The GLI (GLI1/GLI2) transcription factors have been implicated in the development and progression of prostate cancer although our understanding of how they actually contribute to the biology of these common tumours is limited. We observed that GLI reporter activity was higher in normal (PNT-2) and tumourigenic (DU145 and PC-3) androgen-independent cells compared to androgen-dependent LNCaP prostate cancer cells and, accordingly, GLI mRNA levels were also elevated. Ectopic expression of GLI1 or the constitutively active ΔNGLI2 mutant induced a distinct cobblestone-like morphology in LNCaP cells that, regarding the former, correlated with increased GLI2 as well as expression of the basal/stem-like markers CD44, β1-integrin, ΔNp63 and BMI1, and decreased expression of the luminal marker AR (androgen receptor). LNCaP-GLI1 cells were viable in the presence of the AR inhibitor bicalutamide and gene expression profiling revealed that the transcriptome of LNCaP-GLI1 cells was significantly closer to DU145 and PC-3 cells than to control LNCaP-pBP (empty vector) cells, as well as identifying LCN2/NGAL as a highly induced transcript which is associated with hormone independence in breast and prostate cancer. Functionally, LNCaP-GLI1 cells displayed greater clonal growth and were more invasive than control cells but they did not form colonies in soft agar or prostaspheres in suspension suggesting that they do not possess inherent stem cell properties. Moreover, targeted suppression of GLI1 or GLI2 with siRNA did not reverse the transformed phenotype of LNCaP-GLI1 cells nor did double GLI1/GLI2 knockdowns activate AR expression in DU145 or PC-3 cells. As such, early targeting of the GLI oncoproteins may hinder progression to a hormone independent state but a more detailed understanding of the mechanisms that maintain this phenotype is required to determine if their inhibition will enhance the efficacy of anti-hormonal therapy through the induction of a luminal phenotype and increased dependency upon AR function.
The GLI (GLI1/GLI2) transcription factors have been implicated in the development and progression of prostate cancer although our understanding of how they actually contribute to the biology of these common tumours is limited. We observed that GLI reporter activity was higher in normal (PNT-2) and tumourigenic (DU145 and PC-3) androgen-independent cells compared to androgen-dependent LNCaP prostate cancer cells and, accordingly, GLI mRNA levels were also elevated. Ectopic expression of GLI1 or the constitutively active ΔNGLI2 mutant induced a distinct cobblestone-like morphology in LNCaP cells that, regarding the former, correlated with increased GLI2 as well as expression of the basal/stem-like markers CD44, β1-integrin, ΔNp63 and BMI1, and decreased expression of the luminal marker AR (androgen receptor). LNCaP-GLI1 cells were viable in the presence of the AR inhibitor bicalutamide and gene expression profiling revealed that the transcriptome of LNCaP-GLI1 cells was significantly closer to DU145 and PC-3 cells than to control LNCaP-pBP (empty vector) cells, as well as identifying LCN2/NGAL as a highly induced transcript which is associated with hormone independence in breast and prostate cancer. Functionally, LNCaP-GLI1 cells displayed greater clonal growth and were more invasive than control cells but they did not form colonies in soft agar or prostaspheres in suspension suggesting that they do not possess inherent stem cell properties. Moreover, targeted suppression of GLI1 or GLI2 with siRNA did not reverse the transformed phenotype of LNCaP-GLI1 cells nor did double GLI1/GLI2 knockdowns activate AR expression in DU145 or PC-3 cells. As such, early targeting of the GLI oncoproteins may hinder progression to a hormone independent state but a more detailed understanding of the mechanisms that maintain this phenotype is required to determine if their inhibition will enhance the efficacy of anti-hormonal therapy through the induction of a luminal phenotype and increased dependency upon AR function.
Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common cancer in men and although tumours initially
respond well to anti-hormonal treatment, the fact that many tumours acquire
resistance to this form of therapy provides a major obstacle in treating advanced
forms of the disease. Although the precise factors that initiate PCa remain unclear,
numerous studies have described genetic lesions and aberrant signalling mechanisms
that may contribute to tumour formation and progression, and those that help confer
androgen independence are of particular interest as they may represent novel targets
for therapeutic intervention (reviewed in [1]).As with many tumour forms, the role of cancer stem cells (CSC) has received
considerable attention in PCa biology, particularly with regard to tumour initiation
but also progression and metastatic spread (reviewed in [2]). As prostate tumours display a
predominantly luminal phenotype including AR expression, they are thought to derive
from luminal secretory cells. However, based upon CD profiling and cytokeratin
expression, basal-like characteristics have been identified in primary tumours and
may be increased in metastatic and hormone-refractory tumours [3], [4]. Furthermore,
basal/stem-like cells isolated from both primary tumours and cancer cell lines
display greater tumourigenicity in mouse xenograft experiments [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]. In contrast, Vander Griend
et al [11]
proposed that the cancer-initiating cell may be an intermediate AR-expressing cell
that “acquires stem-like activity” and the heterogeneity of PCa is
further highlighted by studies of mouse models: Wang et al [12] described a rare luminal stem
cell population (expressing Nkx3-1) that can give rise to tumours whereas Lawson et
al [13] found that
basal epithelial stem cells were transformed more efficiently.Hedgehog (HH) signalling represents a major developmental pathway that is implicated
in the formation and progression of numerous tumour types including those of the
skin, breast, pancreas, brain and lung. HH signalling, principally mediated by the
downstream GLI (referring to both GLI1 and GLI2) transcription factors, is linked to
tumourigenesis through the regulation of diverse mechanisms such as proliferation,
differentiation, apoptosis, migration/invasion and the maintenance of CSC
populations (reviewed in [14], [15], [16]).Recent studies have described activation of HH signalling in PCa although the results
have often been conflicting and the mechanism(s) by which GLI contribute to
neoplasia are not well understood (reviewed in [17], [18]). For example, several studies
have advocated that increased epithelial GLI1 expression promotes tumour formation
[19], [20], [21]. In
contrast, Fan et al [22] observed no significant difference in SHH or GLI1 mRNA
levels between tumour and zone matched benign tissue and, more significantly, that
GLI1 was expressed in the stromal, but not epithelial, component of BPH and PCa.
Regarding the more advanced disease state, high levels of SHH protein and GLI1 mRNA
have been described in metastatic samples and DHH, GLI1 and GLI2 have been linked
with transformation to a hormone-refractory state [21], [23], [24], [25]. Moreover, recent studies have
established a link between HH/GLI and AR signalling in the androgen-dependent (AD),
luminal epithelial LNCaP prostate cancer cell line and demonstrated that GLI1
maintains cell viability in the absence of AR activity [25], [26], [27], [28].Here we show that high GLI activity is observed in androgen-independent (AI) DU145
and PC-3epithelial prostate cancer cell lines and that ectopic GLI1 promotes
androgen independence in LNCaP cells which correlates with their transformation to a
phenotype more characteristic of DU145 and PC-3 cells. However, GLI suppression does
not promote an AD phenotype in DU145 or PC-3 cells. As such, early targeting of the
GLI oncoproteins may impede progression to a hormone independent state, but this
approach may not enhance the efficacy of anti-hormonal therapy in tumour cells that
have lost AR expression and that are not dependent upon its signalling for their
viability.
Results
Analysis of GLI expression in prostate cancer cells
To investigate a putative role for GLI in prostate cancer, we first determined
the level of GLI reporter activity in various prostate cell lines. GLI reporter
activity was higher in the AI DU145 and PC-3prostate cancer cell lines compared
to the AD LNCaP prostate cancer cell line and reporter activity was also higher
in the AI PNT-2 normal epithelial prostate cell line (Fig. 1A). Accordingly, GLI1 and GLI2 mRNA
expression was higher in all AI cell lines compared to LNCaP cells (Fig. 1B). As such, we analysed
the effect of over-expressing GLI1 and the active ΔNGLI2 mutant upon LNCaP
cell biology. The most striking effect of ectopic GLI1 (eGLI1) and ΔNGLI2
related to cell morphology: in contrast to the characteristic spindle-like
morphology of parental or control LNCaP-pBP (empty vector) cells, within a few
days post-transduction cells/colonies with a cobblestone-like morphology were
evident in LNCaP cells over-expressing eGLI1 or ΔNGLI2 (Fig. 1C). After drug selection, both
LNCaP-GLI1 and LNCaP-ΔNGLI2 cells had completely transformed adopting a
morphology reminiscent of PNT-2 or DU145 cells (refer Fig. 5A to view the fully transformed
morphology). Ectopic GLI1 and ΔNGLI2 protein activity was confirmed by
induction of PTCH1 mRNA (Fig.
1D). In addition, endogenous GLI2 mRNA was induced in LNCaP-GLI1
cells whereas, unexpectedly, endogenous GLI1 mRNA was suppressed in
LNCaP-ΔNGLI2 cells revealing that the morphological change may be mediated
by GLI2 (Fig. 1E). As DU145
and PC-3 cells express high levels of both GLI1 and GLI2 compared to LNCaP cells
(Fig. 1B), we chose to
further investigate the biology of LNCaP-GLI1 cells.
Figure 1
GLI activity is high in androgen-independent cell lines.
(A) Analysis of GLI luciferase reporter activity in various
androgen-independent cell lines and in comparison to the
androgen-dependent LNCaP cell line. (B) Quantitative PCR analysis of
GLI1 and GLI2 mRNA levels in the androgen-independent cell lines and in
comparison to LNCaP cells (C) Cobblestone-like cells/colonies emerge in
LNCaP cells with ectopic GLI1 or ΔNGLI2 expression (denoted by
arrows). (D) qPCR analysis of PTCH1 mRNA expression in LNCaP-GLI1 and
LNCaP-ΔNGLI2 cells. (E) qPCR analysis of GLI2 mRNA expression in
LNCaP-GLI1 cells and GLI1 mRNA expression in LNCaP-ΔNGLI2 cells. (F)
The morphology of LNCaP cells expressing EGFP does not change when
co-cultured with LNCaP-GLI1 cells.
Figure 5
GLI suppression does not induce a luminal-like phenotype in
androgen-independent cells.
(A) The transformed morphology of LNCaP-GLI1 cells does not reverse upon
transfection with GLI1 or GLI2 siRNA. (B) qPCR analysis of GLI1 and GLI2
mRNA in LNCaP-GLI1 cells transfected with GLI1 or GLI2 siRNA. (C) RT-PCR
analysis of ΔNp63 and AR mRNA in LNCaP-GLI1 cells transfected with
GLI1 or GLI2 siRNA. (D) qPCR analysis of GLI1 and GLI2 mRNA in DU145 and
PC-3 cells transfected with GLI1 and GLI2 siRNA. (E) GLI reporter
activity is suppressed in DU145 and PC-3 cells transfected with GLI1 and
GLI2 siRNA (n.b. reporter activity may be influenced by GLI3 expression
in PC-3 cells [17]). (F) RT-PCR analysis of ΔNp63 and AR
mRNA in DU145 and PC-3 cells transfected with GLI1 and GLI2 siRNA.
GLI activity is high in androgen-independent cell lines.
(A) Analysis of GLI luciferase reporter activity in various
androgen-independent cell lines and in comparison to the
androgen-dependent LNCaP cell line. (B) Quantitative PCR analysis of
GLI1 and GLI2 mRNA levels in the androgen-independent cell lines and in
comparison to LNCaP cells (C) Cobblestone-like cells/colonies emerge in
LNCaP cells with ectopic GLI1 or ΔNGLI2 expression (denoted by
arrows). (D) qPCR analysis of PTCH1 mRNA expression in LNCaP-GLI1 and
LNCaP-ΔNGLI2 cells. (E) qPCR analysis of GLI2 mRNA expression in
LNCaP-GLI1 cells and GLI1 mRNA expression in LNCaP-ΔNGLI2 cells. (F)
The morphology of LNCaP cells expressing EGFP does not change when
co-cultured with LNCaP-GLI1 cells.Initially, GLI reporter activity was measured in LNCaP-GLI1 cells and shown to be
at a level comparable with PC-3 and DU145 cells (Fig. 1B, cf. columns 2–4).
Subsequently, we addressed whether the ability of eGLI1 to induce the
cobblestone-like morphology in LNCaP cells was through autonomous means or
whether or not this required paracrine/juxtacrine signalling through molecules
secreted by LNCaP-GLI1 cells. The morphology of LNCaP cells expressing EGFP did
not change when co-cultured with LNCaP-GLI1 cells revealing that the
cobblestone-like morphology is induced autonomously (Fig. 1F). However, we cannot discount the
possibility that induction of the cobblestone-like morphology is mediated
through receptors that are expressed in LNCaP-GLI1 cells (initially with a
normal morphology) and that subsequently bind to molecules secreted by the same
(or other) LNCaP-GLI1 cells acting through paracrine/juxtacrine signalling.
GLI1 confers androgen-independence to LNCaP cells
The expression of epithelial markers was investigated to determine if the luminal
phenotype of LNCaP cells was altered by eGLI1: AR was strongly suppressed in
LNCaP-GLI1 cells whereas the basal/stem-like markers CD44, β1-integrin,
ΔNp63, and BMI1 were all increased (Fig. 2A); this was confirmed by Western blot
analysis for AR and CD44, with increased cell surface expression of the latter
confirmed by FACS (Figs. 2B and
C). Due to the uniform global shift in CD44 expression we chose to
employ the heterogenous population for further study. Regarding androgen
dependence, whereas exposure to the AR inhibitor bicalutamide potently
suppressed the proliferation of LNCaP-pBP cells, the increased proliferative
potential of LNCaP-GLI1 cells was unaffected and this was verified by flow
cytometry (Figs. 2D, lanes
1–4 and E). Therefore, as determined by epithelial marker expression and
insensitivity to bicalutamide, these data suggest that eGLI1 induces regression
(or de-differentiation) of LNCaP cells to a basal/stem-like form that is
naturally independent of AR signalling for viability.
Figure 2
GLI1 induces an androgen-independent phenotype in LNCaP
cells.
(A) qPCR analysis of epithelial marker expression in LNCaP-GLI1 cells
relative to LNCaP-pBP cells (n.b. the data is presented as natural
logarithms so the relative induction of CD44 is almost 7000-fold). (B)
Western blot analysis of AR and CD44 expression in LNCaP-pBP, LNCaP-GLI1
and DU145 cells (arrows denote CD44 isoforms common to LNCaP-GLI1 and
DU145 cells). (C) FACS analysis of CD44 expression in LNCaP-pBP and
LNCaP-GLI1 cells. (D) Proliferation assay to compare and to determine
the effect of bicalutamide upon the proliferation rate of LNCaP-pBP and
LNCaP-GLI1 cells as well as the effect of AG1478 (EGFR inhibitor) and
U0126 (MEK inhibitor) upon the latter. (E) Analysis of the cell cycle by
flow cytometry in LNCaP-pBP and LNCaP-GLI1 cells exposed to
bicalutamide.
GLI1 induces an androgen-independent phenotype in LNCaP
cells.
(A) qPCR analysis of epithelial marker expression in LNCaP-GLI1 cells
relative to LNCaP-pBP cells (n.b. the data is presented as natural
logarithms so the relative induction of CD44 is almost 7000-fold). (B)
Western blot analysis of AR and CD44 expression in LNCaP-pBP, LNCaP-GLI1
and DU145 cells (arrows denote CD44 isoforms common to LNCaP-GLI1 and
DU145 cells). (C) FACS analysis of CD44 expression in LNCaP-pBP and
LNCaP-GLI1 cells. (D) Proliferation assay to compare and to determine
the effect of bicalutamide upon the proliferation rate of LNCaP-pBP and
LNCaP-GLI1 cells as well as the effect of AG1478 (EGFR inhibitor) and
U0126 (MEK inhibitor) upon the latter. (E) Analysis of the cell cycle by
flow cytometry in LNCaP-pBP and LNCaP-GLI1 cells exposed to
bicalutamide.To investigate this further, LNCaP-pBP, LNCaP-GLI1, DU145 and PC-3 cells were
analysed by DNA microarrays: global array profiling revealed that the
transcriptome of LNCaP-GLI1 cells was more similar to DU145 and PC-3 cells than
to LNCaP-pBP cells thus revealing the extent to which LNCaP-GLI1 cells have
changed phenotype (Fig. 3A).
In direct comparison to LNCaP-pBP cells, the expression of 260 transcripts
differed more than 10-fold (144 up and 116 down) in LNCaP-GLI1 cells (Fig. 3B and Figures S1
and S2).
Functional classification of these transcripts produced 15 ontological groups
including those associated with tumour biology such as cell-cell adhesion, cell
motility, EMT (epithelial-mesenchymal transition) and hormone independence
(Figure
S3); the latter group including LCN2 (lipocalin 2) and CAV2 (caveolin
2) which were previously identified as part of a common signature for hormone
independence in breast and prostate cancer [29]. The majority of the 144
increased transcripts were expressed at similar levels in LNCaP-GLI1 cells when
compared to DU145 and/or PC-3 cells (<3-fold difference), whereas the
expression of 12 transcripts (including LCN2) was >3-fold higher in LNCaP-GLI
cells when compared to both cell types (Figure S1 and Table 1). Reciprocally, of the 116 decreased
transcripts only one, MRPL23, was expressed >3-fold lower in LNCaP-GLI1 cells
compared to both DU145 and PC-3 cells (Figure S2).
Figure 3
Ectopic GLI1 induces global changes in the gene expression profile of
LNCaP cells.
(A) A statistical comparison of global gene expression profiles to
determine the percentage of transcripts that are expressed at
significantly different levels in LNCaP-pBP, DU145 and PC-3 cells
compared to LNCaP-GLI1 (Pearson correlation co-efficient ≥0.7,
p<0.05) (B) Heat map denoting transcripts in LNCaP-GLI1 cells where
the change in expression is both >10-fold and highly significantly
different when compared to LNCaP-pBP cells (student's
t-test, p<0.01): left panel lists increased
genes, right panel lists decreased genes and DU145 and PC-3 cells are
shown for comparison (* denotes transcript variants of the same
gene). (C) Western blot analysis comparing the expression of certain
signalling proteins between LNCaP-pBP and LNCaP-GLI1 cells with DU145
and PC-3 lysates included for comparison. (D) Phosphorylation of the
cytoskeletal protein MLC2 is mediated by ROCK in LNCaP-GLI1 cells (n.b.
the antibody for total MLC did not work in our hands).
Ectopic GLI1 induces global changes in the gene expression profile of
LNCaP cells.
(A) A statistical comparison of global gene expression profiles to
determine the percentage of transcripts that are expressed at
significantly different levels in LNCaP-pBP, DU145 and PC-3 cells
compared to LNCaP-GLI1 (Pearson correlation co-efficient ≥0.7,
p<0.05) (B) Heat map denoting transcripts in LNCaP-GLI1 cells where
the change in expression is both >10-fold and highly significantly
different when compared to LNCaP-pBP cells (student's
t-test, p<0.01): left panel lists increased
genes, right panel lists decreased genes and DU145 and PC-3 cells are
shown for comparison (* denotes transcript variants of the same
gene). (C) Western blot analysis comparing the expression of certain
signalling proteins between LNCaP-pBP and LNCaP-GLI1 cells with DU145
and PC-3 lysates included for comparison. (D) Phosphorylation of the
cytoskeletal protein MLC2 is mediated by ROCK in LNCaP-GLI1 cells (n.b.
the antibody for total MLC did not work in our hands).As well as DNA microarray profiling, the extent of major signalling pathway
activation was assessed by Western blotting in LNCaP-GLI1 cells. Hormone
independence is associated with EGFR pathway activation and although it has been
established that EGFR mRNA expression is not greatly increased in AI cell lines
([29]
and our microarray data), a strong increase in EGFR protein expression was
observed in LNCaP-GLI1 cells to a level comparable with DU145 and PC-3 cells
(Fig. 3C). ERK
(Extracellular signal-Regulated Kinase) activity was also increased in
LNCaP-GLI1 cells (Fig. 3C)
and pharmacological inhibition of EGFR or ERK suppressed their high
proliferative potential (Fig.
2D, cf. columns 1, 3, 5 and 6). Regarding AKT, although increased
activity is associated with mutational inactivation of PTEN in LNCaP cells [30], [31], [32], eGLI1 reduced
it to a level comparable with DU145 cells suggesting that there are mechanism(s)
that could be exploited to obviate loss of this important tumour suppressor gene
(Fig. 3C). Regarding the
cytoskeleton, LNCaP-GLI1 cells displayed an increase of MLC2 (myosin light chain
2) phosphorylation that was similar to both DU145 and PC-3 cells (Fig. 3C and data not shown).
MLC2 regulates the actin cytoskeleton (including stress fibre formation) and is
itself regulated by MLCK (myosin light chain kinase) and ROCK (Rho-associated
kinase); exposure to the ROCK inhibitor Y27632 but not the MLCK inhibitor ML-7
reduced MLC2 phosphorylation although this did not reverse the cobblestone-like
morphology of LNCaP-GLI1 cells (Fig. 3D and unpublished observations). In summary, these data
further demonstrate the extent to which LNCaP-GLI1 cells resemble DU145 and PC-3
cells.
LNCaP-GLI1 cells do not display anchorage-independent growth
HH/GLI signalling regulates normal and cancer stem cell populations and recent
studies have described how EMT is an inherent trait of such cells [15], [16], [33].
Interestingly, despite their cobblestone-like morphology, the results of the
microarray revealed that eGLI1 induces EMT in LNCaP cells (Figure S3).
Indeed, decreased E-Cadherin and increased vimentin expression was confirmed by
Western blotting, although this was not dependent upon EGFR or MEK-ERK
signalling [34]
(Fig. 4A). Accordingly,
LNCaP-GLI1 cells were highly invasive through a Matrigel™ substrate (Fig. 4B) and they also
displayed greater clonal growth when seeded at low density (Fig. 4C). However, despite the expression of
‘stemness’ markers (including CD44, β1-integrin and BMI1), EMT
and greater clonal growth (Figs.
2A, 4A and 4C),
unlike control cells LNCaP-GLI1 cells did not form prostaspheres in suspension
or colonies in soft agar (Fig.
4D). To address the possibility that LNCaP-GLI1 cells do not
proliferate in 3-D culture because they are not able to differentiate towards a
luminal phenotype (i.e. because of constitutive eGLI1 expression), DU145 cells
were also cultured under the same conditions. No colonies were observed in
either assay with DU145 cells suggesting that AR− cells are
poorly clonogenic in anchorage-independent in vitro culture
systems (data not shown); this is supported by Thiyagarajan et al [35] who
observed that DU145 (and PC-3 cells) were much less proliferative in soft agar
compared to LNCaP cells although some colony growth was evident in their
study.
Figure 4
LNCaP-GLI1 cells display some stem-like characteristics.
(A) Western blot analysis comparing expression of the EMT markers
E-cadherin and vimentin between LNCaP-GLI1 and LNCaP-pBP cells (n.b. the
decrease of E-cadherin in LNCaP-GLI1 cells is partially reversed in the
presence of the EGFR inhibitor AG1478 and to a lesser extent the MEK
inhibitor U0126). (B) Transwell invasion assay comparing the invasive
potential of LNCaP-pBP and LNCaP-GLI1 cells through a Matrigel
substrate. (C) Clonogenicity assay assessing the colony-forming ability
of LNCaP-pBP and LNCaP-GLI1 cells when seeded at low density. (D)
Anchorage-independent growth is observed in LNCaP-pBP cells but not
LNCaP-GLI1 cells (top panel - soft agar colony assay; bottom panel -
prostasphere assay).
LNCaP-GLI1 cells display some stem-like characteristics.
(A) Western blot analysis comparing expression of the EMT markers
E-cadherin and vimentin between LNCaP-GLI1 and LNCaP-pBP cells (n.b. the
decrease of E-cadherin in LNCaP-GLI1 cells is partially reversed in the
presence of the EGFR inhibitor AG1478 and to a lesser extent the MEK
inhibitor U0126). (B) Transwell invasion assay comparing the invasive
potential of LNCaP-pBP and LNCaP-GLI1 cells through a Matrigel
substrate. (C) Clonogenicity assay assessing the colony-forming ability
of LNCaP-pBP and LNCaP-GLI1 cells when seeded at low density. (D)
Anchorage-independent growth is observed in LNCaP-pBP cells but not
LNCaP-GLI1 cells (top panel - soft agar colony assay; bottom panel -
prostasphere assay).
GLI suppression does not promote a luminal-like phenotype in
androgen-independent prostate cancer cells
Finally, we sought to determine if targeted suppression of GLI was sufficient to
reverse the transformed phenotype of LNCaP-GLI1 cells or to induce a
luminal-like phenotype in DU145 or PC-3 cells. Transfection of LNCaP-GLI1 cells
with GLI1 or GLI2 siRNA did not influence the morphology of LNCaP-GLI1 cells nor
was there any change in the expression of ΔNp63 or AR mRNA (Figs. 5A–C and Figure
S4A); this indicates that the phenotypic conversion induced by eGLI1 in
LNCaP cells is irreversible and that maintenance of the AI phenotype is not
dependent upon GLI2. Regarding DU145 and PC-3 cells, the efficacy of double
GLI1/GLI2 knockdowns was confirmed by a decrease of GLI reporter activity but
there was no change in cell morphology nor was there any change in the
expression of ΔNp63 or AR mRNA (Figs. 5D–F, Figure S4B and unpublished observations). We
also employed the GLI inhibitor GANT61 (30 µM) [36] but this was less efficient
at suppressing GLI reporter activity than RNAi (data not shown). As such,
although AI prostate cancer cells display high GLI mRNA expression and activity
and eGLI1 is able to promote an AI phenotype in LNCaP cells, GLI suppression
does not promote a luminal-like and AD phenotype in AI prostate cancer
cells.
GLI suppression does not induce a luminal-like phenotype in
androgen-independent cells.
(A) The transformed morphology of LNCaP-GLI1 cells does not reverse upon
transfection with GLI1 or GLI2 siRNA. (B) qPCR analysis of GLI1 and GLI2
mRNA in LNCaP-GLI1 cells transfected with GLI1 or GLI2 siRNA. (C) RT-PCR
analysis of ΔNp63 and AR mRNA in LNCaP-GLI1 cells transfected with
GLI1 or GLI2 siRNA. (D) qPCR analysis of GLI1 and GLI2 mRNA in DU145 and
PC-3 cells transfected with GLI1 and GLI2 siRNA. (E) GLI reporter
activity is suppressed in DU145 and PC-3 cells transfected with GLI1 and
GLI2 siRNA (n.b. reporter activity may be influenced by GLI3 expression
in PC-3 cells [17]). (F) RT-PCR analysis of ΔNp63 and AR
mRNA in DU145 and PC-3 cells transfected with GLI1 and GLI2 siRNA.
Discussion
The role of HH signalling has proven contentious in PCa biology; this includes debate
as to whether or not the pathway contributes to primary tumour formation as well the
actual mode of signalling (autocrine or paracrine). In addition, there has been
conflicting data as to whether or not GLI expression is mediated through canonical
or non-canonical pathways in PCa cell lines (reviewed in [18]). We have not addressed the
nature of GLI regulation but have shown that the AI cell lines PNT-2, DU145 and PC-3
display higher levels of GLI mRNA than the AD LNCaP prostate cancer cell line and
this correlates with increased GLI reporter activity (Figs. 1A and B). The fact that GLI1 expression
was comparable between normal PNT-2 cells and tumourigenic DU145 and PC-3 cells was
unexpected but in contrast to Karhadkar et al [21], we also found that GLI1
mRNA was strongly expressed in commercial primary prostate basal epithelial cells
(PrECs), though a faithful comparison to the cell lines used in this study was not
possible because PrECs are cultured in specialist medium that does not contain serum
(S.K.N. and G.W.N., unpublished). Despite these observations, at the protein level
GLI1 is rarely detected in the basal layer of normal human prostate tissue whereas
expression is more prevalent in hyperplastic basal cells and carcinomas [20]. As such, in a
manner akin to GLI2 regulation [37], although GLI1 mRNA expression is constant between normal
and tumourigenic cells, the protein may be stabilised in the latter (possibly
through Fused [38])
and this, along with the GLI2, could account for the increase in GLI reporter
activity.Our data suggests that GLI1 induces androgen-independence in LNCaP cells through its
ability to induce a basal-like phenotype that is associated with basal cell
populations and that is naturally independent of AR activity; this is supported by
reduced AR expression combined with an increase of numerous basal/stem-like markers.
Chen et al [26] also
described a role for GLI1 in promoting AI growth in LNCaP cells but this was not
associated with reduced AR expression and may reflect the fact that eGLI1 expression
was lower in their system as determined by a lesser fold-increase of GLI1 reporter
activity. Although our studies were performed on a heterogenous cell population, the
phenotype was uniform and we have not been able to isolate LNCaP-GLI1 clonal lines
that maintain normal LNCaP morphology indicating that retroviral eGLI1 promotes an
‘all or nothing’ response, but as the level of GLI reporter activity was
comparable with DU145 and PC-3 cells this indicates that our system has biological
relevance. How eGLI1 mediates the transformation of LNCaP cells has not been
elucidated but may involve multiple mechanisms: eGLI1 inhibition of AR signalling
alone is unlikely to initiate the phenotypic change but, combined with its ability
to sustain cell viability in the absence of AR signalling [27], [28], this may compound the effects of
its principal role as a transcriptional activator.As noted above, eGLI1 increased total GLI activity in LNCaP cells to a level
comparable with DU145 and PC-3 cells. Microarray profiling revealed that the
transcriptome of LNCaP-GLI1 cells was similar to both DU145 and PC-3 cells with the
expression of certain genes comparable to one or both cell lines. This probably
reflects the genotype of each cell and the fact that GLI activity and target gene
activation are influenced by signalling enzymes (including ERK and AKT) that are
differentially activated in each cell type [39], [40], [41]. Intriguingly, Nadiminty et al
[42]
recently listed a set of 50 target genes induced by NF-κB2 in LNCaP cells, 15 of
which are present in our list of 144 genes induced >10-fold by eGLI1 in LNCaP
cells (including LCN2) suggesting that NF-κB2 activation is one of the
mechanisms through which eGLI1 elicits its effect in LNCaP cells (Figure S1,
transcripts highlighted in red).Regarding the expression of transcripts that are highest in LNCaP-GLI1 cells (Table 1), ABCC3 is of particular
interest because it encodes a protein that belongs to the ABC (ATP-Binding Cassette)
family of transporters that confer drug resistance and that are highly expressed in
normal and cancer stem cells (reviewed in [43]). HH/GLI1 signalling has been
shown to regulate the expression of Pgp (ABCB1) and BCRP (ABCG2) in various cancer
cell lines including PC-3 [44]. In addition, the SMO inhibitor GDC-0449 was recently
shown to inhibit the drug resistance properties of Pgp and and BCRP [45]. The
shuttle/transport protein lipocalin 2 (LCN2) is also of particular interest:
lipocalin 2 was identified as one half of a complex with matrix metalloproteinase
MMP-9 that is elevated in the urine of cancerpatients (notably breast, bladder,
pancreas and prostate) [46], [47], and it also forms part of a common gene signature for
hormone independence in breast and prostate cancer [29]. Functionally, lipocalin 2
protects MMP-9 from degradation and recently it has been shown to promote EMT by
modulating ERα (oestrogen receptor alpha) and SLUG expression in MCF-7 cells. In
addition, lipocalin 2 negates the response of MCF-7 cells to oestrogenic stimulation
[48]. GLI1 also
represses ERα in MCF-7 cells and negates their response to oestrogenic
stimulation as well as promoting hormone independence [49]. These studies provide evidence
for functional overlap between GLI1 and lipocalin 2 in breast cancer and,
accordingly, the expression of both proteins is associated with the
ER− phenotype [49], [50], [51], [52]. Similarly, although the tight junction protein claudin 1
(CLDN1) is often decreased in breast tumours [53], [54], [55], high expression has been
described in ER− tumours [56], [57]. In the prostate, claudin1
expression is high in the basal layer of benign tissue and its expression decreases
with increasing tumour aggressiveness [58], [59]. A similar pattern of expression
has also been described for the actin-binding protein transgelin (TGLN) [60]; although this
may appear anomalous, it is feasible that these proteins are expressed at high
levels in a small population of basal-like CSCs that are not easily detected by
immunohistochemistry in tumours that display a predominantly luminal
(AR+) phenotype. Indeed, transgelin is more highly expressed in
the CD44+ fraction of DU145 and LNCaP cells [61] and some evidence of increased HH
signalling has been described in an invasive subpopulation of DU145 cells that
express higher levels of CD44 as well as the stem cell marker NANOG [62].Although HH/GLI1 signalling modulates CSC biology in various tissues, defining its
role in PCa is complicated by the fact that cancer-initiating cells may stem from
AR− (basal) or AR+ (intermediate/luminal)
populations [5],
[6], [7], [8], [11], [12], [13]. If PCa arises
from basal/stem-like cells then based upon the results presented here, theoretically
they would express high GLI levels. Conversely, if PCa arises from luminal (or
intermediate) cells that express AR then they would be expected to express low or
absent levels of GLI. This study has not addressed the role of GLI in tumour
initiation but its expression is increased in hyperplastic basal cells that
co-express CD44 and p63 [20]. Interestingly, the same authors demonstrated GLI
expression in localised prostate cancer; this may be unexpected as primary tumours
are considered to display a predominantly luminal phenotype (i.e.
p63−/AR+) but this probably reflects lower GLI
activity compared to more aggressive tumours. However, a meta-analyses of microarray
datasets has shown that a considerable number of localised prostate tumours display
a gene expression profile which is indicative of hormone-independence and reduced AR
expression [29]. Indeed, it would be interesting to determine if GLI
expression was evident in these datasets although they may have been subject to the
same technical limitations that are discussed at the end.Less equivocal is the role of GLI in advanced PCa: high levels of GLI1 mRNA have been
described in metastatic tumours and both GLI1 and GLI2 have been linked with
androgen-independence [21], [23], [24], [25], [27]. The basal cytokeratin K5 is expressed in metastatic
tumours and this is increased in tumours subject to androgen deprivation as well as
those that are hormone-refractory [4]. Moreover, CD profiling and
expression studies have shown that basal cells are present in advanced/metastatic
tumours [3], [63], [64].
Intriguingly, Liu et al [63] identified the EMT marker vimentin as part of a basal
cDNA signature in metastatic prostate tumours. Combined with the fact that EMT is
synonymous with CSC biology [33] and that prostate stem/progenitor cells often express
basal markers (reviewed in [2]), this suggests that there is synergy between EMT and the
basal phenotype in prostate CSC biology and these phenomena may be linked through
HH/GLI signalling.Regarding the mechanisms that control GLI expression in advanced PCa, as well as
canonical HH signalling [25], GLI may be regulated by TGF-β (via Smad3) [65]. Inhibition of
TGF-β or Smad3 has been shown to suppresses the growth and metastasis of AI
tumours in Nude mice (but not tumour incidence) and, as for GLI, Smad3 is expressed
at considerably higher levels in DU145 cells compared to LNCaP cells [66], [67]. Therefore,
TGF-β/Smad3 signalling may, in part, account for increased GLI expression in
advanced PCa and this also correlates with the fact that TGF-β is associated
with EMT and CSC biology [33]. Based upon the fact that GLI reporter activity was high
in DU145 and PC-3 cells and that eGLI1 induced an AI phenotype in LNCaP cells, we
had surmised that GLI inhibition may induce an AD phenotype in DU145 and PC-3 cells
through increased AR expression. Surprisingly, neither eGLI1 nor GLI2 suppression
reversed the phenotype of LNCaP-GLI1 cells; although we cannot discount the
possibility that protein expression was not sufficiently suppressed, this suggests
that the transformation is irreversible or that once the process has occurred it is
no longer dependent upon GLI activity and this is supported by the fact that GLI
suppression did not influence the phenotype of DU145 or PC-3 cells as determined by
marker gene expression (Fig.
5F). A global screening approach may be required to determine if it is
possible for DU145 or PC-3 cells to trans-differentiate towards a luminal phenotype
that is dependent upon AR function but this may not be possible for the former as
loss of AR expression is associated with promoter methylation (Sasaki et al, 1992).
However, this approach may be viable for PC-3 cells as well as those hormone
refractory tumours where loss of (or reduced) AR expression is not associated with
promoter methylation [68], [69]. MicroRNAs provide an attractive target for further
investigation as they can regulate multiple genes, including AR, and are associated
with stem cell biology, tumour biology and hormone independence [70], [71], [72], [73], [74], [75]. This will be
supported by delineating the mechanisms through which the GLI oncoproteins promote
hormone independence and as these may be common to the pathogenesis of breast and
prostate cancer such investigations are clearly warranted. Moreover, the fact that
GLI inhibition has been shown to negatively influence the proliferation and
clonogenic/tumourigenic potential of prostate cancer cell lines as well as
increasing their sensitivity to cancer drugs enhances their attractiveness as target
proteins for therapeutic intervention [19], [23], [35].Finally, in this study we found that the microarray failed to detect GLI1 or GLI2 as
highly expressed transcripts in LNCaP-GLI1, DU145 or PC-3 cells. Indeed, from the
normalised data the expression of GLI1 was constant between all four cell lines
analysed and GLI2 was only slightly increased in LNCaP-GLI1 cells (2.24-fold), DU145
cells (2.95-fold) and PC-3 cells (2.71-fold) which does not correlate with the qPCR
data (Fig. 1B). The GLI1 probe
sequence corresponds to a region within the last exon of GLI1 (NM_005269.2) and
should detect both eGLI1 and endogenous GLI1 in all cell lines. In addition, the
lack of signal is unlikely to be due to the presence of GLI1 splice variants as
these are N-terminal [76], [77]. Regarding GLI2, the probe sequence corresponds to the
non-coding region of the last exon (NM_005270.4) and should also detect the known
splice variants [78], [79], [80]. As such, failure to capture GLI1 or GLI2 mRNA appears to
be a technical issue and it is likely that the expression level of these genes has
been misrepresented in other datasets generated with the Illumina platform.
Materials and Methods
Vector construction
HumanGLI1 encoding cDNA was amplified by standard PCR with Pfu Turbo DNA
Polymerase (Stratagene) and pBluescript-GLI1 (a gift from Kenneth Kinzler) as
the template: the primers contained 5′ phosphate groups (Forward,
5′-CTCTGAGACGCCATGTTCA-3′ and Reverse,
5′-GATTCCCTACTCTTTAGGCA-3′). The amplicon was
cloned into pBabePuro blunted at the Sal1 site to create pBP-GLI1; the integrity
of the coding region was verified by sequencing. ΔNGLI2β coding cDNA was
isolated from pcDNA4/TO-HisΔNGLI2β (Regl et al, Oncogene 2004) by Pme1
digestion and cloned into pBabePuro blunted at the Sal1 site to create
pBP-ΔNGLI2β. The ΔNGLI2β mutant is lacking the first 328 amino
acids and is highly transcriptionally active compared to the wild-type GLI2β
protein [79].
Cell culture and retroviral transduction
The prostate cancer cell lines LNCaP, DU145 and PC-3 were obtained from the
European Collection of Cell Cultures (through Sigma-Aldrich) and normal prostate
epithelial PNT2 cells were kindly provided by Norman Maitland (University of
York) [81]. All
cells were maintained in RPMI 1640 medium supplemented with 10% FBS,
L-Glutamine (2 mM), penicillin (50 U/ml) and streptomycin (50 µg/ml) (all
Lonza). Amphotropic retroviral particles harbouring pBabePuro (empty vector),
pBP-GLI1 or pBP-ΔNGLI2 were created as described previously [82] using the
Phoenix packaging cell line obtained from the Nolan Laboratory (http://www.stanford.edu/group/nolan/retroviral_systems/phx.html).
To create the LNCaP-pBP, LNCaP-GLI1 and LNCaP-ΔNGLI2 stable cell lines,
parental LNCaP cells were exposed to the corresponding viral particles in the
presence of polybrene (5 µg/ml) and centrifuged at 300×g for 1 hr at
32°C. Subsequently, the cells were allowed to recover for 72 hrs prior to
selection with puromycin (1 µg/ml) for up to 1 week and beyond the time
when all the control (non-transduced) cells had expired.
Reporter assay
Cells were seeded at a density of 2,000 cells/cm2 in triplicate
(6-well plates) and transfected 48 hr post-seeding with 1 µg of the GLI
firefly luciferase reporter pGL3-6GBS [83] and 1 µg of a
pCMV-Renilla normalisation vector using 3 µl of Fugene6 (Roche). Cells
were harvested 24 hr post-transfection and analysed for luciferase activity
using the Dual Luciferase Assay Kit (Promega) and a FLUOStar OPTIMA reader (BMG
Labtech) (n = 3).
Proliferation and clonogenicity assays
LNCaP-pBP and LNCaP-GLI1 cells were seeded at a density of 500
cells/cm2 and exposed to bicalutamide (10 µg/ml), AG1478 (1
µM), UO126 (5 µM) or vehicle (DMSO) 24 hr post-seeding. Fresh
drug/media was added after another 72 hr and the cells were trypsinised and
counted 7 days post-seeding using a Casy 1 counter (Sharfe System GmBH)
(n = 3). For clonal growth, LNCaP-pBP and LNCaP-GLI1 cells
were seeded at a density of 50 cells/cm2 in triplicate and cultured
for 10 days prior to fixing in 3% paraformaldehyde and staining with
crystal violet (n = 3).
Western Blotting
Protein lysates were prepared as described previously [82] with separation and transfer
to nitrocellulose membrane performed according to standard protocols. In
summary, cells were seeded at a density of 7000/cm2 and harvested 72
hr post-seeding: where indicated pharmacological agents including AG1478 (1
µM), UO126 (5 µM), ML-7 (10–20 µM) and Y27632
(10–20 µM) were added 24 hr before harvesting. Primary antibodies
used were: CD44 (eBiosciences); GLI1 C-18 and EGFR SC-03 (Santa Cruz
Biotechnology); AR, E-cadherin and vimentin (BD Biosciences); ERK (also used as
a loading control), phospho-ERK (E10), AKT, phospho-AKT (Ser473) and
phospho-MLC2 (Cell Signalling Technology). Secondary HRP-linked antibodies were
obtained commercially (DAKO) and immunodetection performed with ECL+
reagent (GE Healthcare).
Quantitative polymerase chain reaction
Total RNA was isolated using the RNeasy Plus Mini Kit (Qiagen, Valencia, CA) with
3 µg of RNA used to prepare 30 µl of cDNA using the Superscript®
First Strand Synthesis System (Invitrogen Life Science). Quantitative polymerase
chain reactions (qPCR) were performed with Platinum™ SYBR® Green qPCR
Supermix (Invitrogen Life Science) and analysed on a Corbett Rotor-Gene 3000.
The melting curve graph of the PCR product indicated that the data generated was
from a single product and confirmed by running on a 1% agarose gel.
Relative induction values (x) were calculated using the formula
x = 2−ΔΔCT where Ct represents
the mean threshold cycle of replicate analyses, ΔCt represents the
difference between the Ct values of the target gene and the reference gene
GAPDH, and ΔΔCt is the difference between the ΔCt values of the
target gene for each sample compared to the ΔCt mean of the reference sample
(LNCaP or LNCaP-pBP). Primers used were 5′-3′: GLI1 F-GAAGACCTCTCCAGCTTGGA, R-GGCTGACAGTATAGGCAGAG; GLI2
F-GGGTCAACCAGGTGTCCA,
R-GATGGAGGGCAGGGTCAAGGA;
PTCH1 F- ACTCGCCAGAAGATTGGAGA, R- TCCAATTTCCACTGCCTGTT; CD44 F-GTGATCAACAGTGGCAATGG, R-CCACATTCTGCAGGTTCCTT; β1-Int
F-GGGGTAATTTGTCCCGACTT,
CATCTGCGAGTGTGGTGTCT;
ΔNp63 F- GTCCCAGAGCACACAGACA, R- GAGGAGCCGTTCTGAATCTG; Bmi1 F- CCAGGGCTTTTCAAAAATGA, R-CCGATCCAATCTGTTCTGGT; AR F-
TACCAGCTCACCAAGCTCCT,
R-GCTTCACTGGGTGTGGAAAT;
PSA F-CACAGCCTGTTTCATCCTGA,
R-AGGTCCATGACCTTCACAGC
and GAPDH F-GCCTTCCGTGTCCCCACTGC, R-GCTCTTGCTGGGGCTGGTGG.
Flow cytometry
For cell cycle analysis, 4000 cells/cm2 were seeded in a T-25 flask
and exposed to bicalutamide (10 µg/ml) or vehicle (DMSO) for the final 48
hrs before harvesting (96 hrs post-seeding). Trypsinised cells were washed twice
at 1200 RPM for 5 min in PBS with the pellet then fixed in cold sterile
70% ethanol before storing at 4°C overnight. Fixed cells were then
washed ×3 at 1200 RPM for 5 min in 5 ml PBS. During the third wash 100
µl of cells from one of the cell lines was aliquoted separately to
calibrate the FACS machine. After washing, the pellet was re-suspended in 300
µl of DAPI solution (10 µls of 0.1 mg/ml DAPI, 25 µls of 5.0
mg/ml RNase-A, 380 µls of 100 mM sodium citrate in 485 µls PBS) and
incubated in the dark for 30 min at RT. DAPI-labelled cells were loaded on a BD
FACS machine (LS-RII) and analysed with DIVA software.For FACS, cells were incubated with 10 ml of versene for 15 min at 37°C,
neutralised with RPMI/10% FCS then centrifuged at 1200 RPM for 5 min at
RT. The cell pellet was washed twice in PBS then incubated for 1 hr in the dark
with fluorescently-labelled CD44 antibody (14-0441, eBioscience) diluted
1∶500 in PBS. CD44-labelled cells were loaded on a BD FACS machine
(LS-RII) and analysed with DIVA software.
Gene expression and statistical analyses
Gene expression profiling was performed using a HumanHT-12v4 BeadChip read by the
HiScanSQ system (Illumina, Inc). All samples were analysed in triplicate and the
results were normalised to the LNCaP-pBP transcriptome using Bead-Studio®
software (Illumina, Inc): the raw data has been deposited with GEO (Accession
No.: GSE27231) and is MIAME compliant. Normalised data was filtered for
significant genes (student's t-test; p<0.01) with a
>10-fold expression difference (±) using custom designed software
plugged in to Excel. Significant genes were grouped using DAVID 6.7 software
[84],
[85] and
further verified by consensus clustering using GenePattern software [86]. A direct
global array comparison of the LNCaP-GLI1 transcriptome versus the LNCaP-pBP,
DU145 and PC-3 transcriptomes was done using the Pearson correlation matrix
(p<0.05) using MeV v.4.5.1 software (TM4, Microarray Software Suite) [87], [88].
Transwell invasion and anchorage-independent assays
Cell invasion assays were performed over 72 hr using Matrigel-coated (diluted
1∶2 with RPMI 1640) polycarbonate filters (Transwell, BD Biosciences).
Cells (50,000 seeded) invading the lower chamber were trypsinised and counted
using a Casy 1 counter (Sharfe System GmBH) (n = 6). For
soft agar growth, 2500 cells/ml were re-suspended in 0.4% agarose on a
1% agarose bed (diluted in RPMI 1640/10% FCS) and cultured for up
to 3 weeks with medium covering the top layer being replaced every 3–4
days (n = 3). For prostasphere growth, 500 cells/ml were
re-suspended in DMEM/F12 medium supplemented with B27 and N2 (Invitrogen) in
non-adherent plates and cultured for up to 3 weeks
(n = 3).
RNA interference
7000 cells/cm2 were reverse-transfected with control siGLO (Dharmacon)
or siRNA targeting GLI1 (Ambion Silencer® Select s5816)
and/or GLI2 (Ambion Silencer® Select s5817) using the
Hiperfect (Qiagen) transfection reagent to produce a final concentration of 30
nM; fresh medium was added 24 hr post-seeding. RNA was isolated 96 hr
post-seeding or cells were transfected with pGL3-6GBS and pCMV-Renilla 72 hr
post-seeding prior to harvesting for luciferase activity 96 hr post-seeding
(n = 3).Excel worksheet with the raw expression data of the positively
regulated genes presented within the left heat map of
. The transcripts additionally presented in
Table 1 are
underlined and those that were identified as targets of NF-κB2 [41] (see
Discussion) are highlighted in
red.(TIF)Click here for additional data file.Excel worksheet with the raw expression data of the negatively
regulated genes presented within the right heat map of
.(TIF)Click here for additional data file.Mini heat maps denoting functional groups of the genes presented in
and(TIF)Click here for additional data file.qPCR analysis of ΔNp63 mRNA expression in LNCaP-GLI1, DU145 and
PC-3 cells.(TIF)Click here for additional data file.
Authors: Gregory M Sheehan; Bhaskar V S Kallakury; Christine E Sheehan; Hugh A G Fisher; Ronald P Kaufman; Jeffrey S Ross Journal: Hum Pathol Date: 2007-02-15 Impact factor: 3.466
Authors: J Li; C Yen; D Liaw; K Podsypanina; S Bose; S I Wang; J Puc; C Miliaresis; L Rodgers; R McCombie; S H Bigner; B C Giovanella; M Ittmann; B Tycko; H Hibshoosh; M H Wigler; R Parsons Journal: Science Date: 1997-03-28 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Neehar Bhatia; Saravanan Thiyagarajan; Irina Elcheva; Mohammed Saleem; Andrzej Dlugosz; Hasan Mukhtar; Vladimir S Spiegelman Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2006-05-01 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Saurabh Singh; Deepak Chitkara; Reza Mehrazin; Stephen W Behrman; Robert W Wake; Ram I Mahato Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-06-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: John C Bladen; Mariya Moosajee; Dhani Tracey-White; Michèle Beaconsfield; Edel A O'Toole; Michael P Philpott Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2018-02-08 Impact factor: 3.117