| Literature DB >> 23880823 |
S C Williamson1, R Mitter, A C Hepburn, L Wilson, A Mantilla, H Y Leung, C N Robson, R Heer.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evidence increasingly supports that prostate cancer is initiated by the malignant transformation of stem cells (SCs). Furthermore, many SC-signalling pathways are shown to be shared in prostate cancer. Therefore, we planned transcriptome characterisation of adult prostate SCs as a strategy to consider new targets for cancer treatment.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23880823 PMCID: PMC3749571 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2013.399
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Cancer ISSN: 0007-0920 Impact factor: 7.640
Figure 1Pathway analysis of prostate hierarchy. (A) (GeneGo Inc., St Joseph, MI, USA) analysis comparing genes two-fold different between the α2β1HI CD133+VE and α2β1HI CD133−VE fractions. Top 10 pathways are ranked according to their statistical significance (inverse log P-value). (B) Metacore-annotated pathway map (GeneGo Inc.) for testosterone biosynthesis and metabolism comparing the α2β1HI CD133+VE with the α2β1HI CD133−VE fraction. Blue thermometers indicate downregulation of genes in the α2β1HI CD133+VE fraction.
Figure 2Expression of UGTA1 enzymes in the prostate differentiation and prostate cancer progression. Error bars represent s.e. of the mean. (A) Expression of individual UGTA1 enzymes following real-time PCR normalised to GAPDH (n=6). (B) The GSEA for UGT1A comparisons in stem cell (SC) and cancer SC (CSC) vs terminally differentiated (TD) normal and terminally differentiated cancer (CTD) cells, respectively. Barcode plots are graphical representations of the Wilcox gene-set test results using ranks. The ranks of the sorted log-fold changes between conditions run along the x axis from high (pink) to low (green). Black lines represent matches to the UGTA1 enzymes. P-values are given in the tables below for the alternative hypothesis that the UGTA1 enzymes tend to be (i) upregulated in the data set or (ii) downregulated. (C) The GSEA for comparisons of UGT1A expression in benign prostate (Ben.), primary prostate cancer (1°) and castrate-resistant metastatic cancer (Mets).
Figure 3Functional characterisation of altered UGT1A expression in prostate cancer. (A) Representative western blot analysis measuring expression of UGT1A. (B) Representative western blot analysis of UGT1A, AR and PSA following knock down with UGT1A siRNA. (C) A 2D colony-forming efficiency of LNCaP in complete medium following knock down with UGT1A siRNA (n=3; P<0.05).
Figure 4Expression of UGT1A within a tissue microarray of prostate cancer ( Error bars represent s.e. of the mean. (A) Representative images of UGT1A staining in prostate tissue. (B) Staining intensity for UGT1A for samples stratified for D′Amico risk. (C) Presenting PSA levels according to staining intensity for UGT1A. (D) Prostate-specific antigen nadir levels following hormonal therapy according to UGT1A expression (E) A Kaplan–Meier plot demonstrating survival according to UGT1A staining intensities of 0–1 (blue line) and 2–3 (green line). (F) Kaplan–Meier plots of prostate cancer survival in patients without metastases (left hand plot) or with metastases (right hand plot) with UGT1A staining intensity of 0–1 (blue line) or 2–3 (green line).