An INTERVIEW with Dr. Keith Skubitz
ESI Special Topics,
September 2005
Citing URL - http://www.esi-topics.com/fibroids/interviews/KeithSkubitz.html
n
the interview below, Special Topics correspondent Gary Taubes
talks with Dr. Keith Skubitz about his research involving
uterine fibroids. Dr. Skubitz is the lead author of two of the
20 most-cited papers on uterine fibroids over the past two
years: "Differential gene expression in uterine leiomyoma"
(Journal of Laboratory and Clinical Medicine 141:
297-308, 2003), and "Differential gene expression in
leiomyosarcoma" (Cancer 98: 1029-38, 2003). Dr.
Skubitz is a Professor of Medicine in the Division of
Hematology, Oncology, and Transplantation at the University of
Minnesota Medical School.
|
As
an oncologist interested mostly, it seems, in malignancies, how did
you get into the study of uterine fibroids?
Well, we were interested in looking at gene expression in
sarcomas. Sarcomas arise in different types of connective tissue,
including muscle, and there are many subtypes of sarcomas. As a
starting point for this we wanted to look at smooth muscle sarcomas,
known as leiomyosarcomas. Sometimes leiomyosarcomas can arise from
leiomyomas, which are the kind of benign tumor in uterine fibroids,
but usually that’s not the case. So we thought it might be
interesting to do a systematic analysis. We would start by looking
at what genes are expressed in leiomyomas, and compare them to the
genes expressed in normal myometrium.
Then we could compare them with leiomyosarcomas in other muscles.
That’s why we did the leiomyomas. As it turned out, and as we
published in a later paper, we got some leads for leiomyosarcomas
that we wouldn’t have picked up if we hadn’t done leiomyomas
first.
So
what is the primary difference between leiomyomas and leiomyosarcomas?
|

“…we examined a huge number of genes, looking for the difference between normal tissue and benign tissue, so that we could identify which of these genes are unique to the benign tumor. This could potentially provide a target for therapy and tell us something about how these things come about and grow.”
|
|
The main difference is that leiomyomas are benign and
leiomyosarcomas are malignant. Although most leiomyosarcomas don’t
arise in uterine tissue, a fair percentage do. We have smooth muscle
almost everywhere in the body, but uterine muscle is basically all
smooth muscle.
Your
co-author is also a Skubitz. Is that your wife?
Yes, we’re a team. She’s on the faculty in a different
department, and we do a lot of research together.
What
were the primary observations in your highly cited 2003 Journal of
Laboratory and Clinical Medicine article?
We not only looked at differences in gene expression between
leiomyomas and normal uterine muscle from which it arises, but we
also looked at gene expression in a wide variety of other normal
tissues. That made it a much more extensive study. We compared the
leiomyoma gene expression with 18 types of normal tissue—for
example, kidney, liver, lung, muscle, etc.—and each set contained
a sizable number of samples. We were able to identify genes uniquely
expressed in leiomyomas among these normal tissues.
Do
you think that’s why it’s been cited so frequently in such a short
time?
It’s probably because it was, first of all, a big study. There
were a lot of samples, more than 250. Second, at the time, it was
probably the most extensive number of genes ever looked at in
leiomyomas. A third point would be the fact that we were able to
look at these genes in many different tumors and normal tissues.
What
did you learn about leiomyosarcomas from this research, and where did
you publish that paper?
That research was published in Cancer in 2003. We used
some of the genes identified in the paper we’ve been talking
about, and found that they are also expressed in leiomyosarcomas. As
I said, we wouldn’t have found them otherwise. They’re only
expressed in a subset of leiomyosarcomas. Doublecortin, for
instance, is a gene expressed in leiomyosarcomas. We also found
other genes over-expressed in leiomyosarcomas. One reason to do
these assays is so we can then see if a gene is expressed more in
cancer than in normal tissue. In the case of doublecortin, we found
that it seems to be expressed in some uterine leiomyosarcomas, but
not all of them.
Does
that tell you anything about the cause or progression of
leiomyosarcomas?
That’s a difficult question to answer. But, however these
leiomyosarcomas work, it’s being partly described by these data.
Clearly what we found there is very important in how they work, but
it doesn’t really tell us how to put it all together to fully
understand it.
Was
there an element of serendipity in your research?
I think it’s kind of lucky that we did the leiomyoma paper
first in terms of the leiomyosarcoma paper. If we hadn’t, we never
would have found the doublecortin expression in leiomyosarcoma, for
example.
Why
did you publish the leiomyosarcoma paper in Cancer and the
uterine fibroid paper in the Journal of Laboratory and Clinical
Medicine?
We prefer not to publish everything in the same place. I think
these days the choice of what journal you go to isn’t as important
as it used to be. Now almost everybody finds papers of interest by
searching on PubMed.
Did
you expect the leiomyoma paper to be so quickly influential?
I’m surprised. I don’t really know how often my papers are
cited. I don’t pay attention to that. Certainly, leiomyomas are a
common problem, and most women get some, so maybe that contributes
to the citation rate.
What’s
the hardest part of doing this work?
When you’re working with these DNA microarrays, each sample
comes up with 40,000 to 60,000 numbers—that’s per sample. So to
do the analysis, you have to rely on certain statistical approaches,
and you can come up with false positives and negatives when you do
that. How you analyze the data is very important, and it’s not
always perfectly straightforward what the best way to do it is.
There’s always more than one way, so figuring out which one is the
best without being misled is a challenge.
What’s
the next step in your research?
We’re continuing to look at gene expression in different types
of sarcoma along with some other malignancies. We’re not really
following up on the leiomyomas per se. We’re looking more
at the malignant aspects of tumors. We’re looking for potential
targets in these leiomyosarcomas and other tumors that wouldn’t be
present in normal tissue. If we find these, then we can exploit
them. We’re also trying to identify subgroups that would have
practical significance within some of the common tumor types.
What
message would you want to pass on to the general public about your
research?
The message that comes out of this is that we used a large number
of samples of leiomyomas and normal tissue; we examined a huge
number of genes, looking for differences between normal tissue and
leiomyomas, so that we could identify which of these genes are
unique to the benign tumor. We found several genes quite selectively
expressed in leiomyomas. This could potentially provide a target for
therapy and tell us something about how these tumors come about and
grow.
How
has this research changed over the past decade?
That’s easy. We didn’t even have a glimmer that we could do
this type of thing 10 years ago. Microarray technology was first
described about 10 years ago, and commercial development came later.
As soon as we learned about it and realized we could do it, that’s
what we wanted to do. Ten years ago, it would have been
mind-boggling to think that such a thing was possible. It’s still
kind of amazing.
Keith M. Skubitz, M.D.
University of Minnesota Medical School
Minneapolis, MN, USA
|
ESI Special Topics,
September 2005
Citing URL - http://www.esi-topics.com/fibroids/interviews/KeithSkubitz.html
|
|
|