BackgroundBeclin 1 and Beclin 2 are autophagy-related proteins that show similar amino acid sequences and domain structures. Beclin 1 established the first connection between autophagy and cancer. However, the role of Beclin 2 in cancer is unclear. The aims of this study were to analyze Beclin 1 and Beclin 2 expressions in oral cancer tissues and in cell lines, and to evaluate their possible roles in cancer progression.MethodsWe investigated Beclin 1 and Beclin 2 expressions by immunohistochemistry in 195 cases of oral cancer. The prognostic roles of Beclin 1 and Beclin 2 were analyzed statistically. In vitro, overexpression and knockdown of Beclin proteins were performed on an oral cancer cell line, SAS. The immunofluorescence and autophagy flux assays confirmed that Beclin proteins were involved in autophagy. The impacts of Beclin 1 and Beclin 2 on autophagy and tumor growth were evaluated by conversion of LC3-I to LC3-II and by clonogenic assays, respectively.ResultsOral cancer tissues exhibited aberrant expressions of Beclin 1 and Beclin 2. The cytoplasmic Beclin 1 and Beclin 2 expressions were unrelated in oral cancer tissues. In survival analyses, high cytoplasmic Beclin 1 expression was associated with low disease specific survival, and negative nuclear Beclin 1 expression was associated with high recurrent free survival. Patients with either high or low cytoplasmic Beclin 2 expression had significantly lower overall survival and disease specific survival rates than those with moderate expression. In oral cancer cells, overexpression of either Beclin 1 or Beclin 2 led to autophagy activation and increased clonogenic survival; knockdown of Beclin 2 impaired autophagy and increased clonogenic survival.ConclusionsOur results indicated that distinct patterns of Beclin 1 and Beclin 2 were associated with aggressive clinical outcomes. Beclin 1 overexpression, as well as Beclin 2 overexpression and depletion, contributed to tumor growth. These findings suggest Beclin proteins are associated with tumorigenesis.
People with oral cavity cancer were more likely to continue smoking after the treatment if they had low social support, depression, greater nicotine dependence and poor social-emotional function. Healthcare professionals should pay more attention to social support, psychological status and nicotine dependence of people who were treated for oral cavity cancer.
Background: Clear aligner therapy has an aesthetic advantage over fixed appliance therapy. However, to our knowledge, no study has objectively compared patient orthodontic and aesthetic outcomes between clear aligner and fixed appliance therapies administered after orthognathic surgery (OGS). Methods: This study included patients with no history of congenital craniofacial deformities who underwent surgery-first OGS and received clear aligner or fixed appliance therapy. The patients' grades on the Dental Health Component (DHC) and Aesthetic Component of the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need and scores on the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index were calculated before OGS (T0), after OGS (T1), and after orthodontic therapy (T2). Results: This study included 33 patients (clear aligner therapy, n = 19; fixed appliance therapy, n = 14). No considerable between-group differences were noted in the DHC and AC grades at T0, T1, or T2. Furthermore, percentage of reduction in the PAR index score was more significant in the clear aligner group (74.4%) than in the fixed appliance group (63.2%) from T0 to T1 (P = 0.035); however, no between-group differences were noted from T1 to T2 or from T0 to T2. Both groups exhibited substantially improved DHC grades, Aesthetic Component grades, and PAR index scores at T1 and T2. Conclusions: Patient outcomes were similar between the clear aligner and fixed appliance groups after orthodontic therapy. However, the former group exhibited more favorable immediate results after OGS than did the latter group. Thus, as an adjunct therapy for patients with malocclusion, clear aligner therapy may be more effective than fixed appliance therapy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.