| Literature DB >> 25134718 |
Raquel C Martinez-Chacin, Megan Keniry, Robert K Dearth1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Epidemiological studies have shown that consumption of a high-fat diet (HFD) increases the risk of developing breast cancer (BC). Studies in rodents have shown HFD causes changes in the genetic programming of the maturing mammary gland (MG) increasing the susceptibility of developing the disease. Less is known about how HFD induced genes impact BC development. HFD exposure two weeks before conception to six weeks of age was previously shown to dramatically change MG gene expression in 10 week old mice. Therefore, we investigated these differentially expressed HFD-induced genes for their expression in BC using the NKI 295 breast tumor dataset.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25134718 PMCID: PMC4153917 DOI: 10.1186/1756-0500-7-543
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Res Notes ISSN: 1756-0500
Expression of HFD-induced genes in breast cancer subtypes and association with breast cancer prognosis
| Gene a | Basal-like b | HER2 c | Luminal A d | Luminal B e | Normal-like f | Survival association g |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.17 | -0.13* | -0.24* | -0.19* | -0.33* | Poor prognosis |
|
| -0.01 | 0.00 | -0.18* | -0.06 | -0.11 | Poor prognosis |
|
| 0.07 | 0.04 | -0.16* | -0.03* | -0.18* | Poor prognosis |
|
| 0.00 | 0.07* | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.05 | - |
|
| 0.10 | 0.02 | -0.15* | -0.04* | -0.22* | Poor prognosis |
|
| -0.18 | 0.05* | 0.05* | 0.01* | -0.03* | - |
|
| 0.09 | 0.03 | -0.08* | 0.00* | -0.10* | Poor prognosis |
|
| 0.06 | 0.01 | -0.05* | -0.01 | -0.13* | - |
|
| -0.21 | -0.18 | -0.04* | -0.01* | -0.07* | - |
|
| 0.14 | 0.01* | -0.10* | -0.03* | -0.15* | Poor prognosis |
|
| 0.05 | 0.03* | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.01 | - |
|
| 0.11 | 0.01* | -0.15* | -0.04* | -0.16* | Poor prognosis |
|
| 0.23 | 0.00* | -0.15* | -0.08* | -0.14* | Poor prognosis |
|
| -0.07 | 0.04* | -0.03 | -0.01* | 0.04* | - |
|
| -0.02 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.05* | -0.07 | - |
|
| 0.00 | -0.17* | -0.13* | -0.11 | -0.05 | - |
|
| 0.12 | -0.04* | -0.17* | -0.06* | -0.20* | - |
|
| 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.00 | -0.06* | - |
|
| -0.05 | 0.02* | 0.03* | 0.04* | -0.02 | - |
|
| 0.09 | -0.03* | -0.06* | 0.01* | -0.07* | - |
|
| 0.06 | 0.09 | -0.02* | 0.02 | -0.01* | - |
|
| 0.11 | 0.04 | -0.09* | -0.03* | -0.11* | Poor prognosis |
|
| 0.18 | 0.02* | -0.04* | -0.03* | -0.07* | Poor prognosis |
|
| 0.01 | -0.13* | -0.12* | -0.09* | 0.01 | - |
|
| 0.01 | -0.01 | -0.02 | -0.01 | -0.11* | - |
|
| -0.20 | 0.00* | 0.03* | 0.06* | -0.02* | - |
|
| 0.00 | 0.07* | -0.05* | 0.02 | -0.07* | Poor prognosis |
|
| 0.12 | 0.02* | -0.09* | -0.06* | -0.25* | Poor prognosis |
|
| 0.06 | 0.07 | -0.01 | 0.02 | -0.06* | - |
|
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.06 | - |
|
| 0.04 | 0.01 | -0.03* | -0.04* | -0.13* | - |
|
| 0.09 | 0.06 | -0.03* | 0.03* | -0.08* | Poor prognosis |
|
| 0.06 | -0.03 | 0.01 | 0.00* | 0.03 | - |
|
| 0.06 | 0.03 | -0.06* | -0.03* | -0.03* | - |
|
| -0.04 | -0.04 | 0.02* | -0.01 | 0.08* | Good prognosis |
|
| 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | -0.03 | - |
|
| -0.05 | -0.05 | -0.05 | -0.12 | 0.13* | - |
|
| -0.04 | 0.00 | -0.02 | -0.02 | -0.03 | - |
|
| -0.01 | 0.05* | 0.02 | 0.04* | 0.12* | - |
|
| 0.00 | -0.29* | -0.21* | -0.15* | -0.32* | - |
|
| 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.04* | 0.04* | 0.04 | - |
aHFD induced genes (Luitjen et al.) that were present in the NKI human breast cancer data set as described in the Methods. b-fAverage gene expression among 5 different human breast cancer subtypes for these genes (Tumors: basal-like n = 46; HER2 n = 49; luminal A n = 88; luminal B n = 81; normal-like n = 31). gTotal of 13 genes associated with poor prognosis and 1 gene associated with good prognosis based on Kaplan Meier survival analysis for the indicated gene with 295 BC samples from the NKI dataset as described in the Materials and Methods. The plots for the genes that were significantly associated with prognosis are depicted in Figure 1 of this manuscript. *Gene expression statistically different with respect to basal-like subtype (False discovery Rate [FDR] < 0.01).
Figure 1HFD-induced genes are strongly associated with poor BC prognosis. HFD induced genes from mouse MGs were examined for an association with human BC prognosis using Kaplan Meier survival analysis. Gene expression and survival data was obtained from the NKI (Netherlands Cancer Institute) dataset for each HFD induced gene. 295 breast tumors were divided into two equal-sized groups based on the expression of the indicated gene; one group represented low expression of the gene and the other group represented high expression of the gene. Depicted are 14 out of the 41 analyzed HFD induced genes; only these 14 genes showed significant association with breast cancer prognosis. 13 out of 14 HFD induced genes were significantly associated with a poor prognosis.
Cellular processes of genes associated with poor prognosis
| Gene | Description | GO reference | Gene ontology |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| Matrix metallopeptidase 12 | GO:0006508 | Proteolysis |
|
| Glycoprotein (transmembrane) | GO: 0007155 | Cell adhesion |
|
| Cathepsin L | GO:0006508 | Proteolysis |
|
| Leukocyte immunoglobulin-like receptor, subfamily B, member 4 | GO: 0045671 | Negative regulation of osteoclast differentiation |
|
| DNA (cytosine-5-)-methyltransferase 3 alpha | GO:0006306 | DNA methylation |
|
| Solute carrier family 11 (proton-coupled divalent metal ion transporter), member 1 | GO:0070839 | Divalent metal ion export |
|
| Neutrophil cytosolic factor 2 | GO:0016175 | Superoxide-generating NADPH oxidase activity |
|
| Signal-regulatory protein alpha | GO: 0007155 | Cell adhesion |
|
| Integrin, beta 2 (complement component 3 receptor 3 and 4 subunit) | GO:0007155 | Cell adhesion |
|
| Cystatin B (stefin B) | GO:0010466 | Negative regulation of peptidase activity |
|
| Cathepsin A | GO: 0006508 | Proteolysis |
|
| ADAM metallopeptidase domain 8 | GO: 0006508 | Proteolysis |
|
| Fc fragment of IgG, low affinity IIIa, receptor (CD16a) | GO:0001788 | Antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity |
Gene ontologies from the AMIGO database were obtained for HFD induced genes that were found to be associated with poor prognosis.
Figure 2Poor prognosis HFD genes are highly expressed in the basal-like subtype of BC. We calculated the mean (±SEM) expression of each poor prognosis associated gene (from Figure 1) for each BC subtype using NKI gene expression data. Poor prognosis genes were significantly more highly expressed in the basal-like subtype compared to the other subtypes (Her2, luminal A, luminal B, and normal-like subtypes) based on ANOVA with Dunnett’s post-test using the basal-like subtype as the reference group. **p < 0.01.
Genes associated with poor prognosis in non-basal-like breast cancer
| Gene | Association |
|
|---|---|---|
|
| Poor prognosis |
|
|
| Poor prognosis |
|
|
| Poor prognosis |
|
|
| Poor prognosis |
|
|
| Poor prognosis |
|
|
| Poor prognosis |
|
|
| Poor prognosis |
|
|
| Poor prognosis |
|
|
| Poor prognosis |
|
|
| Poor prognosis |
|
|
| Poor prognosis |
|
|
| Poor prognosis |
|
| MMP12 | - |
|
Kaplan Meier analysis was performed with all non-basal breast cancer samples (249) from the NKI dataset and the HFD genes that were found to be associated with prognosis (from Figure 1 and Additional file 1: Table S1). *5 year Kaplan Meier curve was used instead of all time points for ITGB2. Strikingly, 12 out of 13 genes were still strongly associated with poor prognosis in non-basal breast cancer samples.
Figure 3BC invasion genes are enriched in HFD microarray samples. Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) was performed with microarray data from 10 week old mice treated with HFD (labeled F) or control diet (labeled C) and 361 curated genes sets from the Molecular Signatures Database, Broad Institute; enrichment plots for two of the analyzed gene sets are shown. In these analyses, genes are ranked based on their association with the HFD phenotype or the control phenotype. Genes most strongly associated with HFD would be on the far right. Enrichment scores (ES) are calculated using a weighted Kolmogorov-Smirnov-style statistic. Lines underneath the graph depict the genes that are contained in the investigated gene set. A-B, genes associated with invasion in BC were highly associated with HFD samples. P values are indicated on plots.
Breast cancer gene sets that are enriched in HFD microarray samples
| GENE SET NAME | SIZE | ES | NES | NOM |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| SMID_BREAST_CANCER_NORMAL_LIKE_UP | 348 | 0.50 | 2.13 | <0.001 |
| POOLA_INVASIVE_BREAST_CANCER_UP | 215 | 0.51 | 1.96 | <0.001 |
| BERTUCCI_MEDULLARY_VS_DUCTAL_BREAST_CANCER_UP | 142 | 0.46 | 1.91 | <0.001 |
| FINAK_BREAST_CANCER_SDPP_SIGNATURE | 21 | 0.65 | 1.87 | <0.001 |
| FINETTI_BREAST_CANCER_KINOME_GREEN | 15 | 0.75 | 1.86 | <0.001 |
| SCHUETZ_BREAST_CANCER_DUCTAL_INVASIVE_UP | 266 | 0.44 | 1.77 | <0.001 |
| SMID_BREAST_CANCER_LUMINAL_B_DN | 412 | 0.36 | 1.69 | <0.001 |
| JOHNSTONE_PARVB_TARGETS_3_UP | 306 | 0.34 | 1.64 | <0.001 |
Gene set enrichment analysis was preformed with microarray data from high fat and low fat diet as described in the Materials and Methods and 361 curated breast cancer gene sets on the Molecular Signatures Database, Broad Institute. In GSEA enrichment scores (ES) are calculated for each gene set using a Kolmogorov-Smirnov-style statistic. The ES indicates how strongly associated a gene set is with a given phenotype or not. GSEA generates nominal p-values (NOM p-value) using on a phenotype based permutation comparing ES with a null distribution. Normalized enrichment scores (NES) are adjusted enrichment scores based on the number of genes in each examined set. Gene sets with a nominal P-value (NOM p-value) of 0.001 or less and a normalized enrichment score (NES) of 1.5 or greater are shown. These data suggest that common genes are expressed in mammary fat pads from mice treated with HFD and invasive breast cancer.
Figure 4BC Mesenchymal genes are enriched in HFD microarray samples. GSEA was performed with microarray data from 10 week old mice that were fed HFD (labeled F for flaxseed or CO for corn oil) or normal diet (labeled C for control) and 361 curated gene sets from the Molecular Signatures Database, Broad Institute; enrichment plots are shown for the Charafe_Breast_Cancer_Luminal_VS_Mesenchymal_DN geneset. A-B, genes associated with mesenchymal characteristics in BC were significantly associated with the HFD samples. C, the average expression of the mesenchymal marker Vimentin was calculated for HFD (corn oil or flaxseed) and control samples using data from the Luitjen et al. microarray data set. Vimentin was strikingly expressed 10–20 fold higher in HFD treated MG compared to control MGs. P values are indicated on graphs.
HFD leads to a loss in the expression of luminal genes
| GENE SET NAME | Size | ES | NES | NOM |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| SMID_BREAST_CANCER_NORMAL_LIKE_UP | 348 | 0.50 | 2.09 | <0.001 |
| BERTUCCI_MEDULLARY_VS_DUCTAL_BREAST_CANCER_UP | 142 | 0.47 | 1.95 | <0.001 |
| FINETTI_BREAST_CANCER_KINOME_GREEN | 15 | 0.75 | 1.84 | 0.01 |
| SMID_BREAST_CANCER_LUMINAL_B_DN | 412 | 0.37 | 1.70 | <0.001 |
| FARMER_BREAST_CANCER_CLUSTER_1 | 25 | 0.66 | 1.70 | 0.01 |
| CHARAFE_BREAST_CANCER_LUMINAL_VS_MESENCHYMAL_DN | 325 | 0.33 | 1.53 | 0.01 |
| HOWLIN_PUBERTAL_MAMMARY_GLAND | 60 | 0.40 | 1.50 | 0.03 |
Gene set enrichment analysis was performed with 53 gene sets containing luminal genes in breast cancer denoted (form the Molecular Signatures Database, Broad Institute). In GSEA enrichment scores (ES) are calculated for each gene set using a Kolmogorov-Smirnov-style statistic. The ES indicates how strongly associated a gene set is with a given phenotype or not. GSEA generates nominal p-values (NOM p-value) using on a phenotype based permutation comparing ES with a null distribution. Normalized enrichment scores (NES) are adjusted enrichment scores based on the number of genes in each examined set. We found that gene sets with down-regulation of luminal genes were enriched in the HFD samples.