RESUMO A frequência de estudos moleculares visando a analisar os promotores de metilação de genes supressores de tumor e proteômica globais na carcinogênese gástrica está aumentando. No entanto, apenas alguns consideraram os diferentes tipos de células do estômago, a localização do tumor e a influência da infecção por Helicobacter pylori e pelo vírus Epstein-Barr (EBV). Diferenças moleculares relacionadas com áreas tumorais anatômicas e histológicas também foram recentemente descritas. Os autores propõem uma classificação molecular de câncer gástrico, dividindo-o em quatro subtipos: tumores positivos para o EBV; tumores microssatélite instáveis; tumores genomicamente estáveis e tumores com instabilidade cromossômica.

ABSTRACT The frequency of molecular studies aimed to analyze promoter methylation of tumor suppressor genes and global proteomics in gastric carcinogenesis is increasing. Nonetheless, only a few considered the different types of stomach cells, the tumor location and the influence of Helicobacter pylori and Epstein Barr virus infection (EBV). Molecular differences relating to anatomical and histological tumor areas were also recently described. The authors propose a molecular classification of gastric cancer, dividing it into four subtypes: tumors positive for EBV; microsatellite unstable tumors; genomically stable tumors and tumors with chromosomal instability.

BACKGROUND: DNA methylation is commonly linked with the silencing of the gene expression for many tumor suppressor genes. As such, determining DNA methylation patterns should aid, in times to come, in the diagnosis and personal treatment for various types of cancers. Here, we analyzed the methylation pattern from five colorectal cancer patients from the Amazon state in Brazil for four tumor suppressor genes, viz.: DAPK, CDH1, CDKN2A, and TIMP2 by employing a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) specific to methylation. Efforts in the study of colorectal cancer are fundamental as it is the third most of highest incidence in the world. RESULTS: Tumor biopsies were methylated in 1/5 (20 %), 2/5 (40 %), 4/5 (80 %), and 4/5 (80 %) for CDH1, CDKN2A, DAPK, and TIMP2 genes, respectively. The margin biopsies were methylated in 3/7 (43 %), 2/7 (28 %), 7/7 (100 %), and 6/7 (86 %) for CDH1, CDKN2A, DAPK, and TIMP2, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings showed DAPK and TIMP2 to be methylated in most samples from both tumor tissues and adjacent non-neoplastic margins; thus presenting distinct methylation patterns. This emphasizes the importance of better understanding of the relation of these patterns with cancer in the context of different populations.