BACKGROUND: Smoothened, frizzled family receptor (SMO) is an important component of the hedgehog signaling pathway, which has been implicated in various human carcinomas. However, clinical, molecular, and prognostic associations of SMO expression in colorectal cancer remain unclear. METHODS: Using a database of 735 colon and rectal cancers in the Nurse's Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study, we examined the relationship of tumor SMO expression (assessed by immunohistochemistry) to prognosis, and to clinical, pathological, and tumor molecular features, including mutations of KRAS, BRAF, and PIK3CA, microsatellite instability, CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP), LINE-1 methylation, and expression of phosphorylated AKT and CTNNB1. RESULTS: SMO expression was detected in 370 tumors (50 %). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, SMO expression was independently inversely associated with phosphorylated AKT expression [odds ratio (OR) 0.48; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.34-0.67] and CTNNB1 nuclear localization (OR 0.48; 95 % CI 0.35-0.67). SMO expression was not significantly associated with colorectal cancer-specific or overall survival. However, in CIMP-high tumors, but not CIMP-low/0 tumors, SMO expression was significantly associated with better colorectal cancer-specific survival (log-rank P = 0.012; multivariate hazard ratio, 0.36; 95 % CI 0.13-0.95; P interaction = 0.035, for SMO and CIMP status). CONCLUSIONS: Our data reveal novel potential associations between the hedgehog, the WNT/CTNNB1, and the PI3K (phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphonate 3-kinase)/AKT pathways, supporting pivotal roles of SMO and hedgehog signaling in pathway networking. SMO expression in colorectal cancer may interact with tumor CIMP status to affect patient prognosis, although confirmation by future studies is needed.
BACKGROUND:Smoothened, frizzled family receptor (SMO) is an important component of the hedgehog signaling pathway, which has been implicated in various humancarcinomas. However, clinical, molecular, and prognostic associations of SMO expression in colorectal cancer remain unclear. METHODS: Using a database of 735 colon and rectal cancers in the Nurse's Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study, we examined the relationship of tumorSMO expression (assessed by immunohistochemistry) to prognosis, and to clinical, pathological, and tumor molecular features, including mutations of KRAS, BRAF, and PIK3CA, microsatellite instability, CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP), LINE-1 methylation, and expression of phosphorylated AKT and CTNNB1. RESULTS:SMO expression was detected in 370 tumors (50 %). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, SMO expression was independently inversely associated with phosphorylated AKT expression [odds ratio (OR) 0.48; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.34-0.67] and CTNNB1 nuclear localization (OR 0.48; 95 % CI 0.35-0.67). SMO expression was not significantly associated with colorectal cancer-specific or overall survival. However, in CIMP-high tumors, but not CIMP-low/0 tumors, SMO expression was significantly associated with better colorectal cancer-specific survival (log-rank P = 0.012; multivariate hazard ratio, 0.36; 95 % CI 0.13-0.95; P interaction = 0.035, for SMO and CIMP status). CONCLUSIONS: Our data reveal novel potential associations between the hedgehog, the WNT/CTNNB1, and the PI3K (phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphonate 3-kinase)/AKT pathways, supporting pivotal roles of SMO and hedgehog signaling in pathway networking. SMO expression in colorectal cancer may interact with tumorCIMP status to affect patient prognosis, although confirmation by future studies is needed.
Authors: Shuji Ogino; Kaori Shima; Jeffrey A Meyerhardt; Nadine J McCleary; Kimmie Ng; Donna Hollis; Leonard B Saltz; Robert J Mayer; Paul Schaefer; Renaud Whittom; Alexander Hantel; Al B Benson; Donna Spiegelman; Richard M Goldberg; Monica M Bertagnolli; Charles S Fuchs Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2011-12-06 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Timothy J Price; Jennifer E Hardingham; Chee K Lee; Andrew Weickhardt; Amanda R Townsend; Joseph W Wrin; Ann Chua; Aravind Shivasami; Michelle M Cummins; Carmel Murone; Niall C Tebbutt Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-06-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Young A Yoo; Myoung Hee Kang; Hyun Joo Lee; Baek-hui Kim; Jong Kuk Park; Hyun Koo Kim; Jun Suk Kim; Sang Cheul Oh Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2011-10-05 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Anca Oniscu; Roberta M James; Robert G Morris; Scott Bader; Roger D G Malcomson; David J Harrison Journal: J Pathol Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 7.996
Authors: David Qualtrough; Andrea Buda; William Gaffield; Ann C Williams; Christos Paraskeva Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2004-07-20 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Xiaoyun Liao; Teppei Morikawa; Paul Lochhead; Yu Imamura; Aya Kuchiba; Mai Yamauchi; Katsuhiko Nosho; Zhi Rong Qian; Reiko Nishihara; Jeffrey A Meyerhardt; Charles S Fuchs; Shuji Ogino Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2012-02-22 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Georg Richtig; Alena M Aigelsreiter; Martin Asslaber; Thomas Weiland; Martin Pichler; Katharina Eberhard; Stephan Sygulla; Silvia Schauer; Gerald Hoefler; Ariane Aigelsreiter Journal: Histopathology Date: 2019-05-28 Impact factor: 5.087
Authors: Shailesh M Advani; Pragati Advani; Stacia M DeSantis; Derek Brown; Helena M VonVille; Michael Lam; Jonathan M Loree; Amir Mehrvarz Sarshekeh; Jan Bressler; David S Lopez; Carrie R Daniel; Michael D Swartz; Scott Kopetz Journal: Transl Oncol Date: 2018-07-30 Impact factor: 4.243