Differential disruption of cell cycle pathways in small cell and non-small cell lung cancer

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the world, with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) comprising the two major cell types. Although these cell types can be distinguished readily at the histological level, knowledge of their underlying molecular differences is very limited. In this study, we compared 14 SCLC cell lines against 27 NSCLC cell lines using an integrated array comparative genomic hybridisation and gene expression profiling approach to identify subtype-specific disruptions. Using stringent criteria, we have identified 159 of the genes that are responsible for the different biology of these cell types. Sorting of these genes by their biological functions revealed the differential disruption of key components involved in cell cycle pathways. Our novel comparative combined genome and transcriptome analysis not only identified differentially altered genes, but also revealed that certain shared pathways are preferentially disrupted at different steps in these cell types. Small cell lung cancer exhibited increased expression of MRP5, activation of Wnt pathway inhibitors, and upregulation of p38 MAPK activating genes, while NSCLC showed downregulation of CDKN2A, and upregulation of MAPK9 and EGFR. This information suggests that cell cycle upregulation in SCLC and NSCLC occurs through drastically different mechanisms, highlighting the need for differential molecular target selection in the treatment of these cancers

O6-Methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase protein expression by immunohistochemistry in brain and non-brain systemic tumours: systematic review and meta-analysis of correlation with methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction

Background: The DNA repair protein O6-Methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) confers resistance to alkylating agents. Several methods have been applied to its analysis, with methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction (MSP) the most commonly used for promoter methylation study, while immunohistochemistry (IHC) has become the most frequently used for the detection of MGMT protein expression. Agreement on the best and most reliable technique for evaluating MGMT status remains unsettled. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the correlation between IHC and MSP. Methods A computer-aided search of MEDLINE (1950-October 2009), EBSCO (1966-October 2009) and EMBASE (1974-October 2009) was performed for relevant publications. Studies meeting inclusion criteria were those comparing MGMT protein expression by IHC with MGMT promoter methylation by MSP in the same cohort of patients. Methodological quality was assessed by using the QUADAS and STARD instruments. Previously published guidelines were followed for meta-analysis performance. Results Of 254 studies identified as eligible for full-text review, 52 (20.5%) met the inclusion criteria. The review showed that results of MGMT protein expression by IHC are not in close agreement with those obtained with MSP. Moreover, type of tumour (primary brain tumour vs others) was an independent covariate of accuracy estimates in the meta-regression analysis beyond the cut-off value. Conclusions Protein expression assessed by IHC alone fails to reflect the promoter methylation status of MGMT. Thus, in attempts at clinical diagnosis the two methods seem to select different groups of patients and should not be used interchangeably