RESUMO
Background: Cysteine-rich secretory protein 3 (CRISP3) emerges as a potential biomarker in the study of many cancers, including cervical cancer (CC). This study aimed to analyze the expression pattern of CRISP3 in CC patients and CC cell lineages, following treatment with the epigenetic drugs: trichostatin A (TSA) and 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine (5-aza). Methods: The differentially expressed genes identified in GSE63514 were used to construct a protein-protein interaction network. CRISP3 was selected for subsequent analyses. We utilized data from the TCGA and GENT2 projects to evaluate the expression profile and clinical behavior of CRISP3. Additionally, we conducted cell culture experiments to analyze the expression profile of CRISP3 in cells. Results: Low levels of CRISP3 were observed in squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and human papillomavirus (HPV)16+, along with being associated with worse overall survival (OS). MIR-1229-3p was analyzed, and its high expression was associated with worse prognostic outcomes. In CC-derived cell lines, we observed low levels of CRISP3 in SiHa, followed by SW756, C33A, HeLa, and higher levels in CaSki. All cells were treated with TSA, 5-aza, or both. In all cell lines, treatment with TSA resulted in increased transcription of CRISP3. Conclusion: We identified a significant downregulation of CRISP3 in CC, particularly in cases with HPV16 infection and SCC, which was associated with poorer OS. Preliminary findings suggest that epigenetic treatments with TSA and 5-aza may modulate CRISP3 expression, warranting further research to elucidate its regulatory mechanisms and potential as a prognostic biomarker.
RESUMO
Antecedentes: El cáncer de cérvicouterino continúa siendo una enfermedad prevalente en Chile. Es frecuente recibir pacientes en etapas IIB y IIIB donde el riesgo de compromiso ganglionar pelviano y lumbo-aórtico es elevado y el tratamiento es radioquimioterapia. Objetivo: Análisis retrospectivo de pacientes con cáncer cérvicouterino que recibieron radioterapia que incluía los territorios lumboaórticos. Método: Revisión de pacientes con cáncer cérvicouterino tratadas entre 1995 y 2007 en el Instituto Nacional del Cáncer, Santiago, Chile. En 39 pacientes el tratamiento incluyó las cadenas lumboaórticas. Se analizó toxicidad y evolución. Se utilizaron dos técnicas de radioterapia: la primera durante la década del 90, donde se empleaban dos campos paralelos y opuestos (anterior y posterior) y una segunda actual, donde se irradian en conjunto la pelvis y los lumboaórticos a través de 4 campos (laterales y AP-PA). Resultados: El análisis dosimétrico de las dos técnicas confirma un mayor volumen irradiado de tejidos normales con la técnica de dos campos, fundamentalmente intestino delgado. La toxicidad fue significativamente diferente, siendo la que utilizamos hoy menos tóxica y con bajas complicaciones gastrointestinales, a pesar de recibir un tratamiento de radio-quimioterapia concomitante (55 por ciento vs 0 por ciento). Conclusión: La radioterapia lumboaórtica es un tratamiento con una tolerancia aceptable incluso con quimioterapia concomitante. Esta revisión nos obliga a elaborar un nuevo trabajo para evaluar si la radioterapia lumboaórtica reduce el riesgo de recidiva y aumenta la sobrevida.
Background: Uterine cancer is still a prevalent disease in Chile. Is common to treat patients with tumors in stages IIB and IIIB where the risk of pelvic and paraortic limph node involvement is very high. Its treatment is radio-chemotherapy. Objective: To present a retrospective analysis of patients that suffered cervix-uterine cancer who were treated with radiotherapy including the aortic-lumbar area. Methods: From the revision of patients who were treated of cervix-uterine cancer between the years 1995 and 2007, 39 were treated including aortic-lumbar chains. Evolution and toxicity were analyzed. Two radiotherapy techniques were used. The first one, during the nineties, included two parallel previous and later and opposed fields, and a second technique, currently used, where pelvis and paraortic are radiated at the same time through four lateral (AP-PA) fields. Results: The dosimeter analysis of both techniques shows that there is a higher volume of radiated normal tissue with the two fields techniques, mainly in the small bowel. On the other hand, the toxicity was significantly different being today's technique less toxic and showing low gastrointestinal side effects, despite receiving a simultaneous radio-chemotherapy (55 percent vs 0 percent). Conclusion: The paraortic radiotherapy treatment has an acceptable level of tolerance even under simultaneous radio-chemotherapy. Given the results of this study, we see the need for undergoing a new research project in order to evaluate if the aortic-lumbar radiotherapy may reduce the risk of relapse and increase in survival rate.