPV infection is a sexually transmitted disease. It has been estimated that more than 80% of sexually active women become infected with HPV, while more than 50% of young women become infected after they first have sexual intercourse[]. The oncogenic potential of HPV depends on the genotype. HPV 16 and 18 are the most common types associated with invasive cervical cancer[]. Other HPV genotypes have been found to be related to cancer, but their oncogenic risk differs among the various populations, geographic regions, and age groups.
At the country level, collecting baseline data on the local burden of specific HPV genotypes related to cervical cancer is important. This information can impact the local HPV vaccination policies. A meta-analysis revealed that HPV 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58 are responsible for more than 90% of cervical cancers worldwide[]. These genotypes represent the baseline genotypes to include in a vaccine targeting the genotypes circulating in the population[]. The current HPV vaccines were developed to prevent HPV infection, and thus prevent cervical carcinoma. HPV vaccines have been implemented in routine vaccination programs in several developed and developing countries worldwide[]. To date, there have been three HPV vaccines in clinical use: Bivalent, quadrivalent, and nanovalent vaccines[].
Other independent risk factors such as immunosuppression, individual lifestyle, and smoking have been found to be associated with the development of HPV-related cervical cancer[,]. Most HPV infection is transient, and clearance of the virus can occur spontaneously over a 3-year period[]. However, in some cases, persistent infection can result in cervical cancer development. The transition from dysplasia to invasive carcinoma may take several years to decades to develop. HPV initially infects the basal layers of the epithelium through micro-wounds. The virus begins to replicate, and when infected daughter cells migrate to the upper layers of the epithelium, the viral late genes are activated, and viral DNA is packaged into capsids. Progeny virions are released to re-initiate infection, which can result in persistent and/or asymptomatic infection[]. The integration of HPV into the host genome can lead to carcinogenic transformation. Certain regions of the human genome are favored for viral DNA insertion such as fragile sites, rupture points, translocation points, and transcriptionally active regions[]. Moreover, the virus can induce epigenetic modification of viral and cellular genes, which affect their expression, leading to malignant cell transformation[,].
HOST GENETIC FACTORS AND CERVICAL CANCER
Diverse immunogenetic associations with HPV infection, persistence, and transformation have been extensively investigated. Recent studies have looked at multiple genes in various populations with different environment interactions[]. HPV infection alone might not be sufficient for the development of cervical carcinoma, and certain antigen-processing machinery (APM) and single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) may lead to a smaller immunogenic peptide repertoire for presentation to local immune cells. This can result in further attenuation of cytokine and receptor expression, which leads to an ineffective overall immune response and progression to carcinoma[]. The Genome-Wide Association Study (GWAS) for polymorphisms of host immune response genes showed that variation in several genes contributes to different risks of cervical cancer. The integrative approach, which is also known as systems biology, could help explain the complexity of host–virus interactions and provide a better understanding that may eventually lead to personalized prevention, diagnosis, and treatment[-].
The detection of methylated genes in cervical specmens is a feasible technique and represents a potential source of biomarkers that are of relevance to carcinogenesis. In particular, there are methylation markers that, among HPV-infected women, indicate the presence of CIN II+ and risk of cancer[].
High expression levels of certain oncoproteins in cervical cells have been found to be associated with cervical carcinoma. One study found a strong correlation between centromere protein H (CENP-H) expression and cervical carcinoma in a Chinese population[]. Another study found that expression of the B-cell-specific Moloney leukemia virus insert site 1 (Bmi-1), P16, and CD44v6 (a CD44 variant) were significantly higher in cervical carcinoma tissues compared with precancerous lesions and normal tissues[]. In addition, abnormalities in the phosphatidylinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) pathway induced by mutations in PI3K catalytic subunit α (PIK3CA) were associated with shorter survival in cervical cancer patients[]. Recently, deep sequencing of somatic mutations has identified several novel mutations in carcinoma cells, including E322K in the mitogen-activated protein kinase 1 (MAPK1) gene, inactivating mutations in the major histocompatibility complex, class I, B (HLA-B) gene, and mutations in F-box and WD repeat domain containing 7 (FBXW7), tumor protein p53 (TP53), and Erb-B2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 (ERBB2)[].
EPIGENETIC MECHANISMS AND RISK OF CANCER DEVELOPMENT
Recent studies also investigated epigenetic mechanisms related to HPV infection, including methylation of the host and viral genes, and chromatin modification in host cells[]. Epigenetic mechanisms affect gene regulation without changing the genetic sequences, and these mechanisms have been increasingly found to be associated with cancer development[]. The main epigenetic mechanism is methylation patterning, which occurs to various extents in different DNA and proteins. DNA methylation is a mechanism of gene regulation that typically occurs in CpG dinucleotide contexts, resulting in genomic instability. Methylation of heterochromatin and promoter regions is associated with decreased gene transcription. Several studies have found that DNA methylation frequently occurs in cervical cells but rarely in normal cells, suggesting that their methylation is highly related to the severity of cervical neoplasia[]. Several markers have been evaluated extensively in studies involving women with precancerous and cancerous cervical lesions[-]. Epigenetic methylation in the promoter region of several tumor suppressor genes (TSGs) has been detected in precancerous cervical cells[,]. Genes that were found to be significantly associated with promoter methylation were RASSF1A and MGMT (involved in DNA repair), CDKN2A (involved in cell cycle control), PYCARD (involved in apoptosis), and APC and SFRP1 (involved in Wnt signaling)[].
One striking conclusion of previous studies was that methylation frequencies for the same gene vary widely between studies. It was difficult to identify highly consistent results for most genes even when restricting analyses to studies of similar size or those that used common specimen sources or similar assays. This suggests that the frequency of certain methylation markers may also vary for reasons related to differences in populations, specific features of assay protocols, chance, or other unidentified factors. The most important prerequisite for a potential biomarker is that it must be reliable in its measurement. There is a possibility that the wide range of frequencies reported for some genes (in contrast to the more consistent measurement of a few other genes in similar studies) could be related to unreliable assays for these specific genes rather than biological variation. Another prerequisite for a good biomarker is that it has high sensitivity and high specificity for disease detection, resulting in a high positive predictive value. Several studies have proposed the use of methylated gene panels in order to obtain optimal assessment performance for cervical cancer screening[,].
Retinoic acid (RA) is an essential regulator of normal epithelial cell differentiation. The effect of RA is mediated by two types of nuclear receptors, the retinoic-acid receptor (RAR) family and retinoid-X receptor (RXR) family. Both of these receptor families have three members (alpha, beta, and gamma), which are encoded by distinct genes in vertebrates. The retinoic acid receptor beta (RARβ) gene encodes a nuclear receptor that binds RA and mediates cellular signaling. It is important during differentiation of stratified squamous epithelium, including cervical epithelium. It is considered to be a potential TSG. The RARβ gene is usually expressed in normal epithelial tissue. The direct roles of the RARβ protein include regulating gene expression and differentiation, immune modulation, and inducing apoptosis. Previous studies revealed that the RARβ gene is downregulated in high-grade lesions[]. RARβ gene silencing was observed in carcinoma cells[]. Recent research suggested that the RARβ protein can suppress cervical carcinogenesis and may play a role in the early development of cancer[]. CpG methylation of the 5’ region of the RARβ gene contributes to gene silencing, and this methylation is associated with increased grades of SIL and invasive cervical cancer. Many studies have revealed that methylation of CpG islands in the promoter region of the RARβ gene induces repression of RARβ expression in several epithelial carcinomas, including cervical cancer[-].
The risk of cervical cancer due to RARβ methylation remains inconsistent across different studies[,]. Therefore, we reviewed previously published articles and summarized the relationship between RARβ promoter methylation and cervical cancer (Table (Table11).
Table 1
The summary of the articles that investigated the methylation of RARβ gene in tumor tissue from women diagnosed with squamous intraepithelial lesion and cervical cancer
Ref. | Year of publication | Nationality of participants | Sample size | Source of samples | Lab technique | RARβ methylation results |
Virmani et al[57] | 2001 | American | Normal/LSIL = 37 | Normal/LSIL/HSIL from liquid-based cytology specimen | MSP | RARβ methylation positive in |
HSIL = 17 | ICC from biopsy tissue | Normal/LSIL = 11% HSIL = 29% | ||||
ICC = 19 | ICC = 26% | |||||
Narayan et al[56] | 2003 | Colombians | Normal = 8 | Normal = cells from cervical swab LSIL/HSIL = formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded | MSP | RARβ methylation positive in |
German | LSIL = 9 | cervical tissues | Normal = 0% SCC/AC = 29.3% | |||
American | HSIL = 30 | SCC/AC = tumor biopsies | Immuno-histochemistry of RARβ protein | Immunohistochemistry | ||
SCC = 77 | LSIL; 11% showed low expression | |||||
AC = 5 | HSIL; 60% showed complete lack of expression | |||||
Gustafson et al[37] | 2004 | American | Normal = 11 | Liquid-based cytology specimen | Nested MSP | RARβ methylation positive in |
LSIL = 17 | Normal = 0% LSIL = 0% | |||||
HSIL = 11 | HSIL = 9.1% | |||||
Feng et al[58] | 2005 | Senegalese | Normal/ASCUS = 142 | Exfoliated cervical cells and tissue biopsy | MSP | RARβ methylation positive in |
CIN I = 39 | Normal/ASCUS = 3.2% | |||||
CIN II = 23 | CIN I = 0% | |||||
CIN III = 23 | CIN II = 0% | |||||
ICC = 92 | CIN III = 15.8% ICC = 38.2% | |||||
Wisman et al[59] | 2006 | Dutch | Normal = 19 | Cervical scraping | QMSP | The percentage of RARβ methylation level above control ratio were detected in Normal = 0% SCC = 15% AC = 25% |
SCC = 20 | ||||||
AC = 8 | ||||||
Choi et al[60] | 2007 | Korean | Normal = 37 | Normal cells were from hysterectomy due to myoma | MSP | RARβ methylation positive in |
SCC = 37 | Cancer cells were from tissue after surgery | Immuno-histochemistry of RARβ protein | Normal = 0% SCC = 41% | |||
Immunostaining normal = strong staining | ||||||
SCC = 43% absent staining | ||||||
Zhang et al[52] | 2007 | Japanese and Chinese | Normal = 6 | Cervical tissue by biopsy or surgery | Real-time PCR for RARβ mRNA | RARβ expression level among normal cells: All were highly expressed |
ICC = 17 | RARb2 expression level among cancer cells: | |||||
Semi-nested MSP | 13/17: Completely repressed | |||||
2/17: Highly repressed | ||||||
2/17: Moderately down-regulated | ||||||
Among 13 samples with completely repressed mRNA expression | ||||||
9 promoter methylated, 4 unmethylated | ||||||
Flatley et al[2] | 2009 | English | Normal = 58 | Exfoliated cervical cells and cervical biopsy | Nested MSP | RARβ methylation positive in |
CIN I = 68 | Normal = 6.5% | |||||
CIN II = 56 | CIN I = 42.6% | |||||
CIN III = 76 | CIN II = 6.3% | |||||
ICC = 50 | CIN III = 0% ICC = 15.9% | |||||
Kim et al[54] | 2010 | Korean | Normal = 41 | Liquid based cytology specimen | Multiplex nested MSP | RARβ methylation positive in |
LSIL = 32 | Normal = 4.9% LSIL = 15.6% | |||||
HSIL = 67 SCC = 69 | HSIL = 46.3% SCC = 53.6% | |||||
Kim et al[61] | 2010 | Korean | Normal = 28 | Liquid based cytology specimen | Multiplex QMSP | RARβ methylation level |
LSIL = 26 | Normal = 1.59+3.51% LSIL = 3.67+9.09% | |||||
HSIL = 45 SCC = 63 | HSIL = 21.93+20.10% SCC = 19.06+19.39% | |||||
Yang et al[62] | 2010 | Dutch | Normal = 20 | Biopsy tissue | QMSP | RARβ methylation positive (from tissue) in |
LSIL = 20 | Normal = 85% LSIL = 65% | |||||
HSIL = 20 | Cervical scraping only available in subset of samples | HSIL = 75% SCC = 85% AC = 85% | ||||
SCC = 40 | RARβ methylation positive (from scraping) in | |||||
AC = 20 | Normal = 44% LSIL = 37.5% | |||||
HSIL = 55.6% SCC = 83.8% AC = 100% | ||||||
The median methylation level increased significantly with the severity of lesion (P < 0.05) | ||||||
Pathak et al[63] | 2012 | Indian | Normal = 35 | Normal cells from hysterectomy SIL from excision ICC from tissue biopsy | MSP | RARβ methylation positive in |
SIL = 27 | Normal = 11.4% SIL = 55.5% ICC = 57.8% | |||||
ICC = 38 | ||||||
Milutin Gašperov et al[64] | 2015 | Croatian | Normal = 40 | Cervical scraping | MSP | RARβ methylation positive in |
CIN I = 40 | Normal = 62.5% | |||||
CIN II = 40 | CIN I = 35% | |||||
CIN III = 42 | CIN II = 61.5% | |||||
SCC = 8 AC = 3 | CIN III = 61.9% SCC/AC = 90% | |||||
Sun et al[51] | 2015 | Chinese | Normal = 48 | Liquid based cytology specimen | Methylation specific high resolution melting analysis (Quantitative) | RARβ methylation positive in |
CIN I = 54 | Normal = 31.3% CIN I = 35.2% | |||||
CIN II = 47 | CIN II and III = 28.2% SCC = 33.3% | |||||
CIN III = 56 | RARβ methylation level: none = 68.8% | |||||
SCC = 45 | 0-5% methylation = 26.4% 5-25% = 4.8% |
CIN: Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; SIL: Squamous intraepithelial lesion; LSIL: Low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion; HSIL: High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion; SCC: Squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix; AC: Adenocarcinoma of cervix; ICC: Invasive cervical cancer; MSP: Methylation-Specific Polymerase Chain Reaction; QMSP: Quantitative methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction; ASCUS: Atypical squamous cells of undetermined.
Among the 14 articles reviewed, the majority of them (11/14) demonstrated that the frequency of RARβ promoter methylation was significantly correlated with severity of cervical epithelium abnormalities. Three studies did not concur with this finding. The first study was conducted in 2003 with a small sample size and no cancer patients were involved[]. The other two studies were conducted in 2010 and 2015. Both studies found that normal tissue also had RARβ promoter methylation, which made it a poor predictor of progression to severe disease[,]. However, one of the two studies also investigated the level of methylation using quantitative methylation-specific PCR and found that although normal cells were methylated, the level of methylation increased in LSIL, HSIL, and invasive cancer tissue[].
In addition, both Narayan et al[] and Choi et al[] found that RARβ promoter methylation was associated with cervical cancer prognosis. Narayan et al[] found that 80% of the patients with RARβ methylation either died of cancer or only partly responded to treatment, while Choi et al[] found that absence or reduction of RARβ protein expression was associated with a higher level of SCC antigen (P = 0.04) and more frequent lymph node metastasis (P = 0.023).
A study of the frequency of RARβ promoter methylation in urine and cervical samples from Senegalese women and cervical epithelial cell abnormalities found that methylation was significantly greater in abnormal specimens (and the results from the urine samples correlated with the results from the cervical swab samples)[,]. Another study by Zhang et al[] compared the frequency of methylation with RARβ mRNA expression. The authors found that in normal cervical cells, the RARβ gene was highly expressed. In contrast, among 17 samples from patients with invasive cervical carcinoma, RARβ2 expression was completely repressed in 13 samples, highly repressed in 2 samples, and moderately downregulated in 2 samples. Among the 13 samples with completely repressed RARβ2 expression, the RARβ promoter region was methylated in 9 samples and unmethylated in 4 samples. The authors then further investigated the silencing mechanism and discovered that apart from methylation, repressive histone modifications also played a role in gene silencing, which could contribute to the development of cervical carcinoma.
Four studies performed a quantitative assessment of methylation. The first study was conducted in 2006 by Wisman et al[], who found that the RARβ2 promoter was more methylated in cervical cancer than in control tissue. Four years later, Kim et al[] found that the RARβ methylation level in normal tissue was 1.59% ± 3.51% whereas, in HSIL and SCC, it was 21.93% ± 20.10% and 19.06% ± 19.39%, respectively. The third study, by Yang et al[], also highlighted that although the percentage of methylated samples was very high in normal tissue, the level of methylation correlated with disease severity. The last study was conducted by Sun et al[] in 2015. They found that among 250 cervical samples from healthy individuals and patients with various stages of cervical epithelium abnormalities, the percentage of methylation in patients showed that 68.8% had no RARβ promoter methylation, 26.4% had 0%-5% methylation, and 4.8% had 5%-25% methylation. No samples had methylation levels above 25%.
In addition, two studies performed immunohistochemistry staining of the RARβ protein in cervical cells. Narayan et al[] found that in the LSIL group, 11% had low RARβ expression whereas, in the HSIL group, 60% had a complete lack of RARβ expression. This finding suggested that the downregulation of the RARβ gene occurs early in the development of cervical carcinoma[]. The second study was carried out by Choi et al[], who discovered that all normal tissues highly expressed the RARβ protein, whereas no staining was detected in 43% of the SCC tissues.
Almost of cancer cell lines and primary cancer tissues examined, the RARβ2 was repressed. The repression was frequently associated with promoter methylation, which causes lack of gene expression. These results strongly support the hypothesis that promoter methylation is the epigenetic cause of RARβ2 repression in cervical cancers harboring methylated RARβ2 promoters. A DNA demethylating reagent can reactivate gene expression by inducing drastic demethylation of the promoter in repressed cells carrying a methylated promoter[]. This consistency between promoter demethylation and RARβ2 derepression strongly suggests that the primary cause of RARβ2 repression is indeed promoter methylation.
Several hypotheses have been proposed regarding the mechanisms of DNA methylation that lead to silencing of genes. In some cancer cells and tissues examined, RARβ2 was repressed without promoter methylation. These facts indicate that although DNA methylation is the major epigenetic mechanism for gene silencing, there are other epigenetic silencing pathways independent of DNA methylation. RARβ2 is frequently silenced in cervical cancers by one of two epigenetic mechanisms. One is DNA methylation, a well-known epigenetic mechanism leading to transcriptional silencing of genes, while the other involves the formation of repressive histone modifications near the promoter, by unknown mechanisms independent of DNA methylation. At present, the initial causes of these epigenetic changes during carcinogenesis are unclear. RARβ2 silenced by promoter methylation can be reactivated by promoter hypomethylation. This result indicates the importance of examining promoter methylation if epigenetic modulation drugs are to be used for chemotherapy in patients with cervical cancers.
In conclusion, DNA methylation of TSGs likely contributes to the development of cancer. Although DNA methylation of only one gene may not represent the complete process of epigenetic silencing, it has been shown to be significantly correlated with cervical cancer. Analyzing combinations of aberrant hyper- or hypo-methylation of multiple genes may increase the sensitivity of prognoses. Thus, this approach may serve as a better tool for predicting disease progression. Risk factors should also be further characterized to better understand the pathogenesis of cervical carcinoma.
Footnotes
Supported by Research Chair Grant from the National Science and Technology Development Agency, No. P-15-50004; the Center of Excellence in Clinical Virology, Chulalongkorn Unversity and King Chulalongkourn Memorial Hospital, No. GCE 5900930-005; and the Rachadapisek Sompote Fund of Chulalongkorn University for postdoctoral fellowships to Chaninya Wongwarangkana.
Conflict-of-interest statement: No potential conflicts of interest.
Manuscript source: Unsolicited manuscript
Specialty type: Virology
Country of origin: Thailand
Peer-review report classification
Grade A (Excellent): 0
Grade B (Very good): B
Grade C (Good): 0
Grade D (Fair): D, D
Grade E (Poor): 0
Peer-review started: October 6, 2017
First decision: November 7, 2017
Article in press: December 6, 2017
P- Reviewer: Chen C, Chen CJ, Ciotti M S- Editor: Ji FF L- Editor: A E- Editor: Li RF
Contributor Information
Chaninya Wongwarangkana, Center of Excellence in Clinical Virology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Pathumwan, Bangkok 10330, Thailand.
Nasamon Wanlapakorn, Center of Excellence in Clinical Virology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Pathumwan, Bangkok 10330, Thailand.
Jira Chansaenroj, Center of Excellence in Clinical Virology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Pathumwan, Bangkok 10330, Thailand.
Yong Poovorawan, Center of Excellence in Clinical Virology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Pathumwan, Bangkok 10330, Thailand.
References
1. Ginsburg O, Bray F, Coleman MP, Vanderpuye V, Eniu A, Kotha SR, Sarker M, Huong TT, Allemani C, Dvaladze A, et al. The global burden of women’s cancers: a grand challenge in global health. Lancet. 2017;389:847–860.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2. Flatley JE, McNeir K, Balasubramani L, Tidy J, Stuart EL, Young TA, Powers HJ. Folate status and aberrant DNA methylation are associated with HPV infection and cervical pathogenesis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009;18:2782–2789. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
3. Vaccarella S, Laversanne M, Ferlay J, Bray F. Cervical cancer in Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean and Asia: Regional inequalities and changing trends. Int J Cancer. 2017;141:1997–2001. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
4. Wagner M, Bennetts L, Patel H, Welner S, de Sanjose S, Weiss TW. Global availability of data on HPV genotype-distribution in cervical, vulvar and vaginal disease and genotype-specific prevalence and incidence of HPV infection in females. Infect Agent Cancer. 2015;10:13.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
5. Wilailak S, Lertchaipattanakul N. The epidemiologic status of gynecologic cancer in Thailand. J Gynecol Oncol. 2016;27:e65.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
6. Nayar R, Wilbur DC. The Pap Test and Bethesda 2014. Acta Cytol. 2015;59:121–132. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7. Arbyn M, Bergeron C, Klinkhamer P, Martin-Hirsch P, Siebers AG, Bulten J. Liquid compared with conventional cervical cytology: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111:167–177. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
8. Fang J, Zhang H, Jin S. Epigenetics and cervical cancer: from pathogenesis to therapy. Tumour Biol. 2014;35:5083–5093. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
9. Zheng ZM, Baker CC. Papillomavirus genome structure, expression, and post-transcriptional regulation. Front Biosci. 2006;11:2286–2302.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
10. Bernard HU, Calleja-Macias IE, Dunn ST. Genome variation of human papillomavirus types: phylogenetic and medical implications. Int J Cancer. 2006;118:1071–1076. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
11. Graham SV. Human papillomavirus: gene expression, regulation and prospects for novel diagnostic methods and antiviral therapies. Future Microbiol. 2010;5:1493–1506.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
12. Sanclemente G, Gill DK. Human papillomavirus molecular biology and pathogenesis. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2002;16:231–240. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. Clertant P, Seif I. A common function for polyoma virus large-T and papillomavirus E1 proteins? Nature. 1984;311:276–279. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
14. Lusky M, Fontane E. Formation of the complex of bovine papillomavirus E1 and E2 proteins is modulated by E2 phosphorylation and depends upon sequences within the carboxyl terminus of E1. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1991;88:6363–6367.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15. Piccini A, Storey A, Romanos M, Banks L. Regulation of human papillomavirus type 16 DNA replication by E2, glucocorticoid hormone and epidermal growth factor. J Gen Virol. 1997;78(Pt 8):1963–1970. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
16. Ma B, Roden RB, Hung CF, Wu TC. HPV pseudovirions as DNA delivery vehicles. Ther Deliv. 2011;2:427–430.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
17. Doorbar J. The E4 protein; structure, function and patterns of expression. Virology. 2013;445:80–98. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
18. Kessis TD, Connolly DC, Hedrick L, Cho KR. Expression of HPV16 E6 or E7 increases integration of foreign DNA. Oncogene. 1996;13:427–431. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
19. Calleja-Macias IE, Kalantari M, Allan B, Williamson AL, Chung LP, Collins RJ, Zuna RE, Dunn ST, Ortiz-Lopez R, Barrera-Saldaña HA, et al. Papillomavirus subtypes are natural and old taxa: phylogeny of human papillomavirus types 44 and 55 and 68a and -b. J Virol. 2005;79:6565–6569.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
20. Lorincz AT, Reid R, Jenson AB, Greenberg MD, Lancaster W, Kurman RJ. Human papillomavirus infection of the cervix: relative risk associations of 15 common anogenital types. Obstet Gynecol. 1992;79:328–337. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
21. Muñoz N, Bosch FX, de Sanjosé S, Herrero R, Castellsagué X, Shah KV, Snijders PJ, Meijer CJ; International Agency for Research on Cancer Multicenter Cervical Cancer Study Group. Epidemiologic classification of human papillomavirus types associated with cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:518–527. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
22. Walboomers JM, Jacobs MV, Manos MM, Bosch FX, Kummer JA, Shah KV, Snijders PJ, Peto J, Meijer CJ, Muñoz N. Human papillomavirus is a necessary cause of invasive cervical cancer worldwide. J Pathol. 1999;189:12–19. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
23. Adefuye PO, Broutet NJ, de Sanjosé S, Denny LA. Trials and projects on cervical cancer and human papillomavirus prevention in sub-Saharan Africa. Vaccine. 2013;31 Suppl 5:F53–F59. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
24. Markowitz LE, Tsu V, Deeks SL, Cubie H, Wang SA, Vicari AS, Brotherton JM. Human papillomavirus vaccine INTRODUCTION--the first five years. Vaccine. 2012;30 Suppl 5:F139–F148. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
25. Bonanni P, Zanella B, Santomauro F, Lorini C, Bechini A, Boccalini S. Safety and perception: What are the greatest enemies of HPV vaccination programmes? Vaccine. 2017 pii: S0264-410X(17)30730-2 Epub ahead of print. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
26. Plummer M, Peto J, Franceschi S; International Collaboration of Epidemiological Studies of Cervical Cancer. Time since first sexual intercourse and the risk of cervical cancer. Int J Cancer. 2012;130:2638–2644.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
27. Rositch AF, Koshiol J, Hudgens MG, Razzaghi H, Backes DM, Pimenta JM, Franco EL, Poole C, Smith JS. Patterns of persistent genital human papillomavirus infection among women worldwide: a literature review and meta-analysis. Int J Cancer. 2013;133:1271–1285.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
28. Narisawa-Saito M, Kiyono T. Basic mechanisms of high-risk human papillomavirus-induced carcinogenesis: roles of E6 and E7 proteins. Cancer Sci. 2007;98:1505–1511. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
29. Das P, Thomas A, Mahantshetty U, Shrivastava SK, Deodhar K, Mulherkar R. HPV genotyping and site of viral integration in cervical cancers in Indian women. PLoS One. 2012;7:e41012.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
30. Saavedra KP, Brebi PM, Roa JC. Epigenetic alterations in preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions of the cervix. Clin Epigenetics. 2012;4:13.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
31. Sasagawa T, Takagi H, Makinoda S. Immune responses against human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and evasion of host defense in cervical cancer. J Infect Chemother. 2012;18:807–815. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
32. Hong EP, Park JW. Sample size and statistical power calculation in genetic association studies. Genomics Inform. 2012;10:117–122.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
33. Mehta AM, Mooij M, Branković I, Ouburg S, Morré SA, Jordanova ES. Cervical Carcinogenesis and Immune Response Gene Polymorphisms: A Review. J Immunol Res. 2017;2017:8913860.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
34. Chen D, Gyllensten U. Lessons and implications from association studies and post-GWAS analyses of cervical cancer. Trends Genet. 2015;31:41–54. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
35. Chen D, Juko-Pecirep I, Hammer J, Ivansson E, Enroth S, Gustavsson I, Feuk L, Magnusson PK, McKay JD, Wilander E, et al. Genome-wide association study of susceptibility loci for cervical cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105:624–633. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
36. Yan Q. Immunoinformatics and systems biology methods for personalized medicine. Methods Mol Biol. 2010;662:203–220. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
37. Gustafson KS, Furth EE, Heitjan DF, Fansler ZB, Clark DP. DNA methylation profiling of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions using liquid-based cytology specimens: an approach that utilizes receiver-operating characteristic analysis. Cancer. 2004;102:259–268. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
38. Weng MY, Li L, Feng SY, Hong SJ. Expression of Bmi-1, P16, and CD44v6 in Uterine Cervical Carcinoma and Its Clinical Significance. Cancer Biol Med. 2012;9:48–53.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
39. Weng MY, Li L, Hong SJ, Feng SY. Clinical Significance of CENP-H Expression in Uterine Cervical Cancer. Cancer Biol Med. 2012;9:192–196.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
40. Wright AA, Howitt BE, Myers AP, Dahlberg SE, Palescandolo E, Van Hummelen P, MacConaill LE, Shoni M, Wagle N, Jones RT, et al. Oncogenic mutations in cervical cancer: genomic differences between adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas of the cervix. Cancer. 2013;119:3776–3783.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
41. Ojesina AI, Lichtenstein L, Freeman SS, Pedamallu CS, Imaz-Rosshandler I, Pugh TJ, Cherniack AD, Ambrogio L, Cibulskis K, Bertelsen B, et al. Landscape of genomic alterations in cervical carcinomas. Nature. 2014;506:371–375.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
42. Di Domenico M, Giovane G, Kouidhi S, Iorio R, Romano M, De Francesco F, Feola A, Siciliano C, Califano L, Giordano A. HPV epigenetic mechanisms related to Oropharyngeal and Cervix cancers. Cancer Biol Ther. 2017 Epub ahead of print. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
43. Jones PA, Baylin SB. The fundamental role of epigenetic events in cancer. Nat Rev Genet. 2002;3:415–428. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
44. Wang KH, Lin CJ, Liu CJ, Liu DW, Huang RL, Ding DC, Weng CF, Chu TY. Global methylation silencing of clustered proto-cadherin genes in cervical cancer: serving as diagnostic markers comparable to HPV. Cancer Med. 2015;4:43–55.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
45. Huang TH, Lai HC, Liu HW, Lin CJ, Wang KH, Ding DC, Chu TY. Quantitative analysis of methylation status of the PAX1 gene for detection of cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2010;20:513–519. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
46. Lai HC, Ou YC, Chen TC, Huang HJ, Cheng YM, Chen CH, Chu TY, Hsu ST, Liu CB, Hung YC, et al. PAX1/SOX1 DNA methylation and cervical neoplasia detection: a Taiwanese Gynecologic Oncology Group (TGOG) study. Cancer Med. 2014;3:1062–1074.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
47. Clarke MA, Luhn P, Gage JC, Bodelon C, Dunn ST, Walker J, Zuna R, Hewitt S, Killian JK, Yan L, et al. Discovery and validation of candidate host DNA methylation markers for detection of cervical precancer and cancer. Int J Cancer. 2017;141:701–710. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
48. Sharma S, Kelly TK, Jones PA. Epigenetics in cancer. Carcinogenesis. 2010;31:27–36.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
49. Heyn H, Esteller M. DNA methylation profiling in the clinic: applications and challenges. Nat Rev Genet. 2012;13:679–692. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
50. Catarino R, Petignat P, Dongui G, Vassilakos P. Cervical cancer screening in developing countries at a crossroad: Emerging technologies and policy choices. World J Clin Oncol. 2015;6:281–290.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
51. Sun Y, Li S, Shen K, Ye S, Cao D, Yang J. DAPK1, MGMT and RARB promoter methylation as biomarkers for high-grade cervical lesions. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2015;8:14939–14945.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
52. Zhang Z, Joh K, Yatsuki H, Zhao W, Soejima H, Higashimoto K, Noguchi M, Yokoyama M, Iwasaka T, Mukai T. Retinoic acid receptor beta2 is epigenetically silenced either by DNA methylation or repressive histone modifications at the promoter in cervical cancer cells. Cancer Lett. 2007;247:318–327. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
53. Gurioli G, Salvi S, Martignano F, Foca F, Gunelli R, Costantini M, Cicchetti G, De Giorgi U, Sbarba PD, Calistri D, et al. Methylation pattern analysis in prostate cancer tissue: identification of biomarkers using an MS-MLPA approach. J Transl Med. 2016;14:249.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
54. Kim JH, Choi YD, Lee JS, Lee JH, Nam JH, Choi C. Assessment of DNA methylation for the detection of cervical neoplasia in liquid-based cytology specimens. Gynecol Oncol. 2010;116:99–104. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
55. Mariano FV, Egal ES, Pramio D, Fidalgo F, Sara É, Costa AF, de Oliveira Gondak R, Coletta RD, de Almeida OP, Kowalski LP, Victorino Krepischi AC, Altemani A. Evaluation of a subset of tumor suppressor gene for copy number and epigenitic changes in pleomorphic adenoma and carcinoma ex-pleomorphic adenoma carcinogenesis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2016;122:322–331. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
56. Narayan G, Arias-Pulido H, Koul S, Vargas H, Zhang FF, Villella J, Schneider A, Terry MB, Mansukhani M, Murty VV. Frequent promoter methylation of CDH1, DAPK, RARB, and HIC1 genes in carcinoma of cervix uteri: its relationship to clinical outcome. Mol Cancer. 2003;2:24.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
57. Virmani AK, Muller C, Rathi A, Zoechbauer-Mueller S, Mathis M, Gazdar AF. Aberrant methylation during cervical carcinogenesis. Clin Cancer Res. 2001;7:584–589. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
58. Feng Q, Balasubramanian A, Hawes SE, Toure P, Sow PS, Dem A, Dembele B, Critchlow CW, Xi L, Lu H, et al. Detection of hypermethylated genes in women with and without cervical neoplasia. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:273–282. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
59. Wisman GB, Nijhuis ER, Hoque MO, Reesink-Peters N, Koning AJ, Volders HH, Buikema HJ, Boezen HM, Hollema H, Schuuring E, et al. Assessment of gene promoter hypermethylation for detection of cervical neoplasia. Int J Cancer. 2006;119:1908–1914. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
60. Choi CH, Lee KM, Choi JJ, Kim TJ, Kim WY, Lee JW, Lee SJ, Lee JH, Bae DS, Kim BG. Hypermethylation and loss of heterozygosity of tumor suppressor genes on chromosome 3p in cervical cancer. Cancer Lett. 2007;255:26–33. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
61. Kim JH, Choi YD, Lee JS, Lee JH, Nam JH, Choi C, Kweon SS, Fackler MJ, Sukumar S. Quantitative assessment of DNA methylation for the detection of cervical neoplasia in liquid-based cytology specimens. Virchows Arch. 2010;457:35–42. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
62. Yang N, Nijhuis ER, Volders HH, Eijsink JJ, Lendvai A, Zhang B, Hollema H, Schuuring E, Wisman GB, van der Zee AG. Gene promoter methylation patterns throughout the process of cervical carcinogenesis. Cell Oncol. 2010;32:131–143.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
63. Pathak S, Bhatla N, Singh N. Cervical cancer pathogenesis is associated with one-carbon metabolism. Mol Cell Biochem. 2012;369:1–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
64. Milutin Gašperov N, Sabol I, Planinić P, Grubišić G, Fistonić I, Ćorušić A, Grce M. Methylated Host Cell Gene Promoters and Human Papillomavirus Type 16 and 18 Predicting Cervical Lesions and Cancer. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0129452.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
65. Feng Q, Hawes SE, Stern JE, Dem A, Sow PS, Dembele B, Toure P, Sova P, Laird PW, Kiviat NB. Promoter hypermethylation of tumor suppressor genes in urine from patients with cervical neoplasia. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2007;16:1178–1184. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Articles from World Journal of Virology are provided here courtesy of Baishideng Publishing Group Inc
![](/uploads/1/2/5/8/125805703/213073108.jpg)