Abstract
Background Enteric neurons and enteric glial cells are a part of the enteric nervous system, which is sometimes referred to as the “second brain” of the body. This complex network of neurons controls various functions of the gastrointestinal tract, including motility, secretion, and blood flow. Research has shown that there is a connection between enteric neurons and the development of colorectal cancer, although the exact mechanisms are still being studied.
Methods Because of the potential influence of chromosome mutations that may be common to both gliomas and colorectal cancer, we used the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) to examine these mutations.
Results 166 of 506 lower grade gliomas had the 1p 19q co-deletion. 150 of 616 colorectal cancers had a 1p deletion but no 19q deletion.
Conclusion Colorectal cancer cells adhere to and migrate along the neurons of the enteric nervous system. Therefore, cancer cells might be expected to pick up mutations from neurons and enteric glial cells during recombination events. We hypothesize that the chromosome 1p deletion in colorectal cancer above is not a chance event and instead was acquired from adjacent enteric glial cells. Chromosome 1p co-deletion may confer better survival in patients with lower grade glioma in part because of loss of the MycBP oncogene, which is important in glioma development. Enteric glia might have the chromosome 1p deletion but lack the chromosome 19q deletion of CNS gliomas, making them much less vulnerable to malignant transformation than CNS gliomas. Indeed, evidence exists for a tumor suppressor gene on chromosome 19q associated with human astrocytomas, oligodendrogliomas, and mixed gliomas.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported in part through the computational resources and staff expertise provided by Scientific Computing at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. Research reported in this paper was also supported by the Office of Research Infrastructure of the National Institutes of Health under award numbers S10OD018522 and S10OD026880. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Data sources described in the article are publicly available. https://xenabrowser.net/
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Data sources described in the article are publicly available.
Conflicts of interest: none
This work was supported in part through the computational and data resources and staff expertise provided by Scientific Computing and Data at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and supported by the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) grant UL1TR004419 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences.
Have expanded weaknesses 2.1p and 19q co-deletion in brain tumors is mediated by an unbalanced t(1;19)(q10;p10) chromosomal translocation (21, 22). It is a centric fusion between chromosomes 1 and 19 with subsequent loss of 1p/19q whereas the 1q/19p chromosome is retained. 1p deletion in colon cancer is different. It is of various sizes with a minimum common deleted region of 1p36 (23-26). One group found that the deleted region is between markers D1S199 and D1S234 (26) whereas another group between markers D1S2647 and D1S2644 (27). Thus, the two genetic events, 1p and 19q co-deletion in brain tumors and 1p deletion in colon cancer may not be the same and may not be related. 3.Enteric glial cells were shown to stimulate expansion of colon cancer stem cells and ability to give rise to tumors via paracrine signaling (5, 28).
Data Availability
Data sources described in the article are publicly available.
