Advertisement

Pediatric Surgery International

, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 33–38 | Cite as

Expression profiling of favorable and unfavorable neuroblastomas

  • Eiso HiyamaEmail author
  • Keiko Hiyama
  • Hiroaki Yamaoka
  • Taijiro Sueda
  • C. Patrik Reynolds
  • Takashi Yokoyama
Original Article

Abstract

Neuroblastomas show remarkable biological heterogeneity, resulting in favorable or unfavorable outcomes. To survey the differences in gene expression profiles between favorable and unfavorable neuroblastomas, we analyzed ten favorable neuroblastoma samples from patients whose tumors consequently regressed or matured and ten unfavorable tumor samples from patients who consequently died of disease using the microarray technique. In each sample, total RNA was labeled with Cy3 or Cy5 in reverse-trancriptase reaction and hybridized with our original microarray prepared with a cDNA library of human fetal brain. Microarray analysis revealed that 43 genes, including MYCN, hTERT, NME1 and cell cycle regulatory protein-coding genes, were highly expressed in unfavorable neuroblastomas, while another 80 genes were detected as highly expressed in favorable tumors, including neuronal differentiating genes and apoptotic inducing genes. Among favorable neuroblastoma samples, highly expressing genes in regressing tumors were different from those in maturing tumors. Expression profiling data revealed the existence of up-regulated and down-regulated gene clusters in favorable and unfavorable tumors. This cluster analysis is a powerful procedure to distinguish unfavorable tumors from favorable tumors as well as regressing tumors from maturing tumors among favorable tumors. The information obtained from expression profiling would clarify the key genes for cell growth, regression or maturation of neuroblastoma cells, and these genes will become diagnostic and therapeutic targets in human neuroblastoma in the future.

Keywords

Neuroblastoma Microarray Outcome Regression Maturation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was partially supported by a grant-in-aid for scientific research (A) (no. 13307050 and 15209058) from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology and for Cancer Research (13-20) from the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare of the Government of Japan.

References

  1. 1.
    Westermann F, Schwab M (2002) Genetic parameters of neuroblastomas. Cancer Lett 184:127–147CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brodeur GM (2003) Neuroblastoma: biological insights into a clinical enigma. Nat Rev Cancer 3:203–216CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schena M, Shalon D, Davis RW, et al (1995) Quantitative monitoring of gene expression patterns with a complementary DNA microarray. Science 270:467–470PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Osin P, Shipley J, Lu YJ, et al (1998) Experimental pathology and breast cancer genetics: new technologies. Recent Results Cancer Res 152:35–48PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hiyama E, Hiyama K (2002) Clinical application of microarrays as a tool of understanding cancer biology. In: Pandalai SG (ed) Recent research developments in cancer. Transworld Research Network, Kerala, India 4, pp 675–692Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhang K, Zhao H (2000) Assessing reliability of gene clusters from gene expression data. Funct Integr Genomics 1:156–173PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gluer S, Zense M, von Schweinitz D (1998) Cell adhesion molecules and intermediate filaments on embryonal childhood tumors. Pathol Res Pract 194:773–780PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gomez-Santos C, Ambrosio S, Ventura F, et al (2002) TGF-beta1 increases tyrosine hydroxylase expression by a mechanism blocked by BMP-2 in human neuroblastoma SH-SY5Y cells. Brain Res 958:152–160CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Godfried MB, Veenstra M, Sluis P, et al (2002) The N-myc and c-myc downstream pathways include the chromosome 17q genes nm23-H1 and nm23-H2. Oncogene 21:2097–2101CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hiyama E, Hiyama K, Yokoyama T, et al (1995) Correlating telomerase activity levels with human neuroblastoma outcomes. Nature Med 1:249–255PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hiyama E, Hiyama K, Ohtsu K, et al (1997) Telomerase activity in neuroblastoma: is it a prognostic indicator of clinical behavior? Eur J Cancer 33:1932–1936CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hoehner JC, Hedborg F, Eriksson L, et al (1998) Developmental gene expression of sympathetic nervous system tumors reflects their histogenesis. Lab Invest 78:29–45PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kushner BH, Cheung NK, LaQuaglia MP, et al (1996) International neuroblastoma staging system stage 1 neuroblastoma: a prospective study and literature review. J Clin Oncol 14:2174–2180PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shimada H, Chatten J, Newton WJ, et al (1984) Histopathologic prognostic factors in neuroblastic tumors: definition of subtypes of ganglioneuroblastoma and an age-linked classification of neuroblastomas. J Natl Cancer Inst 73:405–416PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eiso Hiyama
    • 1
    Email author
  • Keiko Hiyama
    • 2
  • Hiroaki Yamaoka
    • 3
  • Taijiro Sueda
    • 3
  • C. Patrik Reynolds
    • 4
  • Takashi Yokoyama
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of General Medicine, Graduate School of Biomedical SciencesHiroshima UniversityHiroshimaJapan
  2. 2.Department of Translational Cancer Research, Research Institute for Radiation Biology and MedicineHiroshima UniversityHiroshimaJapan
  3. 3.Department of Surgery, Graduate School of Biomedical SciencesHiroshima UniversityHiroshimaJapan
  4. 4.Division of Hematology-OncologyChildrens’ HospitalLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations