Abstract
Background: Traditional serrated adenoma (TSA) features a unique serrated configuration because it involves two cell types: tall and short columnar cells. The serrated neoplasia pathway is related to the carcinogenesis of colorectal cancer. CpG island methylator phenotype-high (CIMP-high) is a unique genetic alteration in this pathway. Materials and Methods: This study investigated the prevalence and level of methylation and CIMP in 30 TSA cases. The tall and short cells in 28 TSAs were separated by microdissection. Methylation-specific PCR was performed to detect the methylation of MGMT, MLH1, P14, P16, MINT1, MINT2 and MINT31. Results: Overall, 30 cases presented CIMP-high, and the prevalence of CIMP-high was 100% (30/30) in tall cells and 93% (28/30) in short cells. Conclusions: No significant difference was found between tall and short columnar cells. The relationship between methylation and clinicopathological characters remains to be established.
Keywords: Traditional serrated adenoma, CpG island methylator phenotype-high
Introduction
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common gastrointestinal tumor and is the leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide [1-3]. Two well-studied molecular pathogenesis pathways contribute to the carcinogenesis of CRC: the adenoma-adenocarcinoma sequence and the serrated neoplasia pathway [4-9]. The adenoma-adenocarcinoma sequence considered the traditional pathogenic pathway, plays an important role in most CRC; in addition, cancers arise from tubular adenomas (TAs) through this sequence [10,11]. Recent studies have demonstrated that Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathways contribute to the adenoma-adenocarcinoma sequence [12-14]. The serrated neoplasia pathway is distinct from the conventional adenoma-adenocarcinoma sequence pathway. It displays some unique former genetic alterations, such as BRAF mutation [5,12,15-17], DNA hypermethylation [5,12,15,16] and microsatellite instability (MSI) [5,8,12,18,19].
The serrated glands of serrated polyps consist of two cell types: tall columnar cells of the intraluminal projecting portion and short columnar cells of the concave portion. Our previous studies considered the unique serrated epithelial architecture of serrated adenoma (SA) as a result of proliferation versus differentiation [14]. The Wnt signaling pathway contributes to SA and is related to serrated neoplasia [20]. However, the mechanism by which the serrated neoplasia pathway is activated in SA remains unclear.
Hypermethylation of CpG islands in the promoter region of tumor suppressor and tumor-related genes may cause the loss of gene expression in CRC [21-23]. Moreover, CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP), which means a high degree of concurrent promoter methylation in multiple genes, has been described in a subtype of CRC [24-26]. Hypermethylation also occurs in precursor lesions such as aberrant crypt foci and colorectal polyps. A high frequency and level of methylation and CIMP have been observed in sessile serrated adenoma and traditional serrated adenoma (TSA) [15,18,27,28]. However, studies rarely explored the difference in CIMP status between tall and short columnar cells in SA.
In the present study, we compared the frequencies of promoter methylation and CIMP in tall and short columnar cells in TSA. We also explored the relationship between CIMP status and clinical pathological characters. Considering previous findings, we elucidated the mechanism by which the Wnt signaling pathway and the serrated neoplasia pathway worked together to affect TSA. To analyze their methylation levels, tall and short columnar cells in TSA were separated through microdissection, and then detect the methylation frequencies of MGMT, MLH1, P14, P16, MINT1, MINT2, and MINT31 were detected.
Materials and methods
Specimens
Thirty colorectal TSA specimens from 30 patients obtained endoscopically or surgically were selected from the pathology files of the Department of Pathology at the Second Hospital of Harbin Medical University from 2000 to 2011 in accordance with the World Health Organization criterion [17].
All procedures were performed in accordance with the university’s ethical standards and hospital criteria. All participants provided informed consent.
Microdissection
Microdissection was assessed as previously described [20]. The tall and short cells of each case were placed in different tubes for DNA extraction.
DNA extraction
DNA extraction was assessed as previously described [20]. The extracted DNA was stored at -20°C until use.
Bisulfite treatment of DNA, methylation-specific PCR and determination of CIMP status
The methylation status of CpG sites in MGMT, MLH1, P14, P16, MINT1, MINT2 and MINT31 was determined by methylation-specific PCR (MSP) as previously described [29,30]. Bisulfite-modified DNA templates were amplified by PCR using either methylation-specific primers or unmethylation-specific primers of seven loci (Table 1). CIMP status was classified as CIMP-negative if no locus was methylated, CIMP-low if one locus was methylated, and CIMP-high if two or more loci were methylated.
Table 1.
Primer sequences used in CIMP analysis
| Gene locus | Primers | Annealing temperature (°C) |
|---|---|---|
| MGMT | ||
| Methylated | ||
| Sense | 5’-GTATCGGTCGAAGGGTTATTC-3’ | 58 |
| Antisense | 5’-TAAAACAATCTACGCATCCTCG-3’ | 58 |
| Unmethylated | ||
| Sense | 5’-GTTTGTATTGGTTGAAGGGTTATTT-3’ | 57 |
| Antisense | 5’-CTAAAACAATCTACACATCCTCACT-3’ | 57 |
| MLH1 | ||
| Methylated | ||
| Sense | 5’-TTTTTTTAGGAGTGAAGGAGGTTAC-3’ | 58 |
| Antisense | 5’-ACTAAACACGAATACTACGAACGAT-3’ | 58 |
| Unmethylated | ||
| Sense | 5’-TTTTTTTAGGAGTGAAGGAGGTTAT-3’ | 55 |
| Antisense | 5’-AACTAAACACAAATACTACAAACAAT-3’ | 55 |
| P14 | ||
| Methylated | ||
| Sense | 5’-GGTAGGTGGAAGTTTTTTAAAGAGC-3’ | 58 |
| Antisense | 5’-AAAAAAACAAACTACCCAAAACG-3’ | 58 |
| Unmethylated | ||
| Sense | 5’-GTAGGTGGAAGTTTTTTAAAGAGTGG-3’ | 58 |
| Antisense | 5’-AAAAAAACAAACTACCCAAAACAC-3’ | 58 |
| P16 | ||
| Methylated | ||
| Sense | 5’-GGGGAGTAGTATGGAGTTTTCG-3’ | 64 |
| Antisense | 5’-AACTATTCGATACGTTAAACAACGC-3’ | 64 |
| Unmethylated | ||
| Sense | 5’-GGGAGTAGTATGGAGTTTTTGG-3’ | 60 |
| Antisense | 5’-AACTATTCAATACATTAAACAACACC-3’ | 60 |
| MINT1 | ||
| Methylated | ||
| Sense | 5’-TCGTTAATTTTCGAATTTGAAGC-3’ | 59 |
| Antisense | 5’-ACTATAACCAACCTCTACGCGAA-3’ | 59 |
| Unmethylated | ||
| Sense | 5’-TTGTTAATTTTTGAATTTGAAGTGT-3’ | 56 |
| Antisense | 5’-CAACTATAACCAACCTCTACACAAA-3’ | 56 |
| MINT2 | ||
| Methylated | ||
| Sense | 5’-TTGATGTGTTAATTGGGGGTC-3’ | 58 |
| Antisense | 5’-ATAAATATCTATTCTTCCCCTTTCG-3’ | 58 |
| Unmethylated | ||
| Sense | 5’-GTTGATGTGTTAATTGGGGGTT-3’ | 58 |
| Antisense | 5’-CTATAAATATCTATTCTTCCCCTTTCAC-3’ | 58 |
| MINT31 | ||
| Methylated | ||
| Sense | 5’-TTTTTTCGTAGTGGCGTAAGC-3’ | 59 |
| Antisense | 5’-CTCCAAAAAACTATAAATACCCGAA-3’ | 59 |
| Unmethylated | ||
| Sense | 5’-GTTTTTTTGTAGTGGTGTAAGTGT-3’ | 55 |
| Antisense | 5’-CTCCAAAAAACTATAAATACCCAAA-3’ | 55 |
Statistical analysis
Chi-square test and Fisher’s exact test were used for statistical analysis. Statistical significance was considered at P<0.05.
Results
Clinicopathological findings
In our study, the 30 SAs were chosen by strict pathological criteria and were all polypoid and nodular. The average age of patients was 56.6±13 (range, 32 to 75 years), and the ratio of male to female was 2.75:1. As shown in Table 2, the diameter of SAs ranged from 2 to 20 mm (mean, 6.9±4 mm). Lesions proximal to the splenic flexure were classified as right-sided, whereas lesions of the splenic flexure, descending colon, sigmoid colon, and rectum were classified as left-sided. Approximately 77% of SAs (23/30) occurred in the left colon and 23% cases (7/30) in the right colon. The level of dysplasia in most SAs (27/30) was moderate; the remaining cases respectively showed mild, severe dysplasia and severe dysplasia with adenocarcinoma.
Table 2.
Clinicopathological findings of 30 serrated adenomas
| Serrated adenomas | |
|---|---|
| Age ± SD (years) | 56.6±13 |
| Gender | |
| Female | 8 |
| Male | 22 |
| Site | |
| Right colon | 7 |
| Left colon | 23 |
| Diameter (mm) (average) | 6.9±4 |
| Dysplasia | |
| Mild | 1 |
| Moderate | 27 |
| Severe | 1 |
| Severe dysplasia with adenocarcinoma | 1 |
Methylation at MGMT, MLH1, P14, P16, MINT1, MINT2 and MINT31
Examples of methylation at MGMT, MLH1, P14, P16, MINT1, MINT2, and MINT31 are shown in Figure 1. In high columnar cells of serrated adenomas, methylation of P16 and MINT1 was identified in all 30 cases. However, the prevalence rates of P16 and MINT1 methylation in short columnar cells were 90% (27/30) and 87% (26/30), respectively. The frequency of methylation was 97% (29/30) at MGMT, MLH1, P14, and MINT31 and 83% (25/30) at MINT2. However, in short columnar cells, the frequencies of methylation at MGMT, MLH1, P14, MINT31, and MINT2 were 80% (24/30), 83% (25/30), 87% (26/30), 83% (25/30), and 73% (22/30), respectively (Table 3). Aside from these genes, no significant difference was detected between high and short columnar cells, but high columnar cells of serrated adenomas were more frequently methylated at multiple loci than short columnar cells.
Figure 1.
Methylation status. A: MGMT; B: MLH1; C: P14; D: P16; E: MINT1; F: MINT2; G: MINT31; C1: case1; C2: case2; C3: case3; P: Positive control; M: Marker; T-C: Tall columnar cell; S-C: Short columnar cell; M: Methylation; U: Unmethylation.
Table 3.
Methylation of MGMT, MLH1, P14, P16, MINT1, MINT2 and MINT31
| MGMT | MLH1 | P14 | P16 | MINT1 | MINT2 | MINT31 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Methylation | T-C | 29/30 | 29/30 | 29/30 | 30/30 | 30/30 | 25/30 | 29/30 |
| S-C | 24/30 | 25/30 | 26/30 | 27/30 | 26/30 | 22/30 | 25/30 | |
| P | 0.1028 | 0.1945 | 0.3533 | 0.2373 | 0.1124 | 0.5321 | 0.1945 |
CIMP in serrated adenoma and clinicopathological associations
The overall SAs showed CIMP-high after methylation analysis above all loci. Furthermore, we detected the CIMP level between high and short columnar cells. Figure 2 summarizes the methylation status of high and short columnar cells in SAs. The prevalence rates of CIMP-high, CIMP-low, and CIMP-negative in short columnar cells of SAs were 3% (1/30), 7% (2/30), and 90% (27/30), respectively, and the CIMP level of high columnar cells was high in all cases. No significant relationship was found between them; however, the number of CIMP-high cases was greater in tall columnar cells than in short columnar cells.
Figure 2.
Methylation status of 7 loci in tradition serrated adenomas. Each column represents the methylation status of MGMT, MLH1, P14, P16, MINT1, MINT2 and MINT31, respectively, or CIMP status. Horizontal rows represent individual polyp subgrouped as no, low and high methylation groups.
We also detected the associations between CIMP and clinical pathological factors (Table 4). CIMP status and clinical pathological factors showed no association. Clinical pathological factors were also detected in two CIMP-high groups between tall and short columnar cells. The results showed no significant correlations between them as well.
Table 4.
Correlation of CIMP Status and Clinicopathological Features of serrated adenomas
| Short columnar cells | Tall columnar cells | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Characteristics |
|
P |
|
P | ||
| CIMP-negative (n=1) | CIMP-low (n=2) | CIMP-high (n=27) | CIMP-high (n=30) | |||
|
|
|
|||||
| % (no.) | % (no.) | % (no.) | % (no.) | |||
| Age ± SD (years) | 70 | 62±13 | 56±13 | ns | 57±13 | ns |
| Gender | ||||||
| Female | 0 (0) | 50% (1) | 26% (7) | ns | 27% (8) | ns |
| Male | 100% (1) | 50% (1) | 74% (20) | 73% (22) | ||
| Site | ||||||
| Right colon | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 26% (7) | ns | 23% (7) | ns |
| Left colon | 100% (1) | 100 (2) | 74% (20) | 77% (23) | ||
| Size | ||||||
| ≤ ize c | 100% (1) | 100 (2) | 89% (24) | ns | 90% (27) | ns |
| >1.0 cm | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 11% (3) | 10% (3) | ||
Discussion
Our previous studies attempted to find the role of the serrated pathway in the colorectum. Results suggested that the serrated configuration of SAs is related to a proliferation versus differentiation process. In addition, BRAF mutation may be involved in the serrated morphology of SAs [14]. Furthermore, the genetic alteration in both the serrated pathway and the Wnt signaling pathway may contribute to SAs [20]. Considering that the BRAF mutation [5,12,15-17], DNA hypermethylation [5,12,15,16], and MSI [5,8,12,18,19] have been defined as the unique genetic alteration for the serrated pathway, we further detected the frequency of methylation in short and tall columnar cells of SAs.
In the study of Park et al. [27], CIMP-high occurred in 68% (15/22) SAs, which was only 18% (6/34) in TAs. Thus, the frequency of methylation is much higher in SAs than in TAs. The epigenetic alterations in SAs may probably be due to the methylation of CpG islands. However, the study of Kim et al. [31] showed that the prevalence rates of methylation are 86% and 100% in SAs and TAs, respectively. Furthermore, the prevalence rates of CIMP-high are 39% and 28% in SAs and TAs, respectively. Thus, the effects of methylation of tumor-related genes in both SAs and TAs show no obvious difference. These opposite results were all detected by the sensitive methylation-specific PCR. Considering that methylation also existed in normal tissues, we could not estimate how much the methylation level in normal tissues would affect the final results. We also speculated that the difference between their studies may be due to the methylation in normal tissues.
We separated the tall and short columnar cells from the SAs using a microdissection technique to prevent them from interfering with each other, together with pathological normal tissues, such as matrix and inflammatory cells. Most studies revealed that DNA-methylation usually occurs in SAs and contributes to the progression of SAs [15,18,32]. According to our results, the frequencies of methylation at MGMT, MLH1, P14, P16, MINT1, MINT2, and MINT31 were 97%, 97%, 97%, 100%, 100%, 83%, and 97%, respectively, in tall columnar cells, and 80%, 83%, 87%, 90%, 87%, 73%, and 83%, respectively, in short columnar cells. No significant difference was found between them, but the frequency of methylation was higher in tall columnar cells than in short columnar cells. The level of CIMP in all 30 SAs cases was high. Moreover, CIMP-high occurred in 30 cases of tall columnar cells and in 27 cases of short columnar cells in SAs. No significant difference was detected between the two groups. These results indicate that methylation may contribute to the SAs but not to the unique formation of SAs. The high level of CIMP may be due to the sensitivity of methylation-specific PCR. Methylation could be detected through the amplification effect of PCR. Furthermore, our frequency of methylation (100%) was much higher than that in other studies (79.3%-91%). Some factors may be due to the high prevalence, as the specimens were all SAs without hyperplastic polyp and hybrid polyps; the cells were harvested by microdissection and avoided interference from other tissues.
The completeness of DNA and its copies is important to maintain the usual function of cells. Normally, the human body would recognize the errors in the copying process of DNA, and the cell cycle would stop to repair the segments of mismatch. If the DNA polymerase does not correct the errors in time, a backup system called the mismatch repair (MMR) system would adjust the mismatched DNA. However, if MMR failed, the mismatched DNAs would be the templates for the next copying, which may lead to the occurrence of diseases, such as cancers.
O-6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) is a DNA repair enzyme, and its variation may increase mutation rate and carcinogenesis [31]. Loss of MGMT expression is due to the methylation in its promoter region. Dong et al. [33] found that the methylation of MGMT, P16, P14, TIMP3, and FHIT plays a critical role in the carcinogenesis in the serrated pathway, and the methylation of these genes is also related to the histological progress. A report published on 2009 [34] revealed that the overall incidence rates of MGMT methylation in hyperplastic polyp, sessile SAs, and TSAs are 14%-22%, 23%-25%, and 16%-78%, respectively. In the present study, the frequencies of MGMT methylation in tall and short columnar cells of SAs were 97% and 80%, respectively, which are much higher than those in other reports. MGMT methylation and CIMP-low show a positive correlation in sporadic CRC [35]. However, such a relationship was not observed in SAs with MGMT methylation. CIMP-high correlated with MGMT methylation in the present study. The reason may be ascribed to the fact that our technique in collecting the cells could reduce the interference from tissues out of SAs. The results showed that MGMT methylation may be due to the occurrence of SAs.
hMLH1, hMSH2, hMSH3, hMSH6, hPMS2, and hPMS1 are well-known MMR genes. Methylation always occurs in MMR genes, such as hMLH1 and hMSH2, which could lead to MSI and loss of protein expression. Some studies pointed out that abnormal MMR gene expression is a specific marker for MSI-H [36], which is usually related to the methylation of the MLH1 promoter region and the loss of MLH1 expression [31]. The methylation of MLH1 could be found in 70% of sessile SA and 90% of MSI-H sporadic CRC, and rarely occur in hyperplastic polyp and TSAs [5]. Thus, sessile SAs may be the origin of MSI-H CRC [37]. Our study revealed that MLH1 methylation frequently occurred in both tall columnar cells (29/30) and short columnar cells (25/30) in TSAs. Noffsinger et al. [5] reported opposite results. The reason may be the difference in the technique of collecting cells and in the number of SA cases. The high prevalence of MLH1 methylation revealed that MSI-H was related to the occurrence of TSAs. However, MSI status is determined by detecting the microsatellite markers recommended by most studies, such as BAT25, BAT26, D5S346, D2S123, and D17S250 [38]. Lesions are defined as MSI-H when two or more markers show instability. Further studies should confirm the MSI status of the tall and short columnar cells of these 30 TSAs cases. Therefore, the relationship between the status of MSI and the occurrence of TSAs could be eventually confirmed.
One study pointed out that the characteristic molecular biological changes of both adenoma-adenocarcinoma sequence and the serrated neoplasia pathway could exist in some colorectal polyps showing the morphological features of SAs and TAs [39]. Therefore, some researchers introduced a new mechanism for the occurrence of CRC, which considered the two pathways combined to influence the carcinogenesis of CRC [40,41]. On the basis of the molecular subtypes of CRC summarized by Noffsinger et al. [5], the cancer that originated origin from TAs and SAs with KRAS mutation, was caused by both adenoma-adenocarcinoma sequence and serrated neoplasia pathway. This carcinoma had some characteristics in common, such as CIMP-L, chromosome instability, MGMT methylation, KRAS mutation, MSI-L, or MSS. Furthermore, Jiao et al. [14] confirmed that the short columnar cells from SAs demonstrate a high expression level of Wnt-pathway-related proteins (β-catenin and CD44). Thus, they speculated that the Wnt signaling pathway contributes to SA formation. Our previous study proved that BRAF mutations appear in 22/28 (78.6%) TSAs and that all mutations occur in tall cells [20]. β-catenin-positive cells were also found in all SAs used in another previous research [14]. In the present study, the SAs all showed CIMP-H, which was another unique genetic alteration for the serrated neoplasia pathway. These results revealed that the Wnt signaling pathway and the serrated neoplasia pathway both contribute to TSAs but do not affect separately.
The formation of TSAs depended on complicated networks; in addition, the carcinogenesis of CRC that originated from TSAs needed multiple processes and involved multiple molecular events. Our previous studies and this study pointed out that both Wnt signaling pathway and serrated neoplasia pathway contribute to TSAs and possibly to CRC carcinogenesis. The DNA hypermethylation, BRAF mutation, mutations of proteins related to the Wnt signaling pathway and other molecular events worked in synergy to cause TSAs, even CRC. However, the status of MSI, difference in methylation level, and other types of polyps must be clarified to establish the relationship between CIMP and clinical pathological characters. Further research should be conducted to confirm these hypotheses.
Conclusions
In conclusion, methylation of MGMT, MLH1, P14, P16, MINT1, MINT2, and MINT31 contributed to TSA. No significant difference was found between tall and short columnar cells. The relationship between methylation and clinical pathological characters was not established. The number of cases may need to be increased to establish this relationship. DNA hypermethylation was stable in the serrated neoplasia pathway.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by grants from Heilongjiang Postdoctoral Fund to pursue scientific research in Heilongjiang Province in 2014.
Disclosure of conflict of interest
None.
References
- 1.Smith G, Carey FA, Beattie J, Wilkie MJ, Lightfoot TJ, Coxhead J, Garner RC, Steele RJ, Wolf CR. Mutations in APC, Kirsten-ras, and p53--alternative genetic pathways to colorectal cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002;99:9433–8. doi: 10.1073/pnas.122612899. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Kinzler KW, Vogelstein B. Lessons from hereditary colorectal cancer. Cell. 1996;87:159–70. doi: 10.1016/s0092-8674(00)81333-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Jass JR, Whitehall VL, Young J, Leggett BA. Emerging concepts in colorectal neoplasia. Gastroenterology. 2002;123:862–76. doi: 10.1053/gast.2002.35392. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Burgess AW, Faux MC, Layton MJ, Ramsay RG. Wnt signaling and colon tumorigenesis-A view from the periphery. Exp Cell Res. 2011;317:2748–58. doi: 10.1016/j.yexcr.2011.08.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Noffsinger AE. Serrated polyps and colorectal cancer: new pathway to malignancy. Annu Rev Pathol. 2009;4:343–64. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pathol.4.110807.092317. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Snover DC. Update on the serrated pathway to colorectal carcinoma. Hum Pathol. 2011;42:1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2010.06.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Vogelstein B, Fearon ER, Kern SE, Hamilton SR, Preisinger AC, Nakamura Y, White R. Allelotype of colorectal carcinomas. Science. 1989;244:207–11. doi: 10.1126/science.2565047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Iino H, Jass JR, Simms LA, Young J, Leggett B, Ajioka Y, Watanabe H. DNA microsatellite instability in hyperplastic polyps, serrated adenomas, and mixed polyps: a mild mutator pathway for colorectal cancer? J Clin Pathol. 1999;52:5–9. doi: 10.1136/jcp.52.1.5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Watson AR, Jankowski J. Hyperplastic polyps, serrated adenomas, and the serrated polyp neoplasia pathway. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004;99:2242–55. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2004.40131.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Morson B. The polyp-cancer sequence in the large bowel. Proc R Soc Med. 1974;67:451–7. doi: 10.1177/00359157740676P115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Mecillinam. Aetiology of adenoma--carcinoma sequence in large bowel. Urinary Tract Infections. 1978 doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(78)90487-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Sawyer EJ, Cerar A, Hanby AM, Gorman P, Arends M, Talbot IC, Tomlinson IP. Molecular characteristics of serrated adenomas of the colorectum. Gut. 2002;51:200–6. doi: 10.1136/gut.51.2.200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Matsumoto T, Iida M, Kobori Y, Mizuno M, Nakamura S, Hizawa K, Yao T. Serrated adenoma in familial adenomatous polyposis: relation to germline APC gene mutation. Gut. 2002;50:402–4. doi: 10.1136/gut.50.3.402. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Jiao YF, Nakamura S, Sugai T, Yamada N, Habano W. Serrated adenoma of the colorectum undergoes a proliferation versus differentiation process: new conceptual interpretation of morphogenesis. Oncology. 2008;74:127–34. doi: 10.1159/000151359. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Kambara T, Simms LA, Whitehall VL, Spring KJ, Wynter CV, Walsh MD, Barker MA, Arnold S, McGivern A, Matsubara N, Tanaka N, Higuchi T, Young J, Jass JR, Leggett BA. BRAF mutation is associated with DNA methylation in serrated polyps and cancers of the colorectum. Gut. 2004;53:1137–44. doi: 10.1136/gut.2003.037671. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Lee S, Cho NY, Choi M, Yoo EJ, Kim JH, Kang GH. Clinicopathological features of CpG island methylator phenotype-positive colorectal cancer and its adverse prognosis in relation to KRAS/BRAF mutation. Pathol Int. 2008;58:104–13. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1827.2007.02197.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.English DR, Young JP, Simpson JA, Jenkins MA, Southey MC, Walsh MD, Buchanan DD, Barker MA, Haydon AM, Royce SG, Roberts A, Parry S, Hopper JL, Jass JJ, Giles GG. Ethnicity and risk for colorectal cancers showing somatic BRAF V600E mutation or CpG island methylator phenotype. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008;17:1774–80. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0091. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.O’Brien MJ, Yang S, Mack C, Xu H, Huang CS, Mulcahy E, Amorosino M, Farraye FA. Comparison of microsatellite instability, CpG island methylation phenotype, BRAF and KRAS status in serrated polyps and traditional adenomas indicates separate pathways to distinct colorectal carcinoma end points. Am J Surg Pathol. 2006;30:1491–501. doi: 10.1097/01.pas.0000213313.36306.85. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Nash GM, Gimbel M, Cohen AM, Zeng ZS, Ndubuisi MI, Nathanson DR, Ott J, Barany F, Paty PB. KRAS mutation and microsatellite instability: two genetic markers of early tumor development that influence the prognosis of colorectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:416–24. doi: 10.1245/s10434-009-0713-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Shi Y, Li J, Wu SY, Qin L, Jiao YF. BRAF mutation is associated with the unique morphology of traditional serrated adenoma of the colorectum. Int J Surg Pathol. 2013;21:442–8. doi: 10.1177/1066896913499628. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Jones PA, Baylin SB. The epigenomics of cancer. Cell. 2007;128:683–92. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2007.01.029. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Wong JJ, Hawkins NJ, Ward RL. Colorectal cancer: a model for epigenetic tumorigenesis. Gut. 2007;56:140–8. doi: 10.1136/gut.2005.088799. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Deng YS, Deng G. Epigenetic changes (aberrant DNA methylation) in colorectal neoplasia. Gut Liver. 2007;1:1–11. doi: 10.5009/gnl.2007.1.1.1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Grady WM. CIMP and colon cancer gets more complicated. Gut. 2007;56:1498–500. doi: 10.1136/gut.2007.125732. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Rashid A, Issa JP. CpG island methylation in gastroenterologic neoplasia: a maturing field. Gastroenterology. 2004;127:1578–88. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2004.09.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Issa JP, Shen L, Toyota M. CIMP, at last. Gastroenterology. 2005;129:1121–4. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2005.07.040. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Park SJ, Rashid A, Lee JH, Kim SG, Hamilton SR, Wu TT. Frequent CpG island methylation in serrated adenomas of the colorectum. Am J Pathol. 2003;162:815–22. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9440(10)63878-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Chan TL, Zhao W, Leung SY, Yuen ST Cancer Genome Project. BRAF and KRAS mutations in colorectal hyperplastic polyps and serrated adenomas. Cancer Res. 2003;63:4878–81. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Tanaka H, Deng G, Matsuzaki K, Kakar S, Kim GE, Miura S, Sleisenger MH, Kim YS. BRAF mutation, CpG island methylator phenotype and microsatellite instability occur more frequently and concordantly in mucinous than non-mucinous colorectal cancer. Int J Cancer. 2006;118:2765–71. doi: 10.1002/ijc.21701. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Herman JG, Graff JR, Myöhänen S, Nelkin BD, Baylin SB. Methylation-specific PCR: a novel PCR assay for methylation status of CpG islands. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996;93:9821–6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.93.18.9821. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Kim Y, Kakar S, Cun L, Deng G, Kim Y. Distinct CpG island methylation profiles and BRAF mutation status in serrated and adenomatous colorectal polyps. Int J Cancer. 2008;123:2587–93. doi: 10.1002/ijc.23840. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Chan OO, Issa JP, Morris JS, Hamilton SR, Rashid A. Concordant CpG Island Methylation in Hyperplastic Polyposis. Am J Pathol. 2002;160:529–36. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9440(10)64872-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Dong SM, Lee EJ, Jeon ES, Park CK, Kim KM. Progressive methylation during the serrated neoplasia pathway of the colorectum. Mod Pathol. 2005;18:170–8. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.3800261. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Noffsinger AE. Serrated polyps and colorectal cancer: new pathway to malignancy. Annu Rev Pathol. 2009;4:343–64. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pathol.4.110807.092317. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Ogino S, Kawasaki T, Kirkner GJ, Suemoto Y, Meyerhardt JA, Fuchs CS. Molecular correlates with MGMT promoter methylation and silencing support CpG island methylator phenotypelow (CIMP-low) in colorectal cancer. Gut. 2007;56:1564–71. doi: 10.1136/gut.2007.119750. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Mori Y, Selaru FM, Sato F, Yin J, Simms LA, Xu Y, Olaru A, Deacu E, Wang S, Taylor JM, Young J, Leggett B, Jass JR, Abraham JM, Shibata D, Meltzer SJ. The impact of microsatellite instability on the molecular phenotype of colorectal tumors. Cancer Res. 2003;63:4577–82. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Torlakovic E, Skovlund E, Snover DC, Torlakovic G, Nesland JM. Morphologic reappraisal of serrated colorectal polyps. Am J Surg Pathol. 2003;27:65–81. doi: 10.1097/00000478-200301000-00008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Boland CR, Thibodeau SN, Hamilton SR, Sidransky D, Eshleman JR, Burt RW, Meltzer SJ, Rodriguez-Bigas MA, Fodde R, Ranzani GN, Srivastava S. A national cancer institute workshop on microsatellite instability for cancer detection and familial predisposition: development of international criteria for the determination of microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer. Cancer Res. 1998;58:5248–57. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Jass JR, Baker K, Zlobec I, Higuchi T, Barker M, Buchanan D, Young J. Advanced colorectal polyps with the molecular and morphological features of serrated polyps and adenomas: concept of a ‘fusion’ pathway to colorectal cancer. Histopathology. 2006;49:121–31. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2006.02466.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Fearon ER, Vogelstein B. A genetic model for colorectal tumorigenesis: Cell. Cell. 1990;61:759–67. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(90)90186-i. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Jass JR. Classification of colorectal cancer based on correlation of clinical, morphological and molecular features. Histopathology. 2007;50:113–30. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2006.02549.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]