| Literature DB >> 20459597 |
Marcin Piechota1, Michal Korostynski, Wojciech Solecki, Agnieszka Gieryk, Michal Slezak, Wiktor Bilecki, Barbara Ziolkowska, Elzbieta Kostrzewa, Iwona Cymerman, Lukasz Swiech, Jacek Jaworski, Ryszard Przewlocki.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Various drugs of abuse activate intracellular pathways in the brain reward system. These pathways regulate the expression of genes that are essential to the development of addiction. To reveal genes common and distinct for different classes of drugs of abuse, we compared the effects of nicotine, ethanol, cocaine, morphine, heroin and methamphetamine on gene expression profiles in the mouse striatum.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20459597 PMCID: PMC2898085 DOI: 10.1186/gb-2010-11-5-r48
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genome Biol ISSN: 1474-7596 Impact factor: 13.583
Figure 1Comparison of the reinforcing and activating effects of drugs of abuse in C57BL/6J mice. (a) Bar graph summarizing the development of CPP to morphine, heroin, ethanol, nicotine, methamphetamine, cocaine or saline injections (i.p.). The number of drug conditioning sessions is indicated in parentheses. The level of significance was measured using ANOVA following the Newman-Keuls post-hoc test for drug versus saline; *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01 (n = 6 to 12). (b) Graph summarizing locomotor activation in response to drug treatment measured as increased ambulation in an activity cage during 4 h (n = 5). (c,d) Analysis of correlations between drug-induced changes in gene expression and behavioral effects of drugs in mice (Additional file 9). Scatter plots present the most significant correlation between the behavioral effects (y-axis) and the level of drug-induced transcription (x-axis). Correlation with locomotor activation was computed using data for each particular time point.
Figure 2Hierarchical clustering of drug-dependent transcriptional alterations in mouse striatum. (a) Microarray results are shown as a heat map and include genes with a genome-wide significance from two-way ANOVA of the drug factor. Colored rectangles represent transcript abundance (Additional file 2) 1, 2, 4 and 8 h after injection of the drug indicated above of the gene labeled on the right. The intensity of the color is proportional to the standardized values (between -2 and 2) from each microarray, as indicated on the bar below the heat map image. Clustering was performed using Euclidean distance according to the scale on the left. Major drug-responsive gene transcription patterns are arbitrarily described as 'A', 'B1', 'B2' and 'B3. (b) Gene cluster analysis using data-mining methods (Table 1). The fold cellular enrichment (2, 5 or 20 in a particular cell population, as reported in Cahoy et al. [101]) of the selected transcripts in various cell types is indicated by N (neurons), A (astrocytes) or O (oligodendrocytes). Over-representation of transcription factor binding site (TFBSs), as indicated on the left, was identified using the cREMaG database (see Materials and methods). The statistical significance of enrichment is marked as *P < 0.05.
Functional classes, results from literature, and transcription factor binding sites associated with drug-regulated patterns of gene expression
| Gene pattern | Gene ontology | Literature mining | TFBS over-representation | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Term | Fold ( | Dataset |
| Binding sitesb | Fold ( | |
| A | Protein phosphatase activity | 32.4 (0.0036) | Rodriguez | 1.33E-36 | SRF (MA0083) | 5.7 (0.095) |
| Rhythmic process | 14.7 (0.0166) | Jayanthi | 1.04E-13 | CREB1 (MA0018) | 3.9 (0.0068) | |
| Phosphotransferase activity | 10.7(<0.0001) | Lemberger | 5.88E-13 | |||
| Protein dimerization activity | 3.6 (0.0203) | Ryan | 3.52E-12 | |||
| Regulation of transcription | 3 (0.0001) | Impey | 3.87E-12 | |||
| B1 | Small GTPase mediated signal transduction | 5.9 (0.0085) | Sanchis-Segura | 8.96E-29 | Foxd3 (MA0041) | 4.4 (0.02) |
| Apoptosis | 5 (0.0018) | Treadwell | 1.87E-11 | Foxa2 (MA0047) | 4.2 (0.043) | |
| Cell cycle | 4.7 (0.0025) | Sato | 1.57E-08 | FOXF2 (MA0030) | 4 (0.025) | |
| Intracellular signaling cascade | 3.2 (0.0079) | Lemberger | 9.51E-07 | Evi1 (MA0029) | 3.8 (0.036) | |
| Intracellular | 1.5 (0.0017) | Ryan | 8.90E-07 | |||
| B2 | Enzyme inhibitor activity | 8.9 (0.041) | Korostynski | 1.15E-29 | NR1H2 (MA0115) | 3.5 (0.288) |
| Apoptosis | 5.9 (0.0007) | Ryan | 1.41E-18 | Ar (MA0007) | 3.3 (0.074) | |
| Response to stress | 4.2 (0.01) | McClung | 4.23E-17 | NR2F1 (MA0017) | 3.3 (0.0428) | |
| Cell differentiation | 2.5 (0.026) | Treadwell | 3.58E-13 | |||
| Intracellular | 1.4 (0.0074) | Chen | 1.47E-07 | |||
| B3 | Regulation of developmental process | 9.1 (0.0364) | Korostynski | 3.75E-15 | Fos (MA0099) | 6.7 (0.0103) |
| Magnesium ion binding | 8.5 (0.0416) | McClung | 3.52E-10 | NR3C1 (MA0113) | 5.6 (0.0058) | |
| Anatomical structure morphogenesis | 3.9 (0.0261) | Ryan | 3.22E-08 | Ar (MA0007) | 4.7 (0.0021) | |
| Calcium ion binding | 3.5 (0.1894) | Treadwell | 9.56E-06 | TEAD1 (MA0090) | 3.9 (0.0302) | |
| Transmembrane transporter activity | 3.4 (0.1973) | Hasan | 7.61E-05 | |||
The complete results of data-mining are presented in Additional files 7 and 8. aStatistical significance of gene enrichment was computed using algorithms implemented in DAVID 2008 database and ErmineJ software. bConserved promoter regions +5,000/-1,000 bp from the transcription start site were analyzed (see Materials and methods). cFold change of the detected number of identified transcription factor binding sites (TFBSs) compared to the number expected by chance. dStatistical significance of over-representation of TFBS-containing genes compared to a number expected by chance was computed using a z-score test.
Figure 3Validation of drug-induced regulation of gene expression. (a) Bar graphs summarizing qPCR-based measurement of changes in selected gene expression after the indicated drug injection, presented as fold change over the saline control group with standard error (n = 5 to 6). Significant differences in the main effects from multivariate ANOVA for drug treatment are indicated by asterisks (***P < 0.001) and from the Bonferroni post-hoc test (versus appropriate saline control) by dollar signs (P < 0.05). (b) Bar graphs summarizing qPCR-based measurement of selected gene expression after morphine (MOR) injection in the home cage or during CPP acquisition and expression. Results are presented as fold change over the saline control group (SAL) with standard error (n = 6 to 7). Significant differences in transcript abundance between the morphine-treated and control animals obtained by a t-test are indicated by dollar signs (P < 0.05).
Figure 4Pharmacological dissection of transcriptional networks from the drug-induced gene expression profile. Microarray results are shown as heat maps that include drug-responsive genes with genome-wide significance (Figure 2a). Colored rectangles represent transcript abundance and are labeled below the heat map. Each row contains the mean value from three independent array replicates, where samples from two mice were pooled and used for each microarray. The intensity of the color is proportional to the standardized values (between -2 and 2) from each microarray, as indicated on the bar below the cluster images. The names of enzyme inhibitors or receptor antagonists (inhibitor/antagonist) are indicated on the left. The time scheme of each experiment (a-g) is presented on the right. The arrow indicates (two-tailed t-test, P < 0.05) up- or down-regulation of the expression of a particular gene in comparisons between the drug plus vehicle and saline plus vehicle groups (upper row on each heat map) or drug plus inhibitor/antagonist and drug plus vehicle groups (bottom row). The overall influence was measured as a percentage of inhibition of the drug-induced transcriptional response, with 0% representing no effect and 100% representing complete inhibition. The statistical significance of influence was measured as a comparison of the mean fold change between the drug plus inhibitor/antagonist and saline plus vehicle versus drug plus vehicle and saline plus vehicle groups. The level of significance was measured using a two-tailed t-test: *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001. CRF, corticotrophin-releasing factor; HDAC, histone deacetylase.
Figure 5Brain and cellular distribution of two selected drug-regulated genes. (a) False-colored micrographs representing the relative level of the indicated mRNA 4 h after saline (SAL) or 20 mg/kg morphine (MOR) treatment revealed by in situ hybridization. Five coronal sections of mouse brain are presented, containing: (I) dorsal striatum and nucleus accumbens, (II) mid striatum, (III and IV) dorsal hippocampus and (V) ventral hippocampus/mesencephalon. (b) Confocal fluorescence micrographs showing coronal sections of striatum after immunohistochemical staining against SGK (Sgk1, red in the upper panel), GILZ (Tsc22d3, red in the lower panel), NeuN (neuronal marker, green, left) and S100B (glial marker, green, right). Scale bar: 50 μm. (c) Immunoblot of striatal lysates from mice 4 h after injection with morphine (MOR, 20 mg/kg i.p.) or saline (SAL) with antibodies against SGK and GILZ. The level of significance was measured using a two-tailed t-test: *P < 0.05. Error bars indicate standard error.
Figure 6The effects of . Representative micrographs and three-dimensional Imaris reconstructions of dendritic segments of hippocampal and cortical neurons are presented. The neurons were transfected with pSUPER (control) or GILZsh mix or SGK1sh mix in pSUPER on day in vitro 14 for 3 days. GFP was used to highlight transfected cell morphology.
Figure 7A proposed scheme of the core regulatory network of drug-induced molecular mechanisms and gene expression alterations in the striatum. Small nodes represent transcripts belonging to the identified gene expression patterns. The color of each node reflects its gene pattern membership: blue, A; yellow, B1; orange, B2; and red, B3. Thin blue edges between the nodes indicate a correlation between the expression profiles of two genes. Functional connections were implemented based on our results from literature mining, pharmacological experiments and in silico predictions of TFBSs. Large hexagonal nodes represent elements of drug-activated signaling pathways. Solid and dashed edges between the nodes indicate direct or indirect interactions, respectively, as suggested by the literature. A red node color and thin red edge indicate a pharmacologically verified connection (Figure 4). Green triangle nodes represent gene transcription regulatory elements. Thin green edges indicate positive detection of TFBSs in a promoter region of a particular gene. Transparent arrows suggest the influence of gene expression changes on addiction-related traits based on the correlations between the transcriptional and phenotypic response (Figure 1c, d; Additional file 9).