RØYRVIK ET AL.lite <strong>in</strong>stability <strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>sul<strong>in</strong>-like growth factor II receptor gene <strong>in</strong> gastro<strong>in</strong>test<strong>in</strong>altumours. Nat Genet. 1996;14:255–7.48. Malkhosyan S, Ramp<strong>in</strong>o N, Yamamoto H, Perucho M. Frameshift mutator mutations.Nature. 1996;382(6591):499–500.49. Duval A, Roll<strong>and</strong> S, Compo<strong>in</strong>t A, Tubacher E, Iacopetta B, Thomas G,Hamel<strong>in</strong> R. Evolution of <strong>in</strong>stability at cod<strong>in</strong>g <strong>and</strong> <strong>no</strong>n-cod<strong>in</strong>g repeat sequences<strong>in</strong> human MSI-H colorectal cancers. Hum Mol Genet. 2001;10:513–8.50. Perucho M. Microsatellite <strong>in</strong>stability: the mutator that mutates the other mutator.Nat Med. 1996;2:630–-1.51. Vo AT, Zhu F, Wu X, Yuan F, Gao Y, Gu L, Li GM, Lee TH, Her C. hMRE11deficiency leads to microsatellite <strong>in</strong>stability <strong>and</strong> defective DNA mismatch repair.EMBO Rep. 2005;6:438–44.52. Woerner SM, Benner A, Sutter C, Schiller M, Yuan YP, Keller G, Bork P,Doeberitz MK, Gebert JF. Pathogenesis of DNA repair-deficient cancers: a statisticalmeta-analysis of putative Real Common Target genes. Oncogene.2003;22:2226–35.53. Woerner SM, Gebert J, Yuan YP, Sutter C, Ridder R, Bork P, von Knebel DM.Systematic identification of genes with cod<strong>in</strong>g microsatellites mutated <strong>in</strong> DNAmismatch repair-deficient cancer cells. Int J Cancer. 2001;93:12–9.54. Woerner SM, Kloor M, Mueller A, Rueschoff J, Friedrichs N, Buettner R,Buzello M, Kienle P, Knaebel HP, Kunstmann E, Pagenstecher C, SchackertHK, Mosle<strong>in</strong> G, Vogelsang H, von Knebel DM, Gebert JF. Microsatellite <strong>in</strong>stabilityof selective target genes <strong>in</strong> HNPCC-associated colon ade<strong>no</strong>mas. Oncogene.2005;24:2525–35.55. Mori Y, Y<strong>in</strong> J, Rashid A, Leggett BA, Young J, Simms L, Kuehl PM, LangenbergP, Meltzer SJ, St<strong>in</strong>e OC. Instabilotyp<strong>in</strong>g: comprehensive identification offrameshift mutations caused by cod<strong>in</strong>g region microsatellite <strong>in</strong>stability. CancerRes. 2001;61:6046–9.56. Mori Y, Sato F, Selaru FM, Olaru A, Perry K, Kimos MC, Tamura G, MatsubaraN, Wang S, Xu Y, Y<strong>in</strong> J, Zou TT, Leggett B, Young J, Nukiwa T, St<strong>in</strong>eOC, Abraham JM, Shibata D, Meltzer SJ. Instabilotyp<strong>in</strong>g reveals unique mutationalspectra <strong>in</strong> microsatellite-unstable gastric cancers. Cancer Res.2002;62:3641–5.57. Jung B, Doctolero RT, Tajima A, Nguyen AK, Keku T, S<strong>and</strong>ler RS, CarethersJM. Loss of activ<strong>in</strong> receptor type 2 prote<strong>in</strong> expression <strong>in</strong> microsatellite unstablecolon cancers. Gastroenterology. 2004;126:654–9.58. Schulmann K, Mori Y, Croog V, Y<strong>in</strong> J, Olaru A, Sterian A, Sato F, Wang S,Xu Y, Deacu E, Berki AT, Hamilton JP, Kan T, Abraham JM, Schmiegel W,Harpaz N, Meltzer SJ. Molecular phe<strong>no</strong>type of <strong>in</strong>flammatory bowel disease-246
TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANCERassociated neoplasms with microsatellite <strong>in</strong>stability. Gastroenterology.2005;129:74–85.59. Yamaguchi T, Iijima T, Mori T, Takahashi K, Matsumoto H, Miyamoto H,Hishima T, Miyaki M. Accumulation profile of frameshift mutations dur<strong>in</strong>gdevelopment <strong>and</strong> progression of colorectal cancer from patients with hereditary<strong>no</strong>npolyposis colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2006;49:399–406.60. Yamamoto H, Gil J, Schwartz S Jr, Perucho M. Frameshift mutations <strong>in</strong> Fas,Apaf-1, <strong>and</strong> Bcl-10 <strong>in</strong> gastro-<strong>in</strong>test<strong>in</strong>al cancer of the microsatellite mutatorphe<strong>no</strong>type. Cell Death Differ. 2000;7:238–9.61. Ike<strong>no</strong>ue T, Togo G, Nagai K, Ijichi H, Kato J, Yamaji Y, Okamoto M, Kato N,Kawabe T, Tanaka A, Matsumura M, Shiratori Y, Omata M. Frameshift mutationsat mo<strong>no</strong>nucleotide repeats <strong>in</strong> RAD50 recomb<strong>in</strong>ational DNA repair gene<strong>in</strong> colorectal cancers with microsatellite <strong>in</strong>stability. Jpn J Cancer Res.2001;92:587–91.62. Thorstensen L, Holm R, Lothe RA, Trope C, Carvalho B, Sobr<strong>in</strong>ho-Simoes M,Seruca R. WNT-<strong>in</strong>ducible signal<strong>in</strong>g pathway prote<strong>in</strong> 3, WISP-3, is mutated <strong>in</strong>microsatellite unstable gastro<strong>in</strong>test<strong>in</strong>al carc<strong>in</strong>omas but <strong>no</strong>t <strong>in</strong> endometrial carc<strong>in</strong>omas.Gastroenterology. 2003;124:270–1.63. Ejima Y, Yang L, Sasaki MS. Aberrant splic<strong>in</strong>g of the ATM gene associatedwith shorten<strong>in</strong>g of the <strong>in</strong>tronic mo<strong>no</strong>nucleotide tract <strong>in</strong> human colon tumor celll<strong>in</strong>es: a <strong>no</strong>vel mutation target of microsatellite <strong>in</strong>stability. Int J Cancer.2000;86:262–8.64. Kim NG, Choi YR, Baek MJ, Kim YH, Kang H, Kim NK, M<strong>in</strong> JS, Kim H.Frameshift mutations at cod<strong>in</strong>g mo<strong>no</strong>nucleotide repeats of the hRAD50 gene <strong>in</strong>gastro<strong>in</strong>test<strong>in</strong>al carc<strong>in</strong>omas with microsatellite <strong>in</strong>stability. Cancer Res.2001;61:36–8.65. Ham MF, Takakuwa T, Luo WJ, Liu A, Horii A, Aozasa K. Impairment ofdouble-str<strong>and</strong> breaks repair <strong>and</strong> aberrant splic<strong>in</strong>g of ATM <strong>and</strong> MRE11 <strong>in</strong> leukemia-lymphomacell l<strong>in</strong>es with microsatellite <strong>in</strong>stability. Cancer Sci.2006;97:226–34.66. Park J, Betel D, Gryfe R, Michalickova K, Di NN, Gall<strong>in</strong>ger S, Hogue CW,Redston M. Mutation profil<strong>in</strong>g of mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cncersus<strong>in</strong>g an <strong>in</strong> silico ge<strong>no</strong>me scan to identify cod<strong>in</strong>g microsatellites. Cancer Res.2002;62:1284–8.67. Mongiat-Artus P, Miquel C, Van der AM, Buhard O, Hamel<strong>in</strong> R, Soliman H,Bangma C, Jan<strong>in</strong> A, Teillac P, van der KT, Praz F. Microsatellite <strong>in</strong>stability<strong>and</strong> mutation analysis of c<strong>and</strong>idate genes <strong>in</strong> urothelial cell carc<strong>in</strong>omas of upperur<strong>in</strong>ary tract. Oncogene. 2006;25:2113–8.68. Liu W, Dong X, Mai M, Seelan RS, Taniguchi K, Krishnadath KK, Hall<strong>in</strong>gKC, Cunn<strong>in</strong>gham JM, Boardman LA, Qian C, Christensen E, Schmidt SS,247
- Page 1 and 2:
Novel genetic and epigenetic altera
- Page 3 and 4:
TABLE OF CONTENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .
- Page 5 and 6:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe present work ha
- Page 7 and 8:
Prefacetechnology[3]. This new tech
- Page 10 and 11:
SummaryThe subgroup of carcinomas w
- Page 12 and 13:
Introduction“Epigenetic inheritan
- Page 14 and 15:
Introductionamino acid change it is
- Page 16 and 17:
Introductionmethylation during embr
- Page 18 and 19:
IntroductionDNA is most of the time
- Page 20 and 21:
IntroductionFigure 5. DNA methylati
- Page 22 and 23:
IntroductionFigure 6. Incidence rat
- Page 24 and 25:
IntroductionFigure 8. Tumor staging
- Page 26 and 27:
Introductioninasmuch as 80% of colo
- Page 28 and 29:
IntroductionInstabilities involved
- Page 30 and 31:
Introductionthere seems to be a fid
- Page 32 and 33:
Introductionsevere alterations are
- Page 34 and 35:
Introductionpopulation-wide screeni
- Page 36 and 37:
IntroductionFigure 12. Present and
- Page 38 and 39:
RESULTS IN BRIEFPaper Ia. “DNA hy
- Page 40 and 41:
Results in Briefinstability, and se
- Page 42 and 43:
Results in BriefUnivariate survival
- Page 44 and 45:
Discussionseveral factors, and full
- Page 46 and 47:
Discussionlow threshold, we increas
- Page 48 and 49:
DiscussionIt may seem like unnecess
- Page 50 and 51:
Discussionthan 96% DHPLC do not sta
- Page 52 and 53:
DiscussionFigure 13. Mutation detec
- Page 54 and 55:
DiscussionClinical impact of molecu
- Page 56 and 57:
Discussionmarkers with a very high
- Page 58 and 59:
Discussionchromosomes in metaphase[
- Page 60 and 61:
DiscussionThese examples underline
- Page 62 and 63:
Discussiongenes. One is based on mu
- Page 64 and 65:
CONCLUSIONSWe have identified novel
- Page 66 and 67:
Future PerspectivesMolecular risk a
- Page 68 and 69:
REFERENCES1. Breasted J (1930) The
- Page 70 and 71:
References29. Deng G, Chen A, Pong
- Page 72 and 73:
References57. Al-Sukhni W, Aronson
- Page 74 and 75:
References84. Kunkel TA (1993) Nucl
- Page 76 and 77:
ReferencesLeggett B, Levine J, Kim
- Page 78 and 79:
References133. Lind GE, Thorstensen
- Page 80 and 81:
References156. Meling GI, Lothe RA,
- Page 82 and 83:
ReferencesT, Song X, Day RH, Sledzi
- Page 84 and 85:
References196. Honda S, Haruta M, S
- Page 86 and 87:
ORIGINAL ARTICLESAPPENDIXAppendix I
- Page 89 and 90:
GASTROENTEROLOGY 2007;132:1631-1639
- Page 91:
Paper IbGuro E Lind, Terje Ahlquist
- Page 94 and 95:
Journal of Translational Medicine 2
- Page 96 and 97:
Journal of Translational Medicine 2
- Page 98 and 99:
Journal of Translational Medicine 2
- Page 100 and 101:
Journal of Translational Medicine 2
- Page 102 and 103:
Journal of Translational Medicine 2
- Page 105:
Paper IITerje Ahlquist, Guro E Lind
- Page 108 and 109:
BackgroundMost cases of colorectal
- Page 110 and 111:
ADAMTS1 CDKN2A CRABP1 HOXA9 MAL MGM
- Page 112 and 113:
pseudogene, leading to a high rate
- Page 114 and 115:
strands. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1
- Page 116 and 117:
concomitant absence of transcript a
- Page 119 and 120:
Volume 10 Number 7 July 2008 pp. 68
- Page 121 and 122:
682 RAS Signaling in Colorectal Car
- Page 123 and 124:
684 RAS Signaling in Colorectal Car
- Page 125 and 126:
686 RAS Signaling in Colorectal Car
- Page 127:
Table W2. Detailed Somatic Events o
- Page 131 and 132: Identification of RCC2 as a prognos
- Page 133 and 134: INTRODUCTIONMicrosatellite instabil
- Page 135 and 136: unselected series of primary tumors
- Page 137 and 138: specificity, i.e. that they only am
- Page 139 and 140: On the assumption that DNA repair a
- Page 141 and 142: In order to ensure that gene mutati
- Page 143 and 144: Figure 2. Mutation frequency differ
- Page 145 and 146: and TAF1B (0.50), ACVR2A and ASTE1
- Page 147 and 148: Multivariate analysesA multivariate
- Page 149 and 150: When comparing our findings of muta
- Page 151 and 152: The test series included a low numb
- Page 153 and 154: entering M-phase remains to be seen
- Page 155 and 156: 12. Duval A, Reperant M, Hamelin R
- Page 157 and 158: 34. Martineau-Thuillier S, Andreass
- Page 159: AppendicesAppendix I:List of abbrev
- Page 163 and 164: Critical Reviews TM in Oncogenesis,
- Page 165 and 166: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 167 and 168: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 169 and 170: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 171 and 172: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 173 and 174: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 175 and 176: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 177 and 178: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 179: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 183 and 184: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 185 and 186: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 187 and 188: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 189 and 190: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 191: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC