Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: O6-Methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase protein expression by immunohistochemistry in brain and non-brain systemic tumours: systematic review and meta-analysis of correlation with methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction
Author: Brell Doval, Marta
Ibáñez, Javier
Tortosa i Moreno, Avelina
Keywords: Expressió gènica
Gene expression
Issue Date: 26-Jan-2011
Publisher: BioMed Central
Abstract: Background: The DNA repair protein O6-Methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) confers resistance to alkylating agents. Several methods have been applied to its analysis, with methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction (MSP) the most commonly used for promoter methylation study, while immunohistochemistry (IHC) has become the most frequently used for the detection of MGMT protein expression. Agreement on the best and most reliable technique for evaluating MGMT status remains unsettled. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the correlation between IHC and MSP. Methods A computer-aided search of MEDLINE (1950-October 2009), EBSCO (1966-October 2009) and EMBASE (1974-October 2009) was performed for relevant publications. Studies meeting inclusion criteria were those comparing MGMT protein expression by IHC with MGMT promoter methylation by MSP in the same cohort of patients. Methodological quality was assessed by using the QUADAS and STARD instruments. Previously published guidelines were followed for meta-analysis performance. Results Of 254 studies identified as eligible for full-text review, 52 (20.5%) met the inclusion criteria. The review showed that results of MGMT protein expression by IHC are not in close agreement with those obtained with MSP. Moreover, type of tumour (primary brain tumour vs others) was an independent covariate of accuracy estimates in the meta-regression analysis beyond the cut-off value. Conclusions Protein expression assessed by IHC alone fails to reflect the promoter methylation status of MGMT. Thus, in attempts at clinical diagnosis the two methods seem to select different groups of patients and should not be used interchangeably.
Note: Reproducció del document publicat a:
It is part of: BMC Cancer, 2011, vol. 11, núm. 35
Related resource:
ISSN: 1471-2407
Appears in Collections:Articles publicats en revistes (Infermeria Fonamental i Clínica)
Articles publicats en revistes (Institut d'lnvestigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL))

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
1471-2407-11-35-S9.DOC90 kBMicrosoft WordView/Open
1471-2407-11-35-S6.DOC42 kBMicrosoft WordView/Open
1471-2407-11-35-S4.DOC111.5 kBMicrosoft WordView/Open
1471-2407-11-35.pdf534 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
1471-2407-11-35-S2.DOC27.5 kBMicrosoft WordView/Open
1471-2407-11-35-S3.DOC87 kBMicrosoft WordView/Open
1471-2407-11-35-S1.DOC27 kBMicrosoft WordView/Open
1471-2407-11-35-S5.DOC286 kBMicrosoft WordView/Open
1471-2407-11-35-S7.DOC27 kBMicrosoft WordView/Open
1471-2407-11-35-S8.DOC29.5 kBMicrosoft WordView/Open

This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons