4.2 Article

Effect of cigarette smoke condensate on gene promoter methylation in human lung cells

期刊

TOBACCO INDUCED DISEASES
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

EUROPEAN PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1186/1617-9625-12-15

关键词

DNA methylation; Cigarette smoke condensate; Lung cancer cells

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: In lung cancer, an association between tobacco smoking and promoter DNA hypermethylation has been demonstrated for several genes. However, underlying mechanisms for promoter hypermethylation in tobacco-induced cancer are yet to be fully established. Methods: Promoter methylation was evaluated in control and cigarette smoke condensate (CSC) exposed human lung cells using the Methyl-Profiler DNA Methylation PCR System. PSAE cells were exposed to 0.3 or 1.0 mu g/ml CSC for 72 hours and longer term for 14 and 30 days. NL-20 cells were exposed for 30 days to 10 or 100 mu g/ml CSC. Results: Promoters of several genes, including hsa-let-7a-3, CHD1, CXCL12, PAX5, RASSF2, and TCF21, were highly methylated (>90%); hsa-let-7a-3 was affected in both cell lines and under all exposure conditions. Level of methylation tended to increase with CSC concentration and exposure duration (statistical differences were not determined). Percentage methylation of TCF21, which was >98% at exposures of 10 or 100 mu g/ml CSC, was found to be reduced to 28% and 42%, respectively, in the presence of the dietary agent genistein. Conclusions: Using array techniques, several tumor suppressor genes in human lung cells were identified that undergo promoter hypermethylation, providing further evidence of their potential involvement in tobacco smoke-induced lung carcinogenesis and their use as potential biomarkers of harm in tobacco smoke exposure. Results from the study also demonstrated the potential of a dietary agent to exert chemopreventive activity in human tissue against tobacco smoke related diseases through modulation of DNA methylation. Additional studies are needed to confirm these findings.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据