4.8 Article

Characterization of the genotype and integration patterns of hepatitis B virus in early- and late-onset hepatocellular carcinoma

期刊

HEPATOLOGY
卷 61, 期 6, 页码 1821-1831

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/hep.27722

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30801328, 81472770]
  2. Science Fund for Creative Research Groups [81221061, 81201940]
  3. Shanghai Pujiang Project
  4. New Excellent Youth Plan [XYQ2013074]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Early-onset hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) accounts for 15%-20% of total HCC cases in Asia, and the incidence is increasing. The low frequency of cirrhosis and poor prognosis of early-onset HCC suggests that its mechanisms may differ from late-onset HCC. Although hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is epidemiologically associated with HCC, the role of HBV in early-onset HCC remains poorly understood. Here, we report a comparative study of HBV subgenotypes and integration in early- (30) and late-onset (70) HBV-associated HCC using a novel high-throughput viral integration detection method. We report that HBV B2 is predominantly present in early-onset HCC. HBV integration is a common phenomenon, both in early- and late-onset HCC, which favors integrating into human repeat regions. Moreover, we found a breakpoint in 8q24 located between c-Myc and plasmocytoma variant translocation 1 (PVT1), which was detected in 12.4% (14 of 113) of early-onset HCCs, but only 1.4% (2 of 145) in late-onset HCCs. HBV integrating this site results in c-MYC, PVT1, and microRNA-1204 overexpression in tumors, thereby potentially contributing to the development of early-onset HCC. Conclusion: HBV genotype and integration patterns may be distinct in early-onset HCC. Our results may shed light on HCC risk factors in young HBV carriers. Further studies are needed to elucidate at which time in tumor development this integration event occurs and whether it plays an important, causative role in HCC development or progression. (Hepatology 2015;61:1821-1831)

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

4.8
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