| Literature DB >> 24204690 |
Marjaana Pussila1, Laura Sarantaus, Denis Dermadi Bebek, Satu Valo, Nima Reyhani, Saara Ollila, Essi Päivärinta, Päivi Peltomäki, Marja Mutanen, Minna Nyström.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths in the Western world and interactions between genetic and environmental factors, including diet, are suggested to play a critical role in its etiology. We conducted a long-term feeding experiment in the mouse to address gene expression and methylation changes arising in histologically normal colonic mucosa as putative cancer-predisposing events available for early detection. The expression of 94 growth-regulatory genes previously linked to human CRC was studied at two time points (5 weeks and 12 months of age) in the heterozygote Mlh1(+/-) mice, an animal model for human Lynch syndrome (LS), and wild type Mlh1(+/+) littermates, fed by either Western-style (WD) or AIN-93G control diet. In mice fed with WD, proximal colon mucosa, the predominant site of cancer formation in LS, exhibited a significant expression decrease in tumor suppressor genes, Dkk1, Hoxd1, Slc5a8, and Socs1, the latter two only in the Mlh1(+/-) mice. Reduced mRNA expression was accompanied by increased promoter methylation of the respective genes. The strongest expression decrease (7.3 fold) together with a significant increase in its promoter methylation was seen in Dkk1, an antagonist of the canonical Wnt signaling pathway. Furthermore, the inactivation of Dkk1 seems to predispose to neoplasias in the proximal colon. This and the fact that Mlh1 which showed only modest methylation was still expressed in both Mlh1(+/-) and Mlh1(+/+) mice indicate that the expression decreases and the inactivation of Dkk1 in particular is a prominent early marker for colon oncogenesis.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24204690 PMCID: PMC3815089 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0076865
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Diet nutritional information.
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| Soybean Oil | 70 | - |
| Anhydrous Milkfat | - | 133 |
| Canola Oil | - | 55 |
| Sunflower Oil | - | 12 |
|
| ||
| Starch | 397 | 306 |
| Maltodextrin | 132 | 95 |
| Sucrose | 100 | 116 |
|
| 200 (Casein) | 232 (Casein, vitamin free) |
|
| 3.8 | 4.6 |
| Kcal from fat (%) | 17.2 | 39.2 |
| Kcal from carbohydrates (%) | 63.9 | 42.3 |
| Kcal from protein (%) | 18.8 | 18.5 |
| Vitamin D (IU/kg) | 1000 | 100 |
| Folic acid (mg/kg) | 2 | 0.2 |
| Calcium | 5 | 0.5 |
For detailed composition of the experimental diets see Table S1.
a If not stated differently
b If not stated differently
Dkk1 inactivation and colonic neoplasias in different mouse groups.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
|
| 6 | 2 |
|
| 3a | 5 |
|
| 4b | 4c |
|
| 3 | 5a,b,bd |
a hyperplastic polyp; b adenoma; c adenocarcinoma; d not histologically confirmed
Genes showing statistically significant (P < 0.05) mRNA expression differences between tp0 and tp1 in all four mouse groups; in the control group (Mlh1+/+ AIN) and the three study groups (Mlh1+/- AIN, Mlh1+/+ WD, Mlh1+/- WD).
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3.3 (0.003) | 3.8 (0.000) | 4.3 (0.001) | 3.6 (0.000) |
|
| 5.4 (0.002) | 4.9 (0.000) | 5.9 (0.002) | 8.4 (0.000) |
|
| 3.4 (0.025) | 3.4 (0.014) | 3.2 (0.034) | 2.7 (0.028) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2.6 (0.005) | 3.0 (0.002) | 1.8 (0.039) | 1.6 (0.028) |
|
| 4.1 (0.002) | 5.6 (0.000) | 3.4 (0.002) | 5.4 (0.000) |
|
| 4.8 (0.002) | 7.6 (0.000) | 3.4 (0.021) | 5.0 (0.000) |
|
| 3.3 (0.004) | 4.7 (0.000) | 3.2 (0.003) | 5.7 (0.000) |
|
| 3.0 (0.005) | 6.0 (0.000) | 3.0 (0.004) | 3.3 (0.000) |
|
| 2.3 (0.002) | 1.8 (0.006) | 2.3 (0.001) | 1.5 (0.040) |
Genes showing statistically significant (P < 0.05) mRNA expression differences between tp0 and tp1 in at least one of the study groups but not in the control group (Mlh1+/+ AIN).
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2.0 (0.110) | 5.1 (0.012) | 6.2 (0.003) | 7.3 (0.003) |
|
| 1.3 (0.078) | 1.7 (0.041) | 1.3 (0.224) | 1.5 (0.032) |
|
| 1.1 (0.348) | 2.0 (0.075) | 2.1 (0.019) | 1.5 (0.191) |
|
| 1.6 (0.460) | 2.7 (0.067) | 1.0 (0.485) | 3.1 (0.026) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2.2 (0.108) | 2.2 (0.037) | 1.7 (0.329) | 1.0 (0.637) |
|
| 1.4 (0.442) | 2.0 (0.017) | 1.1 (0.725) | 3.3 (0.019) |
|
| 2.4 (0.120) | 1.8 (0.140) | 3.5 (0.124) | 9.4 (0.000) |
Figure 1Validation of the mRNA expression changes that were associated with WD* and/or inherited Mlh1 mutation using TaqMan assays.
Relative expression in different study groups (Mlh1+/- AIN, Mlh1+/+ WD*, and Mlh1+/- WD*) is compared to the control group (Mlh1+/+ AIN). Each sample is a mixture of eight RNA samples from eight different tp1 mice belonging to each mouse group. Data is presented as mean ± SEM (standard error of the mean) (n = 3), *significant difference compared to the control group. Median permutation method, P < 0.05. (A) Mlh1 shows the same 50% expression difference between the genotypes as at the starting point of the study. (B) Dkk1 is significantly down regulated in the study groups with WD* and/or Mlh1 heterozygosity. (C) Slc5a8 does not show significant expression differences at tp1. (D) Hoxd1 is down regulated in association with WD* in both genotypes; the down regulation being especially strong in the Mlh1+/+ WD group. (E) Socs1 does not show significant expression differences at tp1. (F) Dkk2 is down regulated in association with WD* in both genotypes.
Descriptive and comparative statistics of the methylation data of the genes, Dkk1, Slc5a8, Hoxd1, Socs1, Sfrp1 and Mlh1, for mice at tp0 and tp1 and for Group 1 (G1) and Group 2 (G2) (higher and lower methylation cluster, respectively) at tp1 and comparison of the mean methylation values between the different mouse groups.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| tp0 (n =15) | 0.034 | 0.024 | 0.030 | 0.01 | 0.10 | 0.09 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| tp1 (n =32) | 0.147 | 0.075 | 0.120 | 0.07 | 0.35 | 0.28 | |||||
| G1 (n =18) | 0.187 | 0.078 | 0.160 | 0.10 | 0.35 | 0.25 | |||||
| G2 (n =14) | 0.094 | 0.013 | 0.090 | 0.07 | 0.12 | 0.05 | |||||
|
| tp0 (n =15) | 0.058 | 0.017 | 0.052 | 0.04 | 0.12 | 0.07 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| tp1 (n =32) | 0.090 | 0.044 | 0.068 | 0.05 | 0.21 | 0.15 | |||||
| G1 (n =11) | 0.142 | 0.037 | 0.136 | 0.09 | 0.21 | 0.12 | |||||
| G2 (n =21) | 0.063 | 0.008 | 0.062 | 0.05 | 0.08 | 0.03 | |||||
|
| tp0 (n =15) | 0.037 | 0.008 | 0.040 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| tp1 (n =32) | 0.093 | 0.032 | 0.080 | 0.06 | 0.18 | 0.12 | |||||
| G1 (n =13) | 0.119 | 0.021 | 0.120 | 0.08 | 0.15 | 0.07 | |||||
| G2 (n =18) | 0.069 | 0.006 | 0.070 | 0.06 | 0.08 | 0.02 | |||||
|
| tp0 (n =15) | 0.084 | 0.012 | 0.083 | 0.07 | 0.11 | 0.04 | 0.002 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.066 |
| tp1 (n =32) | 0.107 | 0.028 | 0.093 | 0.08 | 0.17 | 0.10 | |||||
| G1 (n =10) | 0.144 | 0.021 | 0.148 | 0.11 | 0.17 | 0.07 | |||||
| G2 (n =22) | 0.091 | 0.008 | 0.091 | 0.08 | 0.11 | 0.04 | |||||
|
| tp0 (n =15) | 0.071 | 0.014 | 0.067 | 0.05 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| tp1 (n =32) | 0.149 | 0.040 | 0.136 | 0.10 | 0.24 | 0.14 | |||||
| G1 (n =11) | 0.189 | 0.040 | 0.198 | 0.12 | 0.24 | 0.12 | |||||
| G2 (n =19) | 0.126 | 0.016 | 0.122 | 0.10 | 0.16 | 0.06 | |||||
|
| tp0 (n =16) | 0.040 | 0.016 | 0.036 | 0.02 | 0.09 | 0.07 | 0.089 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.776 |
| tp1 (n =31) | 0.056 | 0.029 | 0.048 | 0.02 | 0.13 | 0.10 | |||||
| G1(n =9) | 0.086 | 0.023 | 0.088 | 0.05 | 0.13 | 0.08 | |||||
| G2 (n =22) | 0.043 | 0.021 | 0.037 | 0.02 | 0.11 | 0.08 |
a P(Mann-Whitney test, Exact Sig., 2 tailed)
Figure 2Methylation clusters and the NMDS analysis of the methylation data.
Using the Chipster’s Dendrogram tool, two distinct clusters, the higher (Group 1) and the lower methylation cluster (Group 2) were observed at tp1. Except for one mouse in Sfrp1 and in Socs1 (B214 and B225, respectively) the same 11 mice clustered into the higher methylation cluster at CGIs of Dkk1, Slc5a8, Hoxd1, Socs1, and Sfrp1. The neoplasias are marked with superscripts ( ahyperplastic polyp, badenoma, cadenocarcinoma, dnot histologically confirmed) and the mice groups with different colors (black; Mlh1+/+ AIN, brown; Mlh1+/- AIN, turquoise; Mlh1+/+ WD*, pink; Mlh1+/- WD*). Also according to the NMDS analysis (Chipster) the tp0 and tp1 mice segregate into different parts of the plots indicating differences in their methylation levels. Red refers to tp0 mice, green refers to Group 1 mice, blue refers to Group 2 mice, and turquoise refers to mice that did not belong to either group.