[Precancerous lesions of the buccal epithelium]

Long non-coding RNA CCL2 promoted gastric cancer function via miR-128/ PARP2 signal pathway

Amounts of studies have revealed long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) was related to the development of gastric cancer. Here, our results suggested the function and regulatory mechanism of CCL2 in gastric cancer. Quantitative polymerase-chain reaction (qPCR) was employed to inspect lncRNA CCL2 and miR-128 expression in normal gastric cell line (GES-1) and tumor cell lines (HGC-27 and MKN-45). The effects of CCL2 and miR-128 were measured via Luciferase reporter test. Western blot was used to check PARP2 protein expression. CCL2 expression and PARP2 protein levels were up-regulated, while miR-128 expression was obviously lower. Meanwhile, CCL2 down-regulating significantly repressed the proliferation, migration, and invasion by regulating miR-128. In addition, we proved miR-128 was a direct target of CCL2 through double luciferase assay and bioinformatics analysis. Moreover, miR-128 markedly inhibited the proliferation, migration, and invasion in gastric cancer. More importantly, miR-128 could reverse the effects of lncRNA CCL2 knocked down. PARP2-si obviously suppressed in gastric cancer proliferation, migration, and invasion. Meanwhile, miR-128 mimic and the knockout of CCL2 distinctly decreased PARP2 protein level. Additionally, luciferase report experiments certificated that PARP2 targeted miR-128, implying PARP2 directly interacted with miR-128 in gastric cancer. More interestingly, the downregulation of PARP could reverse the trend triggered by miR-128 inhibitor in gastric tumor. All over these results showed lncRNA CCL2 played importance of role in gastric tumor via miR-128/PARP2 axis signal pathway. LncRNA CCL2 accelerated gastric cancer progression by regulating miR-128/PARP2 signaling pathway, providing a novel possible strategy for the treatment of gastric cancer.

Importance of Early Detection of Potentially Malignant Lesions in the Prevention of Oral Cancer

Objective:

The aim of this study was to assess the importance of early diagnosis of potentially malignant lesions in the prevention of oral cancer.

Material and methods:

In order to achieve the set objectives, we selected our participant pool. Of the 340 patients who came to the initial examination at the Clinic for Oral Medicine and Periodontology, we selected 40 patients with potentially malignant oral lesions (PMOL) of both sexes and of different ages. After an extensive anamnesis and a clinical examination of all mucous membranes, we documented potentially malignant lesions, their localization, subjective and objective symptoms, duration of pathological lesion, and bad habits (smoking and alcohol). All lesions were colored with Toluidine blue, which indicates malignancy in 75% of cases. Patients who had a positive Toluidine blue staining test were sent to biopsy and pathohistological analysis.

Results:

The most common potentially malignant lesions are Lichen reticularis (25%), Lichen erosivus (20%), and Leukoplakia (15%). The most common localization of lesions is the buccal mucosa bilaterally (26%), buccal mucosa unilaterally (10%), and the lower lip (10%). The staining test with Toluidine blue was positive at 23% PMOLs. In patients with positive Toluidine staining findings, biopsy and pathohistological analysis were performed, which showed that 20% of all lesions are carcinoma (CIS, Baseocellular Carcinoma, Squamocellular Carcinoma), while 14% are mucosal epithelial dysplasia. Statistical analysis confirmed the significance of positive staining of Toluidine blue and Leukoplakia (Spearman’s coefficient = 0.427, p = 0.006, N = 40), and statistically significant positive association of Squamocellular Carcinoma and Toluidine blue staining (Spearman’s coefficient = 0.619, p = 0.000, N = 40).

Conclusion:

Most oral cancers are caused by potentially malignant lesions, which is why a very detailed clinical examination with the visualization of pathological lesions is very important. Toluidine blue test can be an auxiliary tool for clinical diagnosis but does not replace the pathohistological finding. Biopsy and pathohistological findings are the gold standard in the diagnosis of oral cancers, as confirmed in our research.