Mutation analysis of genes that control the G1/S cell cycle in melanoma: TP53, CDKN1A, CDKN2A, and CDKN2B.

BACKGROUND The role of genes involved in the control of progression from the G1 to the S phase of the cell cycle in melanoma tumors in not fully known. The aim of our study was to analyse mutations in TP53, CDKN1A, CDKN2A, and CDKN2B genes in melanoma tumors and melanoma cell lines METHODS We analysed 39 primary and metastatic melanomas and 9 melanoma cell lines by single-stranded conformational polymorphism (SSCP). RESULTS The single-stranded technique showed heterozygous defects in the TP53 gene in 8 of 39 (20.5%) melanoma tumors: three new single point mutations in intronic sequences (introns 1 and 2) and exon 10, and three new single nucleotide polymorphisms located in introns 1 and 2 (C to T transition at position 11701 in intron 1; C insertion at position 11818 in intron 2; and C insertion at position 11875 in intron 2). One melanoma tumor exhibited two heterozygous alterations in the CDKN2A exon 1 one of which was novel (stop codon, and missense mutation). No defects were found in the remaining genes. CONCLUSION These results suggest that these genes are involved in melanoma tumorigenesis, although they may be not the major targets. Other suppressor genes that may be informative of the mechanism of tumorigenesis in skin melanomas should be studied.

Lack of correlation between the optimal glycaemic control and coronary micro vascular dysfunction in patients with diabetes mellitus: a cross sectional study.

Background Coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) is associated with cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Optimal glycaemic control does not always preclude future events. We sought to assess the effect of the current target of HBA1c level on the coronary microcirculatory function and identify predictive factors for CMD in T2DM patients. Methods We studied 100 patients with T2DM and 214 patients without T2DM. All of them with a history of chest pain, non-obstructive angiograms and a direct assessment of coronary blood flow increase in response to adenosine and acetylcholine coronary infusion, for evaluation of endothelial independent and dependent CMD. Patients with T2DM were categorized as having optimal (HbA1c < 7 %) vs. suboptimal (HbA1c ≥ 7 %) glycaemic control at the time of catheterization. Results Baseline characteristics and coronary endothelial function parameters differed significantly between T2DM patients and control group. The prevalence of endothelial independent CMD (29.8 vs. 39.6 %, p = 0.40) and dependent CMD (61.7 vs. 62.2 %, p = 1.00) were similar in patients with optimal vs. suboptimal glycaemic control. Age (OR 1.10; CI 95 % 1.04–1.18; p < 0.001) and female gender (OR 3.87; CI 95 % 1.45–11.4; p < 0.01) were significantly associated with endothelial independent CMD whereas glomerular filtrate (OR 0.97; CI 95 % 0.95–0.99; p < 0.05) was significantly associated with endothelial dependent CMD. The optimal glycaemic control was not associated with endothelial independent (OR 0.60, CI 95 % 0.23–1.46; p 0.26) or dependent CMD (OR 0.99, CI 95 % 0.43–2.24; p = 0.98). Conclusions The current target of HBA1c level does not predict a better coronary microcirculatory function in T2DM patients. The appropriate strategy for prevention of CMD in T2DM patients remains to be addressed. Keywords: Endothelial dysfunction; Diabetes mellitus; Coronary microcirculation