RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: RB1 gene screening aids clinical management and genetic counselling in retinoblastoma families. Here we present epigenetic changes identified during routine molecular RB1 screening of tumor and blood samples. Complications in interpreting RB1 methylation are discussed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Screening for RB1 promoter hypermethylation was carried out by Methylation Specific PCR (MS-PCR) after bisulphite modification of DNA. The cohort consisted of 315 tumors, and 204 blood samples, from 497 retinoblastoma patients (22 patients had both blood and tumor screened). RESULTS: 11.4% of retinoblastoma tumors had promoter hypermethylation. It was not routinely detected in blood samples, or in tumors with two other oncogenic RB1 changes. One blood sample had promoter hypermethylation due to an X;13 translocation. One tumor had low level methylation as well as two other oncogenic changes. Histopathological analysis of a small subset of age-matched tumors was similar regardless of promoter hypermethylation status. CONCLUSIONS: Promoter hypermethylation was detected in 11.4% of the retinoblastoma tumors and should be tested for in routine RB1 screening programmes. Constitutional samples are not expected to display RB1 hypermethylation. In a small proportion of cases it may not be possible to use this somatic change in patient management.
Asunto(s)
Metilación de ADN , Neoplasias de la Retina/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Retina/genética , Proteínas de Unión a Retinoblastoma/genética , Retinoblastoma/diagnóstico , Retinoblastoma/genética , Ubiquitina-Proteína Ligasas/genética , Niño , Preescolar , Cartilla de ADN/química , Electroforesis en Gel de Agar , Epigénesis Genética , Femenino , Humanos , Lactante , Masculino , Reacción en Cadena de la Polimerasa , Regiones Promotoras GenéticasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Retinoblastoma (RB) is a malignant, childhood tumour of the developing retina that occurs with an estimated frequency of 1 in 20 000. Identification of oncogenic mutations in the RB1 gene aids in the clinical management of families with a heritable predisposition to RB. Here we present the spectrum of genetic and epigenetic changes identified in 194 tumours and 209 blood samples, from 403 unrelated RB patients. METHODS: Mutation screening was carried out across all 27 RB1 exons and their associated splice sites. Small coding sequence changes were detected using fluorescent conformation analysis followed by sequencing. Large exonic deletions were detected by quantitative fluorescent PCR. Methylation specific PCR of the RB1 promoter was performed to detect epigenetic alterations. Polymorphism analysis was used to determine loss of heterozygosity in tumour samples. RESULTS: 95% of the expected mutations were identified in the tumour samples, with 16 samples exhibiting only one mutation, while two samples had no detectable RB1 mutation. 96% of bilateral/familial RB blood samples and 9.5% of unilateral sporadic blood samples, yielded mutations. 111 were novel mutations. CONCLUSIONS: The full range of screening techniques is required to achieve a high screening sensitivity in RB patients.