Prognostic significance of hMSH2, hMSH3, and hMSH6 expression in ameloblastoma

DNA methylation status of MutS genes in ameloblastoma

OBJECTIVES

Ameloblastoma is an odontogenic epithelial tumour with a low expression of mismatch repair system components. We aimed to investigate the methylation status of the genes MSH2, MSH3 and MSH6 (MutS group) in conventional ameloblastomas.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The ameloblastoma and dental follicle samples (n = 10 each) were collected from 20 different patients. Each ameloblastoma sample was sectioned into two fragments: one was paraffin-embedded while the other one, likewise the dental follicle samples, was fixed in RNAlater and frozen at -196°C. All frozen samples were investigated for the MutS genes methylation levels, using the enzymatic restriction digestion and quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) assay. The ameloblastoma paraffin-embedded samples were submitted to immunohistochemical reactions for MutS proteins detection and digitally quantification. Correlation analyses were performed between the immunohistochemical results and the respective gene methylation percentage.

RESULTS

There are no significant differences between the MutS genes methylation levels in the ameloblastoma and the dental follicle. However, a strong negative correlation was found between MSH2 and MSH6 gene methylation status and their respective proteins expressions evaluated by immunohistochemistry.

CONCLUSION

Our results show that the genes methylations is in part responsible for decreasing the expression of MSH2 and MSH6 genes in ameloblastoma.

Immunoexpression of DNA base excision repair and nucleotide excision repair proteins in ameloblastomas, syndromic and non-syndromic odontogenic keratocysts and dentigerous cysts

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the immunoexpression of DNA base excision repair (BER) [apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APE-1), X-ray repair cross complementing 1 (XRCC-1)] and nucleotide excision repair (NER) [xeroderma pigmentosum complementation group (XPF)] proteins in benign epithelial odontogenic lesions with different biological behaviors.

DESIGN

Thirty solid ameloblastomas, 30 non-syndromic odontogenic keratocysts (NSOKCs), 29 syndromic odontogenic keratocysts (SKOCs), 30 dentigerous cysts (DCs) and 20 dental follicles (DFs) were evaluated quantitatively for APE-1, XRCC-1 and XPF through immunohistochemistry.

RESULTS

Nuclear expression of APE-1 was significantly higher in NSOKCs, SOKCs, and ameloblastomas in comparison to DCs (p < 0.001). Nuclear expression of XRCC-1 was higher in NSOKCs and SOKCs than in DCs (p < 0.05). At the nuclear level, XPF expression was higher in NSOKCs and SOKCs than in DCs and ameloblastomas (p < 0.05). A statistically significant higher expression of APE-1 (nuclear), XRCC-1 (nuclear), and XPF (nuclear and cytoplasmic) was found in all odontogenic lesion samples as compared to DFs (p < 0.05). For all lesions, there was a positive correlation between nuclear expression of APE-1 and XRCC-1 or XPF (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest a potential involvement of APE-1, XRCC-1 and XPF proteins in the pathogenesis of benign epithelial odontogenic lesions, especially in those with more aggressive biological behavior, such as ameloblastomas, NSOKCs, and SOKCs. We also showed that the expression of APE-1 was positively correlated with the nuclear expression of XRCC-1 and XPF, which may suggest an interaction between the BER and NER pathways in all odontogenic lesions studied herein.

COX-2 as a determinant of lower disease-free survival for patients affected by ameloblastoma

Ameloblastoma is a locally aggressive neoplasm with a poorly understood pathogenesis. Therefore, the aim of this study is to investigate whether COX-2 expression is associated with ameloblastoma microvascular density (MVD) and with tumor aggressiveness. Sixty-three cases of primary ameloblastomas arranged in tissue microarray were submitted to immunohistochemistry against cyclooxigenase-2 (COX-2) and CD34. Clinicopathological parameters regarding sex, age, tumour size, tumour duration, tumour location, treatment, recurrences, radiographic features, vestibular/lingual and basal cortical disruption and follow-up data were obtained from patients' medical records and correlated with the proteins expression. The results on BRAF-V600E expression were obtained from our previous study and correlated with COX-2 and CD34 expressions. Log-rank univariate analysis and multivariate Cox regression model were done to investigate the prognostic potential of the molecular markers. Twenty-eight cases (44.4%) exhibited cytoplasmic positivity for COX-2, predominantly in the columnar peripheral cells, with a mean MVD of 2.2 vessels/mm². COX-2 was significantly associated with recurrences (p < 0.001) and BRAF-V600E expression (p < 0.001), whereas lower MVD was associated with the use of conservative therapy (p = 0.004). Using univariate and multivariate analyses, COX-2 was significantly associated with a lower 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate (p < 0.001 and p = 0.012, respectively), but not with a higher MVD (p = 0.68). In conclusion, COX-2 expression in ameloblastomas is not associated with MVD, but it is significantly associated with recurrences and with a lower DFS.

Expression of hMLH1 and hMSH2 proteins in ameloblastomas and tooth germs

BACKGROUND

Mismatch repair proteins (MMRPs) are a group of nuclear enzymes that participate in the repair of base mismatches that occur during DNA replication in all proliferating cells. The most studied MMRPs are hMSH2 and hMLH1, which are known to be highly expressed in normal tissues. A loss of MMRPs leads to the accumulation of DNA replication errors in proliferating cells. Ki-67 is a biomarker regarded to be the gold-standard tool for determining cell proliferation by immunohistochemical methods. The aim of this study was to investigate the immunohistochemical expression of hMLH1, hMSH2 and Ki-67 proteins in ameloblastomas and tooth germs, to contribute to the understanding of the development of this odontogenic neoplasm.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Immunohistochemical assays to determine the presence of proteins hMSH2, hMLH1 and Ki-67 were performed in 80 ameloblastomas (40 solid and 40 unicystic) and five tooth germs.

RESULTS

Unicystic ameloblastomas showed higher MMRP expression (hMLH1: 62.5 ± 43.4; hMSH2: 83.3 ± 47.8) than did solid ameloblastomas (hMLH1: 59.4 ± 13.5; hMSH2: 75.8 ± 40.2). Additionally, the cell proliferation index assessed by Ki-67 was inversely proportional to the expression of MMRP. Comparison between tooth germs and ameloblastoma revealed significantly higher expression of hMLH1, hMSH2 and Ki-67 in tooth germs (p=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The differences of MMRP and Ki-67 immunoexpression between ameloblastomas and tooth germ suggest that alterations in the MMRP mechanisms could participate in the biological behavior of ameloblastomas.

Prognostic importance of FGF2 and FGFR1 expression for patients affected by ameloblastoma

BACKGROUND

Fibroblast growth factor 2 (FGF2) and FGF receptor 1 (FGFR1) have been investigated in different human neoplasms and were shown to play important roles in the pathogenesis of these diseases; however, very few are known regarding their prognostic importance in the context of ameloblastoma. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate whether the expression of FGF2 and FGFR1 is associated with ameloblastoma clinical behavior.

METHODS

Fifty-eight cases of ameloblastoma arranged in tissue microarray were submitted to immunohistochemistry against FGF2 and FGFR1. Clinicopathological parameters regarding sex, age, tumor size, duration and location, treatment, recurrences, radiographic features, cortical disruptions, and follow-up data were obtained from patients' medical records and correlated with the molecules expression. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to investigate the prognostic potential of the biomarkers.

RESULTS

Forty-four cases (75.9%) exhibited cytoplasmic positivity for FGF2 in central and peripheral epithelial cells, 46 of 58 (79.3%) showed FGFR1 cytoplasmic positivity predominantly in the columnar peripheral cells, and 43 cases (74.1%) were positive for both. Expression of FGF2 and FGF2 + FGFR1 was associated with tumor recurrences (P = .05). However, univariate and multivariate analyses did not demonstrate a significant influence of FGF2, FGFR1, or FGF2 + FGFR1 in the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate (P = .27, P = .33, and P = .25, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Cytoplasmic expression of FGF2 and FGF2 + FGFR1 is associated with ameloblastoma recurrence, but FGF2 and FGFR1 are not determinants of a lower DFS.