» Articles » PMID: 23405241

Mitosis is a Source of Potential Markers for Screening and Survival and Therapeutic Targets in Cervical Cancer

Abstract

The effect of preventive human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination on the reduction of the cervical cancer (CC) burden will not be known for 30 years. Therefore, it's still necessary to improve the procedures for CC screening and treatment. The objective of this study was to identify and characterize cellular targets that could be considered potential markers for screening or therapeutic targets. A pyramidal strategy was used. Initially the expression of 8,638 genes was compared between 43 HPV16-positive CCs and 12 healthy cervical epitheliums using microarrays. A total of 997 genes were deregulated, and 21 genes that showed the greatest deregulation were validated using qRT-PCR. The 6 most upregulated genes (CCNB2, CDC20, PRC1, SYCP2, NUSAP1, CDKN3) belong to the mitosis pathway. They were further explored in 29 low-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasias (CIN1) and 21 high-grade CIN (CIN2/3) to investigate whether they could differentiate CC and CIN2/3 (CIN2+) from CIN1 and controls. CCNB2, PRC1, and SYCP2 were mostly associated with CC and CDC20, NUSAP1, and CDKN3 were also associated with CIN2/3. The sensitivity and specificity of CDKN3 and NUSAP1 to detect CIN2+ was approximately 90%. The proteins encoded by all 6 genes were shown upregulated in CC by immunohistochemistry. The association of these markers with survival was investigated in 42 CC patients followed up for at least 42 months. Only CDKN3 was associated with poor survival and it was independent from clinical stage (HR = 5.9, 95%CI = 1.4-23.8, p = 0.01). CDKN3 and NUSAP1 may be potential targets for the development of screening methods. Nevertheless, further studies with larger samples are needed to define the optimal sensitivity and specificity. Inhibition of mitosis is a well-known strategy to combat cancers. Therefore, CDKN3 may be not only a screening and survival marker but a potential therapeutic target in CC. However, whether it's indispensable for tumor growth remains to be demonstrated.

Citing Articles

Proteogenomic characterization of molecular and cellular targets for treatment-resistant subtypes in locally advanced cervical cancers.

Hyeon D, Nam D, Shin H, Jeong J, Jung E, Cho S Mol Cancer. 2025; 24(1):77.

PMID: 40087745 DOI: 10.1186/s12943-025-02256-3.


Downregulation of RhoB Inhibits Cervical Cancer Progression and Enhances Cisplatin Sensitivity.

Wang W, Jia Y, Liu Y, Lv X, Guo L, Meng S Genes (Basel). 2024; 15(9).

PMID: 39336777 PMC: 11431011. DOI: 10.3390/genes15091186.


Comprehensive analysis of autophagy associated genes and immune infiltrates in cervical cancer.

Li S, Gao K, Yao D Iran J Basic Med Sci. 2024; 27(7):813-824.

PMID: 38800011 PMC: 11127083. DOI: 10.22038/IJBMS.2024.74431.16168.


Genetic Changes in Mastocytes and Their Significance in Mast Cell Tumor Prognosis and Treatment.

Zmorzynski S, Kimicka-Szajwaj A, Szajwaj A, Czerwik-Marcinkowska J, Wojcierowski J Genes (Basel). 2024; 15(1).

PMID: 38275618 PMC: 10815783. DOI: 10.3390/genes15010137.


Cyclin B2 impairs the p53 signaling in nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Liu Q, Yuan Y, Shang X, Xin L BMC Cancer. 2024; 24(1):25.

PMID: 38166895 PMC: 10763327. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-11768-4.


References
1.
Julien S, Dube N, Hardy S, Tremblay M . Inside the human cancer tyrosine phosphatome. Nat Rev Cancer. 2010; 11(1):35-49. DOI: 10.1038/nrc2980. View

2.
Gupta N, Srinivasan R, Rajwanshi A . Functional biomarkers in cervical precancer: an overview. Diagn Cytopathol. 2009; 38(8):618-23. DOI: 10.1002/dc.21270. View

3.
Li X, Bolcun-Filas E, Schimenti J . Genetic evidence that synaptonemal complex axial elements govern recombination pathway choice in mice. Genetics. 2011; 189(1):71-82. PMC: 3176111. DOI: 10.1534/genetics.111.130674. View

4.
Pyeon D, Newton M, Lambert P, den Boon J, Sengupta S, Marsit C . Fundamental differences in cell cycle deregulation in human papillomavirus-positive and human papillomavirus-negative head/neck and cervical cancers. Cancer Res. 2007; 67(10):4605-19. PMC: 2858285. DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-3619. View

5.
Leinonen M, Nieminen P, Kotaniemi-Talonen L, Malila N, Tarkkanen J, Laurila P . Age-specific evaluation of primary human papillomavirus screening vs conventional cytology in a randomized setting. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009; 101(23):1612-23. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djp367. View