EXPRESSION PATTERNS OF MULTIDRUG-RESISTANCE (MDR1), MULTIDRUG RESISTANCE-ASSOCIATED PROTEIN (MRP), GLUTATHIONE-S-TRANSFERASE-PI (GST-PI) AND DNA TOPOISOMERASE-II (TOPO-II) GENES IN RENAL-CELL CARCINOMAS AND NORMAL KIDNEY
Wj. Kim et al., EXPRESSION PATTERNS OF MULTIDRUG-RESISTANCE (MDR1), MULTIDRUG RESISTANCE-ASSOCIATED PROTEIN (MRP), GLUTATHIONE-S-TRANSFERASE-PI (GST-PI) AND DNA TOPOISOMERASE-II (TOPO-II) GENES IN RENAL-CELL CARCINOMAS AND NORMAL KIDNEY, The Journal of urology, 156(2), 1996, pp. 506-511
Purpose: Expression levels of the multidrug-resistance (mdr1), multidr
ug resistance-associated protein (MRP), glutathione-S-transferase-pi (
GST-pi) and DNA topoisomerase II (Topo II) genes in normal kidney and
renal cell carcinomas were analyzed to study the complexity of the rol
es of these genes. Materials and Methods: The reverse transcription-po
lymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay was used with beta(2) microglob
ulin (beta(2) m) as the internal control. Results: In normal kidneys,
the expression levels of the 4 genes in individual normal kidney sampl
es correlated significantly with one another. Comparisons of the expre
ssion levels between normal kidneys and renal cell carcinomas showed t
hat only the mean MRP gene expression level was higher in renal cell c
arcinomas than in normal kidneys (p = 0.018). The expression patterns
of the 4 genes in renal cell carcinomas differed markedly for nonpapil
lary and papillary tumors. The mean MRP/beta(2) m ratio for the papill
ary type was significantly lower than that for the nonpapillary alveol
ar type carcinoma (p = 0.004). The 4 genes showed moderate positive co
rrelations with one another in alveolar type renal carcinoma similar t
o the correlations observed in normal kidneys. In contrast, in papilla
ry type, MRP expression was inversely correlated with mdr1 and Topo II
expression. Conclusion: Differences in cytogenetic changes, origins a
nd natural histories between papillary and nonpapillary carcinoma may
be associated with these distinct expression patterns of the resistanc
e-related genes. Further study is required to clarify whether the diff
erences in the expression patterns between these 2 structural types of
carcinoma affect their chemosensitivities and clinical outcomes.