
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Molecular Oncology, Markers, Clinical Correlates |
Departments of Internal Medicine [B-S. S.], Pathology [H-B. Y., A-H. H.], and Medical Technology [J-J. W.], and Institute of Basic Science [S-M. S.], Medical College, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 70428, Taiwan
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Experimental Design: Three hundred subjects were enrolled in this study: half were relatives of 50 H. pylori-infected gastric cancer patients, and half were relatives of 50 H. pylori-infected duodenal ulcer (DU) patients (controls). Each relative underwent endoscopy to detect H. pylori infection and related gastric histology. One hundred and twenty GCFs were found to have H. pylori infection. After H. pylori eradication, 90 of the 120 GCFs were followed up with annual endoscopy examinations over the next 2 years. Gastric COX-2 intensity in all of the specimens collected from these patients was immunochemically stained and graded from 0 to 4.
Results: H. pylori infection, gastric atrophy, and intestinal metaplasia (IM) were more prevalent in GCFs than in relatives of H. pylori-infected patients with DUs (P < 0.05). H. pylori-infected GCFs also showed a greater COX-2 intensity than H. pylori-infected relatives of patients with DUs (89.1% versus 62.7%, P < 0.001; relative risk: 4.9; 95% confidence interval: approximately 2.3410.29). Among the H. pylori-infected GCFs, COX-2 intensity correlated with atrophy and IM (P < 0.001). After H. pylori eradication, gastric COX-2 expression disappeared only in those relatives without IM (P < 0.001).
Conclusions: GCFs are more likely to show greater gastric COX-2 expression and a higher incidence of precancerous lesions after H. pylori infection than the relatives of H. pylori-infected patients with only DUs. H. pylori eradication can reverse gastric COX-2 expression in patients without IM but not in patients with IM.
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
H. pylori infection tends to cluster within families and is partially responsible for the familial aggregation of environmental factors associated with stomach cancer (8) . El-Omar et al. (9) additionally extended research on family clustering and GC by showing that H. pylori infection can increase the prevalence of precancerous changes in the GCFs as compared with the relatives of non-GC patients. These findings support the notion that H. pylori infection plays a more aggravating role in gastric carcinogenesis in the first-degree GCFs than in the relatives of H. pylori-infected patients who do not have GC. For this reason, we believe that treatment for H. pylori infection should be provided for the members of families with a history of GC who have premalignant lesions. However, family history should not be the only indication for H. pylori eradication (10) . Molecular evidence (especially the consequences of the host-bacterial interaction) might also reveal subjects with H. pylori infection who are at particular risk of GC. Such an interaction may also explain why H. pylori plays a more pernicious role in GC development in the GCFs as opposed to infected subjects without a family history of GC. Molecular evidence could also explain the family clustering of GC.
Gastric COX-2 expression is now recognized as an early event in gastric carcinogenesis (11) and can be highly up-regulated in the setting of H. pylori-infected premalignant gastric changes (12, 13, 14) . Moreover, gastric COX-2 expression has been proven to positively correlate with the presence of H. pylori infection (14) . Therefore, we presume that the members of GC families are predisposed to greater gastric COX-2 expression and, thus, to more and earlier precancerous lesions after H. pylori infection than the members of families without a history of GC.
In the present study, we examined whether H. pylori infection is more prevalent in the GCFs and whether it plays a more toxic role in gastric carcinogenesis after host-bacterial interaction than in the relatives of non-GC patients. One part of this study (a large-scale, controlled study) was a prospective 2-year follow-up designed to determine whether H. pylori eradication can reverse gastric COX-2 expression. This study is believed to have the longest follow-up of any study determining whether reducing COX-2 expression by H. pylori eradication can be related to different H. pylori-related histological patterns observed before eradication therapy. We expect that the present study offers promising histological evidence that the cancer risk can be reversed through the eradication of H. pylori infection.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
After granting informed consent, each subject underwent gastric biopsy via panendoscopy to obtain tissue for histology studies and H. pylori cultures. Five gastric biopsy specimens, two from the antrum, two from the corpus, and one from the cardia, were obtained during the endoscopy (15) . A specimen from each of the three sites was stained with H&E and modified Giemsa stains. In addition, the second specimen from the antrum was stained immunohistochemically to show the intensity of COX-2 expression. The remaining antrum and corpus specimens were used for H. pylori cultures (16) .
Also examined in this study were the GCFs who had been proven to have H. pylori infection (shown by positive culture or histology findings). These subjects then received a 1-week regimen of anti-H. pylori triple therapy (i.e., amoxicillin, 1 g; clarithromycin, 500 mg; and omeprazole, 20 mg twice daily). H. pylori-infected family members with an allergy to penicillin or clarithromycin were not included in the study. Six weeks after the triple therapy, these subjects then underwent a [13C]urea breath test to determine whether the H. pylori infection had been successfully eradicated (17) . In those patients in whom treatment had been successful, endoscopy was repeated annually for the next 2 years to obtain a gastric biopsy specimen for H. pylori-related histology and COX-2 immunohistochemistry studies.
Analysis of H. pylori-Related Histology.
The same pathologist, who was blinded to the endoscopic findings and culture results, examined the gastric histology specimen. The following features were scored using the updated Sydney System: acute inflammation (range, 03), chronic inflammation (range, 03), atrophic change (absence, 0; presence, 1), and IM (absence, 0; presence, score 13; Ref. 18
). The total acute and chronic inflammation scores were a sum of the scores for the specimens from the three sites and ranged from 0 to 9. AT was defined as the presence of atrophy only in the antrum (score of 1 for atrophy in the antrum but 0 for atrophy in the corpus and cardia). Pangastric atrophy, which was given a score of 1, was defined as atrophy in all three of the sites: the antrum, corpus, and cardia. In this study, if one gastric biopsy specimen with a score of 1 showed metaplastic cells (goblet cells) involving at least 5% of the upper third of the gastric mucosa, this was deemed IM. If two or more biopsy specimens were found to contain goblet cells on <5% of the upper third of the mucosa, the IM was considered global.
Immunohistochemistry Studies for the Gastric Expression of COX-2.
Tissue immunohistochemical staining was performed using monoclonal antibodies with COX-2 (Cayman Chemical Company, Ann Arbor, MI) and the DAKO-labeled streptavidin-biotin 2 system, peroxidase complex kit (LSAB 2KIT/horseradish peroxidase RB/BO, 3-amino-9-ethylcarbazole; Dako, Carpinteria, CA). Resected gastric tissues were fixed in 10% buffered formalin. Specimens were embedded in paraffin, serially sectioned at a thickness of 4 µm, placed onto microscope slides, and then deparaffinized. The slides were immersed for 10 min in 0.3% peroxide in methanol to stop the endogenous peroxidase activity. Nonspecific binding sites were saturated with 0.3% BSA. Tissue sections were treated with primary antibody against COX-2 at a dilution of 1:100 and then incubated in a humidified chamber at room temperature for 1 h. The DAKO-labeled streptavidin-biotin 2 system, peroxidase complex kit was adapted for blocking, linkage, and labeling for staining according to the manufacturers instructions. 3-Amino-9-ethylcarbazole was selected as the chromogen. Sections were then counterstained with hematoxylin. For a negative control, nonimmune rabbit
immunoglobulin was substituted for the primary antibody. The intensity of gastric COX-2 expression was graded in the epithelial cells of the mucosa as follows: 0 (negative), 1 (<5% cells showing positive staining), 2 (530% cells showing positive staining), 3 (3060% cells showing positive staining), or 4 (>60% cells showing positive staining; Ref. 14
). The other investigator, who was blinded to the severity of H. pylori-related histology findings and the study group of the subject the specimen came from, scored the intensity of COX-2 expression.
COX-2 staining was confirmed in 30 randomly selected tissues by Western blotting. In this analysis, each tissue was first homogenized in an ice-cold radioimmunoprecipitation buffer (11) . The mixture was then centrifuged (13,000 rpm for 10 min at 4°C) to produce a supernatant, which was then used to measure the protein concentration, done with a Bio-Rad Protein Assay kit (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA). Using 8% SDS-PAGE, 30 µg of COX-2 protein was extracted and transferred to a nitrocellulose membrane. The membrane was then immersed in 0.5% skim milk to block the reaction, and then incubated with rabbit polyclonal IgG specific for human COX-2 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology) for 1 h and with peroxidase-labeled goat antirabbit IgG (1:2,000) for an additional 1 h at 25°C. The reaction band was visualized by the enhanced chemiluminescence system (11) .
Statistics.
Students t test and paired t test were applied where appropriate to determine parametric differences. Pearsons
2 test was used for assessing nonparametric proportions. The relative risk and 95% CI were also tested in the different study groups. The correlation coefficients were calculated using the nonparametric Spearman rank test. All of the tests were two-tailed, with a P < 0.05 taken as significant.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Gastric tissue is predisposed to atrophy and IM after H. pylori infection (18)
. Indeed, Table 1
shows that in the relatives of both GC and non-GC families in our study, the prevalence rates of AT and IM were significantly higher in H. pylori-infected relatives than in relatives without H. pylori infection (P < 0.05). In addition, among the relatives with H. pylori infection, the prevalence rates of AT and IM were higher in those from GC families than in those from the non-GC families (AT: 70.8% versus 40%, P < 0.01; IM: 55% versus 26.6%, P < 0.05). These findings confirm that H. pylori infection could predispose to the development of AT and IM. Moreover, the likelihood of H. pylori infection inducing AT and IM was significantly different between the age-matched H. pylori-infected GCFs and those from non-GC families.
Our findings are compatible with those of El-Omar et al. (9) who found that GCFs were at higher risk for precancerous changes after H. pylori infection. However, the exact reason why H. pylori infection plays different roles in GCFs and non-GC patients warrants additional molecular studies that focus on the specific interaction between host and bacterial virulence factors.
CagA of H. pylori is a well-known virulence factor of H. pylori that has shown close links to GC (2 , 10) . Nevertheless, in Taiwan, the prevalence of CagA-positive H. pylori infection is extremely high, approaching 100% (16) . Therefore, the exposure to such a virulence factor existed equally for the relatives of both GC and non-GC families. Therefore, it is possible that, in addition to the bacterial virulence factor, there are also host factors in H. pylori-infected GCFs that predispose them to the development of precancerous lesions.
One possible host factor might be the IL-1 ß gene, which could be highly up-regulated by H. pylori infection (8
, 19) . IL-1 polymorphisms have also been significantly related to a risk of GCs (20)
. In addition, besides IL-1ß, several proinflammatory genotypes of tumor necrosis factor
and IL-10 of the H. pylori-infected host could also serve as host factors that increase the risk for distal GC (21)
. Barrios-Rodiles et al. (22)
have also proposed that certain bacterial lipopolysaccharides, IL-10, tumor necrosis factor
, and IL-1ß, could all significantly enhance COX-2 expression. Therefore, it would be interesting to determine whether these host factors induce precancerous lesions and increase the rate of GC after H. pylori infection caused by higher COX-2 expression in the stomach.
Our findings revealed that the GCFs, who showed a higher GC clustering risk, were significantly more likely (4.9-fold) to have a strong gastric COX-2 intensity after H. pylori infection (Fig. 1)
. Table 2
shows that such gastric COX-2 expression was correlated significantly with the presence of H. pylori infection, AT, and IM (P < 0.001). Taken together, our findings appear to show a positive molecular linkage that explains why the so-called host factors can increase the risk of GC after H. pylori infection.
Nevertheless, gastric COX-2 expression can be found in patients with and without precancerous lesions after H. pylori infection, without their being at particular risk for GC (11, 12, 13, 14)
. This suggests that gastric COX-2 expression serves only as an early event in gastric carcinogenesis (11)
. Again, it will be interesting to determine whether higher COX-2 expression in the H. pylori-infected GCFs really accounts for the higher prevalence rate of precancerous lesions, such as AT and IM. Fig. 2
shows that the prevalence rates of AT and IM were higher in the H. pylori-infected GCFs showing strong COX-2 expression than in those showing weak COX-2 expression or no COX-2 impression (P < 0.001). Because this finding was not observed in the relatives of non-GC families, certain host factors likely exist that enhance gastric COX-2 expression in these individuals. In turn, the higher gastric COX-2 intensity enhances the development of AT and IM in these patients, and places them at a higher risk for cancer after H. pylori infection. Therefore, a longitudinal therapeutic study would be valuable in clarifying whether higher gastric COX-2 expression could be reversed by anti-H. pylori therapy in the relatives of cancer families, who genetically should have exerted the clustering of poor host factors to yield a higher COX-2 intensity to induce more precancerous lesions.
Fig. 3
shows 90 GCFs who have completed the 2-year follow-up after H. pylori eradication. The mean gastric COX-2 intensity of these 90 patients in the first year (1.34) and the second year (1.01) after H. pylori eradication was significantly lower than the intensity before therapy (2.51; P < 0.001, paired t test). We believe that these data constitute an initial rationale for beginning anti-H. pylori therapy to produce COX-2 regression in the H. pylori-infected GCFs at high risk for GC. Indeed, our study confirmed that anti-H. pylori therapy could significantly decrease gastric COX-2 expression in relatives with a high GC risk. However, because the mean COX-2 intensity in the second year remained
1.01, some patients might have had persistent COX-2 expression despite the success of H. pylori eradication. In our view, an appropriate next step would be to determine whether the different histological backgrounds surveyed in this study could have a bearing on the persistence of COX-2 expression in the stomach.
As shown in Table 4
, anti-H. pylori therapy can decrease gastric COX-2 intensity at the end of the second year but cannot completely reverse gastric COX-2 expression in patients with IM. The data from our large-scale study with a 2-year follow-up are compatible with the data from the study of Sung et al. (14
, 23)
, who conducted a 1-year follow-up and found that anti-H. pylori therapy could not reverse COX-2 expression in the presence of IM (14
, 23) . Because anti-H. pylori therapy cannot reverse COX-2 expression in these individuals, there is a need for an additional intervention such as the COX-2 inhibitor to reduce the cancer risk in those with precancerous lesions. Similarly, Table 3
shows that COX-2 expression declined significantly in 40% and 66.7% of patients without IM during the first and second year after therapy, respectively (McNemar test, P < 0.05). These positive data support the initiation of anti-H. pylori therapy as early as possible to abolish the GC risk in patients without IM.
In summary, the GCFs are predisposed to higher gastric COX-2 expression and the development of precancerous lesions after H. pylori infection than nongastric patients. Although eradication of H. pylori infection may significantly reverse gastric COX-2 expression in such patients without IM, the possibility of this is still limited for patients with IM. Additional clinical trials of the COX-2 inhibitor to reverse COX-2 expression are called for in patients with IM in the stomach.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
This work was supported by Grant NSC91-2314-B-006-001 from the National Science Council, Taiwan.
1 To whom requests for reprints should be addressed, at Department of Internal Medicine, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, 138 Sheng Li Road, Tainan, Taiwan 70428. Phone: 886-6-2353535, extension 5368; Fax: 886-6-2370941; E-mail: sheubs{at}mail.ncku.edu.tw ![]()
2 The abbreviations used are: GC, gastric cancer; COX, cyclooxygenase; IM, intestinal metaplasia; AT, gastric atrophy; DU, duodenal ulcer; GCF, relatives or family members of gastric cancer patients; CI, confidence interval; IL, interleukin. ![]()
Received 1/28/03; revised 4/17/03; accepted 4/22/03.
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
. J. Immunol., 163: 963-969, 1999.This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
B.-S. Sheu, H.-C. Cheng, A.-W. Kao, S.-T. Wang, Y.-J. Yang, H.-B. Yang, and J.-J. Wu Pretreatment with Lactobacillus- and Bifidobacterium-containing yogurt can improve the efficacy of quadruple therapy in eradicating residual Helicobacter pylori infection after failed triple therapy. Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, April 1, 2006; 83(4): 864 - 869. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Cancer Research | Clinical Cancer Research |
| Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention | Molecular Cancer Therapeutics |
| Molecular Cancer Research | Cancer Prevention Research |
| Cancer Prevention Journals Portal | Cancer Reviews Online |
| Annual Meeting Education Book | Meeting Abstracts Online |