| Literature DB >> 23185408 |
Chih-Hsiung Lai1, Shiang-Fu Huang, I-How Chen, Chun-Ta Liao, Hung-Ming Wang, Ling-Ling Hsieh.
Abstract
Reprogramming of energy metabolism in cancer cells has been directly/indirectly linked to mitochondria and mitochondrial functional defects and these changes seem to contribute to the development and progression of cancer. Studies have indicated that mitochondrial DNA haplogroups are associated with risk in relation to various diseases including cancer. However, few studies have examined the effect of haplogroups on cancer prognosis outcome. In order to explore the role of haplogroups on oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) prognosis, the mitochondrial genomes of 300 male OSCC patients were comprehensively analyzed by direct sequencing. They were then haplotyped and grouped into four major geographic haplogroups, namely the East Asia AN, Southeast Asia RBF, East Asia MGE and Northeast Asia CZD groups. The Kaplan-Meier plot analysis indicated that individuals who were members of the CZD haplogroup showed a significant association with better disease-free survival (DFS) than the other three haplogroups and this phenomenon still existed after adjusting for tumor stage, differentiation and age at diagnosis (hazard ratio=0.55; 95% CI=0.36-0.84). In addition, an interaction between membership of the RBF haplogroup and radiotherapy/chemo-radiotherapy in DFS was also identified. The results strongly support the hypothesis that an individual's haplogroup, by defining their genomic background, plays an important role in tumor behavior and mitochondrially-targeted anticancer drugs are promising future therapeutic approaches.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23185408 PMCID: PMC3504154 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0049684
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Characteristics of the 300 OSCC patients.
| Clinical parameters | Category | Results (%) |
| Age (year) | ||
| Mean±SD | 51.6±11.3 | |
| Range | 27–82 | |
| Site of primary tumor [No. of patients (%)] | ||
| Tongue | 104 (34.7) | |
| Bucca | 105 (35.0) | |
| Others | 91 (30.3) | |
| Tumor stage [No. of patients (%)] | ||
| Stage I | 52 (17.3) | |
| Stage II | 75 (25.0) | |
| Stage III | 38 (12.7) | |
| Stage IV | 135 (45.0) | |
| Lymph node metastasis [No. of patients (%)] | ||
| Negative | 196 (65.3) | |
| Positive | 104 (34.7) | |
| Extracapsular spread | ||
| Yes | 72 (24.0) | |
| No | 32 (10.7) | |
| Differentiation [No. of patients (%)] | ||
| Well | 116 (38.7) | |
| Moderate/Poor | 184 (61.3) | |
| Cigarette smoking [No. of patients (%)] | ||
| Yes | 242 (80.7) | |
| No | 58 (19.3) | |
| Alcohol drinking [No. of patients (%)] | ||
| Yes | 147 (49.0) | |
| No | 153 (51.0) | |
| Areca quid chewing [No. of patients (%)] | ||
| Yes | 244 (81.3) | |
| No | 56 (18.7) | |
| Treatment regimen | ||
| Surgery only | 124 (41.3) | |
| Surgery+Radiotherapy | 121 (40.3) | |
| Surgery+Chemotherapy | 2 (0.7) | |
| Surgery+Concomitant chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) | 53 (17.7) | |
The distribution of mtDNA haplogroups in 300 Taiwanese OSCC patients.
| Regional haplogroup | mtDNA Haplogroup | N (%) |
| East Asia MGE group | 65 (21.7) | |
| M7b | 17 (5.7) | |
| M7c’e | 18 (6.0) | |
| M9 | 4 (1.3) | |
| M10a | 5 (1.7) | |
| M12a | 2 (0.7) | |
| M others | 8 (2.7) | |
| G | 9 (3.0) | |
| E | 2 (0.7) | |
| Northeast Asia CZD group | 91 (30.3) | |
| M8a | 17 (5.7) | |
| C | 3 (1.0) | |
| Z | 9 (3.0) | |
| D4 | 36 (12.0) | |
| D5 | 26 (8.7) | |
| East Asia AN group | 25 (8.3) | |
| A | 13 (4.3) | |
| N/N9a | 12 (4.0) | |
| Southeast Asia RBF group | 119 (39.7) | |
| R9 | 6 (2.0) | |
| R11 | 1 (0.3) | |
| B4/B5 | 62 (20.7) | |
| F | 50 (16.7) |
Figure 1Classification tree of the mtDNA geographic haplogroups observed in 300 OSCC patients.
The diagnostic variants are underlined.
Associations between mtDNA geographic haplogroup and OSCC clinicopathological parameters.
| Parameters | Category | East Asia MGE group N (%) | Northeast AsiaCZD group N (%) | East Asia AN group N (%) | Southeast Asia RBF group N (%) |
|
| Total cases | 65 (21.7) | 91 (30.3) | 25 (8.3) | 119 (39.7) | ||
| Age | <51 (n = 149) | 37 (24.8) | 40 (26.8) | 12 (8.1) | 60 (40.3) | 0.46 |
| ≥51 (n = 151) | 28 (18.5) | 51 (33.8) | 13 (8.6) | 59 (39.1) | ||
| Cigarette smoking | 0.18 | |||||
| Yes (n = 242) | 56 (23.1) | 75 (31.0) | 22 (9.1) | 89 (36.8) | ||
| No (n = 58) | 9 (15.5) | 16 (27.6) | 3 (5.2) | 30 (51.7) | ||
| Alcohol drinking | 0.58 | |||||
| Yes (n = 147) | 36 (24.5) | 43 (29.3) | 10 (6.8) | 58 (39.5) | ||
| No (n = 153) | 29 (19.0) | 48 (31.4) | 15 (9.8) | 61 (39.9) | ||
| AQ chewing | 0.52 | |||||
| Yes (n = 244) | 56 (23.0) | 70 (28.7) | 21 (8.6) | 97 (39.8) | ||
| No (n = 56) | 9 (16.1) | 21 (37.5) | 4 (7.1) | 22 (39.3) | ||
| Tumor stage | ||||||
| I/II (n = 127) | 29 (22.8) | 40 (31.5) | 7 (5.5) | 51 (40.2) | 0.50 | |
| III/IV (n = 173) | 36 (20.8) | 51 (29.5) | 18 (10.4) | 68 (39.3) | ||
| Lymph node metastasis | 0.97 | |||||
| Negative (n = 196) | 41 (20.9) | 60 (30.6) | 17 (8.7) | 78 (39.8) | ||
| Positive (n = 104) | 24 (23.1) | 31 (29.8) | 8 (7.7) | 41 (39.4) | ||
| LNECS | ||||||
| Yes (n = 72) | 18 (25.0) | 21 (29.2) | 5 (6.9) | 28 (38.9) | ||
| No (n = 32) | 6 (18.8) | 10 (31.3) | 3 (9.4) | 13 (40.6) | ||
| Differentiation | 0.52 | |||||
| Well (n = 116) | 23 (19.8) | 31 (26.7) | 11 (9.5) | 51 (44.0) | ||
| Moderate/poor (n = 184) | 42 (22.8) | 60 (32.6) | 14 (7.6) | 68 (37.0) | ||
| Tumor site | ||||||
| Tongue (n = 104) | 21 (20.2) | 29 (27.9) | 9 (8.7) | 45 (43.3) | 0.82 | |
| Bucca (n = 105) | 25 (23.8) | 36 (34.3) | 9 (8.6) | 35 (33.3) | ||
| Others (n = 91) | 19 (20.9) | 26 (28.6) | 7 (7.7) | 39 (42.9) | ||
Figure 2Kaplan–Meier survival curves for OSCC patients.
A, overall survival (OS) based on mtDNA geographic haplogroups (p = 0.74). B, disease-free survival (DFS) according to mtDNA geographic haplogroups: Northeast Asia CZD haplogroup (n = 91), East Asia MGE haplogroup (n = 65), East Asia AN haplogroup (n = 25), and Southeast Asia RBF haplogroup (n = 119); p = 0.03. C, DFS according to mtDNA geographic haplogroups in patients treated with surgery alone (p = 0.008). D. DFS according to mtDNA geographic haplogroups in patients received radiotherapy after surgery (p = 0.05).
Univariate and multivariate analysis of disease-free survival in 300 OSCC patients.
| Univariate | Multivariate | ||||
| Variables | Category | Hazard ratio (95% CI) |
| Hazard ratio (95% CI) |
|
| Age (years) | |||||
| <51 | 1 | 1 | |||
| ≥51 | 0.84 (0.59–1.19) | 0.32 | 1.0 (0.70–1.43) | 0.99 | |
| Differentiation | |||||
| Well | 1 | 1 | |||
| Moderate/poor | 1.09 (0.76–1.56) | 0.63 | 1.07 (0.74–1.54) | 0.74 | |
| Primary tumor | |||||
| T1/T2 | 1 | 1 | |||
| T3/T4 | 1.48 (1.04–2.10) | 0.03 | 1.24 (0.86–1.78) | 0.26 | |
| Nodal status | |||||
| (−) metastasis, (−) ECS | 1 | 1 | |||
| (+) metastasis, (−) ECS | 1.39 (0.78–2.46) | 0.26 | 1.28 (0.71–2.29) | 0.41 | |
| (+) metastasis, (+) ECS | 2.39 (1.62–3.54) | <0.001 | 2.14 (1.41–3.25) | <0.001 | |
| mtDNA haplogroup | |||||
| CZD haplogroup | 0.52 (0.34–0.80) | 0.003 | 0.55 (0.36–0.84) | 0.006 | |
| Others | 1 | 1 | |||
Characteristics of specific nonsynonymous variants in four geographic haplogroups observed in 300 OSCC patients.
| Haplogroup | Variant nucleotide position | Gene | Amino acid change | Respiratory complex involved | Prediction of variant functionality | Frequency | ||||||
| PolyPhen-2 | SIFT | Grantham | BLOSUM 62 matrix | Evolutionaryconservation | ||||||||
| Macro-M haplogroup | ||||||||||||
| MGE/CZD | 8701G | ATP6 | T59A | V | Benign (0.00) | 0.57 (T) |
|
| EU | 153/156 (98.1) | ||
| MGE/CZD | 10398G | ND3 | T114A | I | Benign (0.00) | 0.36 (T) |
|
| EU | 156/156 (100) | ||
| East Asia MGE haplogroup (n = 65) | ||||||||||||
| M7b | 4048A | ND1 | D248N | I | Benign (0.00) | 1.00 (T) | 23 | 1 | EU | 16/17 (94.1) | ||
| M7b | 5460A | ND2 | A331T | I | Benign (0.00) | 0.29 (T) |
|
| EU | 16/17 (94.1) | ||
| M7b | 7853A | COII | V90I | IV | Benign (0.00) | 1.00 (T) | 29 | 3 | EU | 17/17 (100) | ||
| M7b | 12811C | ND5 | Y159H | I | Benign (0.00) | 0.69 (T) |
| 2 | EU | 14/17 (82.4) | ||
| M7c | 5442C | ND2 | F325L | I | Benign (0.00) | 1.00 (T) | 22 | 0 | EU | 16/18 (88.9) | ||
| M9 (M9a/E) | 4491A | ND2 | V8I | I | Benign (0.00) | 1.00 (T) | 29 | 3 | EU | 5/6 (83.3) | ||
| M9a | 3394C | ND1 | Y30H | I | Benign (0.01) |
|
| 2 |
| 4/5 (80.0) | ||
| E | 7598A | COII | A5T | IV | Benign (0.00) | 0.17 (T) |
|
| EU | 2/2 (100) | ||
| E | 14577C | ND6 | I33V | I | Benign (0.00) | 0.28 (T) | 29 | 3 |
| 2/2 (100) | ||
| M12a | 12030G | ND4 | N424S | I | Benign (0.00) | 0.38 (T) | 46 | 1 | EU | 2/2 (100) | ||
| M12a | 12358G | ND5 | T8A | I | Unknown | 0.48 (T) |
|
| EU | 2/2 (100) | ||
| M12a | 15651T | Cyt b | A302V | III | Benign (0.14) | 0.88 (T) |
| 0 |
| 2/2 (100) | ||
| G | 4833G | ND2 | T122A | I |
|
|
|
| EU | 9/9 (100) | ||
| Northeast Asia CZD haplogroup (n = 91) | ||||||||||||
| M8 (M8a/CZ) | 8584A | ATP6 | A20T | V | Benign (0.06) |
|
|
| EU | 26/29 (89.7) | ||
| M8a | 8684T | ATP6 | T53I | V | Benign (0.00) | 0.56 (T) |
|
| EU | 16/17 (94.1) | ||
| D (D4/D5) | 5178A | ND2 | L237M | I |
| 0.59 (T) | 15 | 2 | EU | 61/62 (98.4) | ||
| D4 | 8414T | ATP8 | L17F | V |
| 0.30 (T) | 22 | 0 | EU | 35/36 (97.2) | ||
| D5 | 5301G | ND2 | I278V | I | Benign (0.00) |
| 29 | 3 | EU | 25/25 (100) | ||
| East Asia AN haplogroup (n = 25) | ||||||||||||
| N/N9a | 12358G | ND5 | T8A | I | Unknown | 0.48 (T) |
|
| EU | 9/12 (75.0) | ||
| A | 4824G | ND2 | T119A | I |
|
|
|
|
| 13/13 (100) | ||
| A | 8794T | ATP6 | H90Y | V | Benign (0.00) | 0.10 (T) |
| 2 |
| 13/13 (100) | ||
| Southeast Asia RBF haplogroup (n = 119) | ||||||||||||
| R9/F | 13928C | ND5 | S531T | I |
| 1.00 (T) | 46 | 1 | EU | 54/56 (96.4) | ||
Five methods including the PolyPhen-2 and SIFT (Sorting Intolerant From Tolerant) algorithm, the Grantham and BLOSUM 62 matrix, and the degree of evolutionary conservation wer applied to predict the putative effect of each nonsynonymous variant on protein function. Variant on protein function predicted to be significantly impacted is presented in bold phase.
cases with variant/cases in the defined haplogroup.
T: tolerated; D:deleterious.
EC: evolutionary conserved; EU: evolutionary unconserved.