| Literature DB >> 26449251 |
Miguel Vizoso1, Marta Puig2, F Javier Carmona1, María Maqueda3, Adriana Velásquez4, Antonio Gómez1, Anna Labernadie5, Roberto Lugo4, Marta Gabasa4, Luis G Rigat-Brugarolas6, Xavier Trepat7, Josep Ramírez8, Sebastian Moran1, Enrique Vidal1, Noemí Reguart9, Alexandre Perera3, Manel Esteller10, Jordi Alcaraz11.
Abstract
Epigenetic changes through altered DNA methylation have been implicated in critical aspects of tumor progression, and have been extensively studied in a variety of cancer types. In contrast, our current knowledge of the aberrant genomic DNA methylation in tumor-associated fibroblasts (TAFs) or other stromal cells that act as critical coconspirators of tumor progression is very scarce. To address this gap of knowledge, we conducted genome-wide DNA methylation profiling on lung TAFs and paired control fibroblasts (CFs) from non-small cell lung cancer patients using the HumanMethylation450 microarray. We found widespread DNA hypomethylation concomitant with focal gain of DNA methylation in TAFs compared to CFs. The aberrant DNA methylation landscape of TAFs had a global impact on gene expression and a selective impact on the TGF-β pathway. The latter included promoter hypermethylation-associated SMAD3 silencing, which was associated with hyperresponsiveness to exogenous TGF-β1 in terms of contractility and extracellular matrix deposition. In turn, activation of CFs with exogenous TGF-β1 partially mimicked the epigenetic alterations observed in TAFs, suggesting that TGF-β1 may be necessary but not sufficient to elicit such alterations. Moreover, integrated pathway-enrichment analyses of the DNA methylation alterations revealed that a fraction of TAFs may be bone marrow-derived fibrocytes. Finally, survival analyses using DNA methylation and gene expression datasets identified aberrant DNA methylation on the EDARADD promoter sequence as a prognostic factor in non-small cell lung cancer patients. Our findings shed light on the unique origin and molecular alterations underlying the aberrant phenotype of lung TAFs, and identify a stromal biomarker with potential clinical relevance.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26449251 PMCID: PMC4662832 DOI: 10.1093/carcin/bgv146
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Carcinogenesis ISSN: 0143-3334 Impact factor: 4.944
Figure 1.Primary lung TAFs exhibit global DNA hypomethylation and focal gain of DNA methylation. (A) Representative fluorescence images illustrating α-SMA overexpression in lung TAFs compared to paired CFs obtained with a ×20 objective (top). Scale bars here and thereafter, 30 μm. The bottom plot shows the quantification of fold α-SMA intensity per cell of fibroblasts from four randomized patients. (B) Unsupervised clustering of 1452 CpG sites with marked differential methylation in TAFs and CFs from 12 randomized patients of our cohort and (C) normalized distribution (relative density) of the corresponding β-values. Dashed vertical lines indicate median β-values. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001 (here and thereafter).
Figure 2.Activating CFs with TGF-β1 partially mimics the genomic methylation changes in TAFs. (A) Effect of TGF-β1 on α-SMA fluorescence staining in CFs. (B) Effect of TGF-β1 on the DNA methylation distribution of the list of 1452 differential CpG sites in CFs from two randomly selected patients (P5 and P28). Dashed horizontal lines indicate the median of each distribution. (C) DNA methylation distribution of the list of 1452 differential CpG sites in CFs and paired TAFs from the same patients. (D) Outline of the culture assay based on polyacrylamide gels with normal- or tumor-like rigidities in the presence of TGF-β1. (E) Effect of culture conditions shown in (D) on the DNA methylation distribution of the list of 1452 differential CpG sites in CFs from the same patients.
Figure 3.Pathway-enrichment analysis reveals that a fraction of TAFs are fibrocyte or fibrocyte-like cells in origin. (A) Statistically significant overrepresented KEGG pathways within the 750 distinct genes corresponding to the list of 1452 CpG sites with marked differential methylation between TAFs and CFs. Pathway’s circle size is proportional to the number of annotated genes. Genes annotated to each pathway are color-coded according to their fold DNA methylation. None, one or two circles around each gene indicate that differential methylation was found within non-promoter, promoter, or both non-promoter and promoter regions, respectively. (B) Representative images of tumor histologic sections of a randomly selected patient from our cohort stained for fibrocyte markers CD34 (left) and CD45 (right). Black arrows point to CD34+ and CD45+ (non-endothelial) spindle-shaped stromal mesenchymal cells. (C) Histograms of CD34+ (left) and CD45+ (right) cultured CFs and TAFs from the same patient as in (B) assessed by flow cytometry. (D) Fold (TAFs/CFs) percentages of CD34+ and CD45+ fibroblasts from three randomly selected patients assessed as in (C).
Table 1. Differential methylation in promoter sequences in lung TAFs. Hypermethylated genes with marked differential methylation (│Δβ │ > 0.2) in promoter sequences in lung TAFs in ≥ 2 CpG sites
| Gene symbol | CpG sites | Highest Δβ = βTAF − βCF | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hypermethylated | SMAD3 | 4 | 0.236 |
| SYNPO | 3 | 0.211 | |
| GPR88 | 2 | 0.276 | |
| C7orf54 | 2 | 0.272 | |
| SND1 | 2 | 0.272 | |
| TMEM212 | 2 | 0.248 | |
| LOC404266 | 2 | 0.241 | |
| TTC39C | 2 | 0.230 | |
| ZMIZ1 | 2 | 0.225 | |
| EYA4 | 2 | 0.220 |
Hypomethylated genes with marked differential methylation (│Δβ │ > 0.2) in promoter sequences in lung TAFs in ≥ 2 CpG sites
| Gene symbol | CpG sites | Highest Δβ = βTAF − βCF | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hypomethylated | IVL | 5 | −0.261 |
| RUNX1 | 4 | −0.319 | |
| C22orf9 | 4 | −0.298 | |
| MIR1249 | 4 | −0.298 | |
| NTM | 4 | −0.245 | |
| CSGALNACT1 | 3 | −0.314 | |
| IPO5 | 3 | −0.303 | |
| EDARADD | 3 | −0.295 | |
| SLAMF8 | 3 | −0.283 | |
| SLC22A18AS | 3 | −0.271 | |
| SLC22A18 | 3 | −0.271 | |
| SMCP | 3 | −0.244 | |
| MIR298 | 3 | −0.230 | |
| MIR296 | 3 | −0.230 | |
| SCT | 2 | −0.351 | |
| PARP4 | 2 | −0.316 | |
| EPS15 | 2 | −0.297 | |
| WIPF1 | 2 | −0.291 | |
| HRH1 | 2 | −0.280 | |
| FAM49A | 2 | −0.277 | |
| CHRM5 | 2 | −0.270 | |
| RUNX3 | 2 | −0.263 | |
| TSPAN9 | 2 | −0.262 | |
| CARD14 | 2 | −0.259 | |
| S100A3 | 2 | −0.258 | |
| GNASAS | 2 | −0.254 | |
| ZC3H12D | 2 | −0.254 | |
| PLEKHA5 | 2 | −0.249 | |
| LEPR | 2 | −0.242 | |
| LEPROT | 2 | −0.242 | |
| CHRNA1 | 2 | −0.231 | |
| ESRRG | 2 | −0.229 | |
| STRA6 | 2 | −0.224 | |
| HTR1D | 2 | −0.221 | |
| GSTA3 | 2 | −0.220 | |
| SH3BP4 | 2 | −0.217 | |
| LCE1B | 2 | −0.207 |
Figure 4.Validation of differential methylated promoters and the prognostic value of EDARADD in NSCLC with high stromal mesenchymal expression in-vivo. (A) DNA methylation of selected genes measured by pyrosequencing in TAFs and paired CFs from 12 patients. (B) Fold (TAFs/CFs) relative mRNA expression of selected genes in five randomized patients by qRT-PCR. Horizontal dashed lines here and thereafter are added as a reference. (C) Kaplan–Meier survival curve using publicly available data of a cohort of 204 NSCLC patients (161 ADC, 43 SCC) sorted by their EDARADD DNA methylation status assessed in primary tumoral DNA (13). (D) Kaplan–Meier survival curve using publicly available data of a cohort of 226 NSCLC patients (226 ADC) sorted by their EDARADD expression assessed in primary tumors (31). (E) Representative images of histologic sections from our cohort stained for EDARADD obtained from unaffected lung parenchyma (control, left) or tumor (right). Black arrows within inserts point to EDARADD+ spindle-shaped mesenchymal cells. (F) Scoring of EDARADD protein expression in (non-endothelial) spindle-shaped stromal cells in our cohort of 20 NSCLC patients (10 ADC, 10 SCC).
Figure 5.SMAD3 epigenetic silencing in TAFs correlates with enhanced response to TGF-β1, ECM expression and contractility. (A) Fold (TAFs/CFs) relative mRNA expression of a panel of wound-related ECM genes in response to TGF-β1 in four randomized patients. (B) Illustrative traction maps of a single CF and paired TAF from the same patient under basal conditions or TGF-β1 stimulation. (C) Fold (TAFs/CFs) average traction force in four randomized patients. All data are mean ± SE.