Published in

Elsevier, Gene, 1(499), p. 81-87, 2012

DOI: 10.1016/j.gene.2012.02.011

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Different mutation profiles associated to P53 accumulation in colorectal cancer

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

The tumor suppressor TP53 gene is one of the most frequently mutated in different types of human cancer. Particularly in colorectal cancer (CRC), it is believed that TP53 mutations play a role in the adenoma-carcinoma transition of tumors during pathological process. In order to analyze TP53 expressed alleles in CRC, we examined TP53 mRNA in tumor samples from 101 patients with sporadic CRC. Samples were divided in two groups defined according to whether they exhibit positive or negative P53 protein expression as detected by immunohistochemistry (IHC). The presence of TP53 mutation was a common event in tumors with an overall frequency of 54.5%. By direct sequencing, we report 42 different TP53 sequence changes in 55 CRC patients, being two of them validated polymorphisms. TP53 mutations were more frequent in positive than in negative P53 detection group (p<0.0001), being the precise figures 79.6% and 30.8%, respectively. In addition, the mutation profiles were also different between the two groups of samples; while most of the mutations detected in P53 positive group were missense (38 out of 39), changes in P53 negative detection group include 7 insertions/deletions, 6 missense, 2 nonsense and 1 silent mutation. As previously observed, most mutations were concentrated in regions encoding P53 DNA binding domain (DBD). Codons 175, 248 and 273 together account for 36.7% of point mutations, in agreement with previous observations provided that these codons are considered mutation hotspots. Interestingly, we detected two new deletions and two new insertions. In addition, in three samples we detected two deletions and one insertion that could be explained as putative splicing variants or splicing errors.