| Literature DB >> 25496125 |
Camila Miranda Lopes-Ramos1,2, Angelita Habr-Gama3,4, Bruna de Souza Quevedo5, Natália Mariana Felício6,7, Fabiana Bettoni8, Fernanda Christtanini Koyama9, Paula Fontes Asprino10, Pedro Alexandre Galante11, Joaquim Gama-Rodrigues12,13, Anamaria Aranha Camargo14,15, Rodrigo Oliva Perez16,17,18, Raphael Bessa Parmigiani19.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by radical surgery is the preferred treatment strategy for locally advanced rectal cancer. However, complete tumor regression is observed in a significant proportion of patients after nCRT, making them ideal candidates for alternative treatment strategies to this considerably morbid procedure. Identification of such patients based on clinical findings (complete clinical response - cCR) is difficult mainly because it relies on subjective clinical and imaging studies. Our goal was to identify biomarkers capable of predicting complete response to nCRT.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25496125 PMCID: PMC4279677 DOI: 10.1186/s12920-014-0068-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Genomics ISSN: 1755-8794 Impact factor: 3.063
Clinical and demographics data of patients included in the study
|
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 7 | 20 | 7 | 5 | 4 | ||
|
| 58.9 ± 10.9 | 54.2 ± 13.7 | ns | 60.4 ± 13.6 | 59.6 ± 14.5 | 69.3 ± 15.0 | ns |
|
| 2/5 | 9/11 | ns | 3/4 | 3/2 | 3/1 | ns |
|
| 4.0 ± 2.6 | 4.3 ± 2.2 | ns | 4.6 ± 2.4 | 2.2 ± 2.8 | 4 ± 0.8 | ns |
|
| 4.4 ± 0.8 | 4.6 ± 1.5 | ns | 3.6 ± 0.9 | 5 ± 1.9 | 5 ± 1.4 | ns |
|
| ns | ns | |||||
| T2 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 0 | ||
| T3 | 7 | 17 | 2 | 2 | 4 | ||
| T4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | ||
| N0 | 4 | 7 | 2 | 2 | 2 | ||
| N+ | 3 | 13 | 5 | 3 | 2 | ||
|
| |||||||
| cCR | 3 | - | 6 | - | 4 | ||
| pCR | 4 | - | 1 | - | - | ||
| ypT2 | - | 6 | - | 1 | - | ||
| ypT3 | - | 13 | - | 4 | - | ||
| ypT4 | - | 1 | - | 0 | - | ||
| ypN0 | - | 12 | - | 1 | - | ||
| ypN+ | - | 8 | - | 2 | - | ||
| ypNx | - | 0 | - | 2 | - | ||
Differentially expressed miRNAs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| miR-205-5p | 3.67 | 2,099.32 | 0.002 | 6.21E-06 | 0.002 |
| miR-21-5p | 106,020.55 | 31,438.53 | 3.372 | 1.99E-04 | 0.028 |
| miR-1290-3p | 115.14 | 30.02 | 3.835 | 2.65E-04 | 0.028 |
| miR-1246 | 65.58 | 19.60 | 3.346 | 3.36E-04 | 0.028 |
miRNAs mean expression is shown for each response group to nCRT and fold change of complete responders relative to incomplete responders. Statistical significance can be verified by P-values and false discovery rate (FDR).
Figure 1Patients’ clustering based on the expression of 4 differently expressed miRNAs. A) Hierarchical clustering heatmap for incomplete (I) and complete responders (C). B) PCA was conducted for 27 samples and 4 variables (differently expressed miRNAs). Blue dots: complete responders; red dots: incomplete responders.
Figure 2Accuracy to predict nCRT based on the expression of differently expressed miRNAs. ROC curves were built based on miRNA expression determined by RNA-Seq. Area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity (Sens) and specificity (Spec) were calculated for each miRNA.
Figure 3miR-21-5p expression in all samples included in the study. Patients were divided in 3 groups according to nCRT response: patients with initial cCR followed by early local recurrence (n = 4), incomplete responders (n = 25), and complete responders (n = 14). miR-21-5p expression is given as normalized values (cpm) from RNA-Seq data. Statistical analysis was performed with EdgeR (*FDR < 0.05).
Figure 4Expression analysis of gene. A) Correlation between SATB1 and miR-21-5p expression, measured by RNA-Seq, in the same primary rectal tumors. r: Pearson correlation factor. B) SATB1 expression according to nCRT response: incomplete responders (n = 13), and complete responders (n = 6). SATB1 expression is given as normalized values (rpkm). Mann–Whitney test performed.
Figure 5Manipulation of miR-21-5p expression negatively correlates with SATB1 mRNA expression. A) Evaluation of miR-21-5p expression by qPCR shows that HCT116 and SW480 cells express different levels. B) miR-21-5p and SATB1 mRNA expression were evaluated by qRT-PCR 24 hours after transient transfection of SW480 cell line with miR-21-5p mimic or mimic control; C) miR-21-5p and SATB1 mRNA expression was evaluated 24 hours after transient transfection of HCT116 cell line with miR-21-5p inhibitor or inhibitor control. Bars represent mean expression relative to control and normalized by RNU6b (for miR-21-5p) and HMBS (for SATB1). Error bars represent standard deviation for quadruplicates in 2 independent experiments. *P < 0.005 for Student’s t-test.
Figure 6Manipulation of miR-21-5p expression alters response to chemoradiation . A) Quantification of colony formation assays for SW480 cell line transfected with miR-21-5p mimic or mimic control. B) Quantification of colony formation assays for HCT116 cell line transfected with miR-21-5p inhibitor or inhibitor control. Cells were grown under control conditions or submitted to CRT treatment, which consisted of 5 μM 5-FU and a single dose of 2Gy (A) or 1Gy (B) radiation. Graphs show relative absorbance of colonies stained with crystal violet, normalized to untreated controls. All values are presented as means ± s.d. relative to mimic or inhibitor controls from two independent experiments with quadruplicates. *P < 0.005 for Student’s t-test.