| Literature DB >> 25561224 |
Chi-Jung Chung1, Chao-Hsiang Chang2, Chih-Pin Chuu3, Chi-Rei Yang4, Yi-Huei Chang5, Chi-Ping Huang6, Wen-Chi Chen7, Mu-Chi Chung8, Han Chang9.
Abstract
This study aims to elucidate the level of DNA methylation in urothelial carcinomas (UCs) using 5-methylcytosine (5-MeC) immunohistochemistry (IHC). We examined the relationship among 5-MeC levels, DNA (cytosine-5)-methyltransferase 1 (DNMT1) immunostaining levels, and clinicopathologic features. Tissue samples included 23 normal urothelia and 150 urothelial neoplasia, which comprised 40 non-invasive and 110 invasive UCs. The levels of 5-MeC and DNMT1 were assessed based on their immunoreactivities and then divided into low and high levels. In addition, we collected information on clinical variables, pathologic features, and recurrent status from patient questionnaires and medical records. Chi-square test and multivariate logistic regression model were used for analyses. Results showed that 5-MeC levels were positively associated with DNMT1 levels in UC (p = 0.0288). Both 5-MeC and DNMT1 were low in approximately 50% (76/150) of UC. The percentage of low 5-MeC levels was higher in invasive UC (65/110; 59%) than in normal urothelia (2/23; 13%) and non-invasive UC (18/40; 45%). Clinical factors were independently associated with low 5-MeC levels after adjusting for age and sex, including cancer stages II-IV, presence of UC in situ, and marked inflammation. Low 5-MeC levels in stage I invasive UC were not significantly different from those of non-invasive tumors (p = 0.8478). Low DNMT1 levels were only associated with UC with squamous differentiation (p = 0.0365). Neither 5-MeC nor DNMT1 levels were associated with UC recurrence. In conclusion, a low 5-MeC level could predict the progression of UC invasion into muscle.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25561224 PMCID: PMC4307268 DOI: 10.3390/ijms16010677
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Clinicopathologic variables of patients with urothelial carcinomas (UCs).
| Variables | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5-MeC | DNMT1 | |||
| All cases | 150 (100.0) | 104.9 ± 23.2 | 162.3 ± 19.3 | |
| Age (year) | Median (range) | 68 (26–87) | – | – |
| Sex | Male | 65 (43.3) | 109.9 ± 25.6 | 163.5 ± 19.9 |
| Female | 85 (56.7) | 101.0 ± 20.5 | 161.4 ± 8.9 | |
| Smoking | Never | 66 (44.0) | 108.5 ± 24.1 | 161.8 ± 17.3 |
| Ever | 36 (24.0) | 109.4 ± 22.5 | 159.9 ± 23.3 | |
| Missing cases | 48 (32.0) | – | – | |
| Tumor histology | UIS | 5 (3.3) | 126.8 ± 18.3 | 174.8 ± 21.3 |
| Noninvasive papillary UC | 35 (23.3) | 110.7 ± 24.2 | 162.4 ± 22.7 | |
| Invasive UC | 108 (72.0) | 102.1 ± 23.3 | 161.7 ± 18.1 | |
| Small cell carcinoma | 2 (1.4) | 115.7 ± 3.9 | 149.6 ± 0.38 | |
| Tumor location | Pelvis | 27 (18.0) | 108.7 ± 22.4 | 163.2 ± 17.6 |
| Ureter | 65 (43.3) | 98.0 ± 20.8 | 161.4 ± 17.4 | |
| Urinary bladder | 58 (38.7) | 110.9 ± 24.3 | 162.8 ± 22.2 | |
| Tumor grading | Low grade | 34 (22.7) | 107.3 ± 25.1 | 166.1 ± 20.7 |
| High grade | 116 (77.3) | 104.2 ± 22.7 | 161.2 ± 8.9 | |
| TNM stage | 0a | 35 (23.3) | 110.7 ± 4.2 | 162.4 ± 22.7 |
| 0is | 5 (3.3) | 126.8 ± 18.3 | 174.8 ± 1.3 | |
| I | 42 (28.0) | 105.0 ± 22.9 | 162.9 ± 18.6 | |
| II | 34 (22.7) | 100.3 ± 20.2 | 159.2 ± 19.0 | |
| III | 33 (22.0) | 99.8 ± 24.2 | 162.1 ± 6.5 | |
| IV | 1 (0.7) | 113.2 | 183.5 | |
| Tumor recurrence | Absent | 134 (89.3) | 105.2 ± 23.6 | 162.9 ± 18.7 |
| Present | 16 (10.7) | 102.3 ± 20.1 | 157.5 ± 24.3 | |
|
| ||||
| Subjacent UIS | Absent | 90 (60.0) | 109.3 ± 22.3 | 164.2 ± 19.2 |
| Present | 60 (40.0) | 98.4 ± 23.1 | 159.4 ± 9.3 | |
| Inflammation | None | 54 (36.0) | 107.4 ± 24.8 | 163.7 ± 19.4 |
| + | 41 (27.3) | 108.4 ± 19.8 | 167.4 ± 19.1 | |
| ++ | 33 (22.0) | 103.5 ± 25.2 | 160.6 ± 15.9 | |
| +++ | 22 (14.7) | 94.5 ± 19.6 | 151.9 ± 21.2 | |
| Tumor with SD | Absent | 107 (71.3) | 106.5 ± 22.6 | 163.5 ± 19.8 |
| Present | 43 (28.7) | 100.9 ± 24.5 | 159.3 ± 18.1 | |
| Tumor with GD | Absent | 137 (91.3) | 105.3 ± 23.7 | 162.9 ± 19.3 |
| Present | 13 (8.7) | 100.4 ± 17.4 | 155.3 ± 19.2 | |
| LVI or PNI | Absent | 128 (85.3) | 105.2 ± 23.2 | 161.6 ± 19.7 |
| Present | 22 (14.7) | 103.2 ± 23.7 | 166.3 ± 17.3 | |
H-Score, representative of the staining intensity and described in “Experimental Section”; 5-MeC, 5-methylocytosine; DNMT1, DNA (cytosine-5)-methyltransferase 1; 0a, noninvasive papillary carcinoma; 0is, carcinoma in situ; UIS, urothelial carcinoma in situ; UC, urothelial carcinoma; Subjacent UC in situ is described as a status of invasive UC concomitant with UC in situ; Inflammation is defined as tumor stromal inflammation, and its severity is quantified as none, + (mild), ++ (moderate), and +++ (severe with lymphoid aggregates); Tumor with squamous (SD) or glandular differentiation (GD) is defined as a case of more than 10% of cancer cells having squamous or glandular differentiation; Lymphovascular invasion (LVI) is defined as cancer emboli present in lymphovascular channels; Perineural invasion (PNI) is defined as cancer cells invading nerve bundles.
Figure 1Normal urotheliun. (A) Mouse IgG control; (B) 5-Methylocytosine (5-MeC) immunohistochemistry; (C) DNA (cytosine-5)-methyltransferase 1 (DNMT1) immunohistochemistry. High levels of both 5-MeC and DNMT1 present in the normal urothelium. Bar = 200 µm.
Figure 2Representative photography of 5-MeC and DNMT1 immunohistochemistry. The 5-MeC photography in A–E; The DNMT1 photos in F–J. (A,F) High-grade urothelial carcinoma showing high levels of both 5-MeC and DNMT1; (B,G) Low-grade urothelial carcinoma showing high levels of both 5-MeC and DNMT1; (C,H) High-grade urothelial carcinoma with glandular differentiation, showing high 5-MeC but low DNMT1 levels. (D,I) High-grade urothelial carcinoma with squamous differentiation, showing low levels of both 5-MeC and DNMT1; (E,J) High-grade urothelial carcinoma showing low levels of both 5-MeC and DNMT1. Bar = 200 µm.
Distribution of 5-MeC levels in different tumor locations and correlations of 5-MeC and DNMT1 levels for UCs using immunohistochemistry (n = 150).
| Variables | 5-MeC Level | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low | High | |||
| Tumor location | Normal urothelia ( | 2 | 21 | |
| Pelvis ( | 15 | 12 | 0.0014 * | |
| Ureter ( | 43 | 22 | <0.0001 * | |
| Urinary bladder ( | 25 | 33 | 0.0069 * | |
|
| ||||
| DNMT1 level | Low ( | 76 (50.7%) | 53 (35.3%) | 0.0288 † |
| High ( | 7 (4.7%) | 14 (9.3%) | ||
5-MeC, 5-methylocytosine; DNMT1, DNA (cytosine-5)-methyltransferase 1. Percentage in bracket indicates positive number/total number. * Significant when p-value <0.05 using chi-square test compared to normal urothelia; † Significant when p-value <0.05 using Chi-square test.
Comparison of UCs with low 5-MeC or DNMT1 level stratified by clinicopathological features (n = 150).
| Variables | All Cases | Biomarkers with Low Level, | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5-MeC | DNMT1 | |||||
| Age | <68 | 73 | 43 (58.9) | 0.3917 | 64 (87.7) | 0.5657 |
| ≥68 | 77 | 40 (52.0) | 65 (84.4) | |||
| Sex | Male | 65 | 30 (46.2) | 0.0480 * | 54 (83.1) | 0.3669 |
| Female | 85 | 53 (62.4) | 75 (88.2) | |||
| Smoking † | Never | 66 | 35 (53.0) | 0.4072 | 55 (83.3) | 0.7124 |
| Ever | 36 | 16 (44.4) | 31 (86.1) | |||
| Tumor location | Pelvis | 27 | 15 (55.6) | 0.0371 * | 22 (81.5) | 0.1500 |
| Ureter | 65 | 43 (66.2) | 60 (92.3) | |||
| Urinary bladder | 58 | 25 (43.1) | 47 (81.0) | |||
| Tumor grade | Low grade | 34 | 18 (52.9) | 0.7500 | 30 (88.2) | 0.6690 |
| High grade | 116 | 65 (56.0) | 99 (85.3) | |||
| TNM stage | 0a/0is | 40 | 18 (45.0) | 0.0321 * | 33 (82.5) | 0.7250 |
| I | 42 | 20 (47.6) | 36 (85.7) | |||
| II/III/IV | 68 | 45 (66.2) | 60 (88.2) | |||
| Tumor recurrence | Absent | 134 | 75 (56.0) | 0.6493 | 115 (85.8) | 0.8548 |
| Present | 16 | 8 (50.0) | 14 (87.5) | |||
|
| ||||||
| UIS | Absent | 90 | 41 (45.6) | 0.0032 * | 74 (82.2) | 0.1024 |
| Present | 60 | 42 (70.0) | 55 (91.7) | |||
| Inflammation | None/+/++ | 128 | 65 (50.8) | 0.0068 * | 109 (85.2) | 0.7402 |
| +++ | 22 | 18 (81.8) | 20 (90.9) | |||
| SD | Absent | 107 | 56 (52.3) | 0.2442 | 88 (82.2) | 0.0365 * |
| Present | 43 | 27 (62.8) | 41 (95.4) | |||
| GD | Absent | 137 | 74 (54.0) | 0.2916 | 117 (85.4) | 0.6948 |
| Present | 13 | 9 (69.2) | 12 (92.3) | |||
| LVI or PNI | Absent | 128 | 71 (55.5) | 0.9359 | 110 (85.9) | 0.9576 |
| Present | 22 | 12 (54.6) | 19 (86.4) | |||
* Significant when p-value <0.05 using chi-square test; † 48 missing cases.
Significant factors associated with UCs with low 5-MeC or low DNMT1 level.
| Independent Variables | Dependent Variable: 5-MeC | Dependent Variable: DNMT1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | |||||
| Age (≥68 compared with <68) | 0.74 (0.39–1.43) | 0.3752 | 0.76 (0.30–1.93) | 0.5594 | ||
| Sex (Female compared with Male) | 1.95 (1.01–3.76) | 0.0476 * | 1.53 (0.61–3.87) | 0.3656 | ||
| Smoking (Ever compared with Never) | 1.32 (0.41–4.26) | 0.6416 | 2.98 (0.67–13.15) | 0.1499 | ||
| Tumor recurrence (Present compared with Absent) | 0.89 (0.31–2.58) | 0.8336 | 1.28 (0.27–6.21) | 0.7570 | ||
| Tumor Location | ||||||
| Pelvis compared with Urinary bladder | 1.46 (0.57–3.77) | 0.4302 | 2.82 (0.90–8.88) | 0.0762 | ||
| Ureter compared with Urinary bladder | 2.55 (1.20–5.44) | 0.0150 * | 0.95 (0.28–3.16) | 0.9264 | ||
| Tumor grade (High compared with Low) | 0.86 (0.42–1.76) | 0.6779 | 0.71 (0.25–2.02) | 0.5206 | ||
| TNM Stage | ||||||
| I compared with 0a/0is | 1.09 (0.45–2.63) | 0.8478 | 1.33 (0.40–4.40) | 0.6365 | ||
| II–IV compared with 0a/0is | 2.76 (1.20–6.35) | 0.0168 * | 1.65 (0.54–5.03) | 0.3806 | ||
| UIS (present compared with absent) | 2.76 (1.37–5.56) | 0.0045 * | 2.34 (0.80–6.79) | 0.1190 | ||
| Inflammation (+++ compared with None/+/++) | 4.96 (1.53–16.08) | 0.0076 * | 1.85 (0.39–8.81) | 0.4379 | ||
| SD (present compared with absent) | 1.38 (0.66–2.91) | 0.3917 | 4.23 (0.93–19.20) | 0.0620 | ||
| GD (present compared with absent) | 2.09 (0.59–7.35) | 0.2519 | 2.21 (0.27–18.31) | 0.4630 | ||
| LVI or PNI (present compared with absent) | 0.94 (0.37–2.36) | 0.8925 | 1.01 (0.27–3.79) | 0.9851 | ||
OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval. * Significant when p-value < 0.05 using multivariate logistic regression after adjusting for age and sex.
Figure 3Immunohistochemical intensity representated as H-score by imaging software counts. The A–C photography are the sample 1. The D–F photography are the sample 2. The positive color in our experiment is brown. The photography (A,D) are initially changed to brown-color channels (B,E) before intensity counting. The positive pixel counts (C,F) shows red color as strong positivity (staining intensity grade 3), orange color as medium positivity (grade 2), yellow color as weak positivity (grade 1) and blue color as negativity (grade 0), and finally quantifies the areas and intensities to get H-scores ranged from 0 to 300. The H-score of sample 1 by 175 is higher than sample 2 by 133. Bar = 200 µm.