| Literature DB >> 27399691 |
Chao Zhang1,2, Georgia Arentz3,4, Lyron Winderbaum5, Noor A Lokman6,7, Manuela Klingler-Hoffmann8,9, Parul Mittal10,11, Christopher Carter12, Martin K Oehler13,14, Peter Hoffmann15,16.
Abstract
Vulvar cancer is the fourth most common gynecological cancer worldwide. However, limited studies have been completed on the molecular characterization of vulvar squamous cell carcinoma resulting in a poor understanding of the disease initiation and progression. Analysis and early detection of the precursor lesion of HPV-independent vulvar squamous cell carcinoma (VSCC), differentiated vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (dVIN), is of great importance given dVIN lesions have a high level of malignant potential. Here we present an examination of adjacent normal vulvar epithelium, dVIN, and VSCC from six patients by peptide Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization Mass Spectrometry Imaging (MALDI-MSI). The results reveal the differential expression of multiple peptides from the protein cytokeratin 5 (CK5) across the three vulvar tissue types. The difference observed in the relative abundance of CK5 by MALDI-MSI between the healthy epithelium, dVIN, and VSCC was further analyzed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in tissue from eight VSCC patients. A decrease in CK5 immunostaining was observed in the VSCC compared to the healthy epithelium and dVIN. These results provide an insight into the molecular fingerprint of the vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia that appears to be more closely related to the healthy epithelium than the VSCC.Entities:
Keywords: Cytokeratin 5 (CK5); Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI); differentiated vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (dVIN); imaging mass spectrometry (MSI); vulva squamous cell carcinomas (VSCC)
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27399691 PMCID: PMC4964464 DOI: 10.3390/ijms17071088
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry imaging peak groups ranked heuristically by the largest difference in median log intensity between the healthy epithelium, differentiated vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia, and vulvar squamous cell carcinoma.
| Peptide AWM [M + H] of the Peak Group 1 | Da Range of the Peak Group | No. Spectra in Peak Group 2 | Maximum Difference Median Log Intensity 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1198.71 | ±0.62 | 23,099 | 0.75 |
| 1028.62 | ±0.56 | 15,354 | 0.66 |
| 1410.72 * | ±0.82 | 18,784 | 0.58 |
| 1905.95 | ±0.52 | 10,956 | 0.56 |
| 1095.58 | ±0.82 | 21,704 | 0.55 |
| 944.54 | ±0.69 | 19,354 | 0.53 |
| 957.63 | ±0.65 | 10,464 | 0.52 |
| 857.60 | ±0.68 | 14,956 | 0.50 |
| 976.51 | ±0.65 | 15,534 | 0.49 |
| 878.56 | ±0.68 | 11,213 | 0.46 |
| 810.48 * | ±0.76 | 17,095 | 0.45 |
| 958.59 | ±0.69 | 15,432 | 0.42 |
| 943.62 | ±0.82 | 20,030 | 0.41 |
| 865.42 * | ±0.84 | 15,617 | 0.41 |
| 1217.66 | ±0.55 | 10,906 | 0.39 |
| 884.52 * | ±0.66 | 14,337 | 0.37 |
| 856.67 | ±0.74 | 15,483 | 0.36 |
| 1143.65 * | ±0.64 | 17,685 | 0.36 |
| 1045.62 | ±0.65 | 16,370 | 0.35 |
| 2147.19 | ±0.14 | 20,418 | 0.33 |
| 1105.59 | ±0.50 | 11,479 | 0.30 |
| 1296.68 | ±0.10 | 22,823 | 0.29 |
| 870.64 | ±0.85 | 22,749 | 0.29 |
| 842.60 | ±0.90 | 25,210 | 0.22 |
| 1267.65 | ±0.32 | 11,686 | 0.20 |
| 2932.59 | ±0.07 | 15,500 | 0.19 |
| 816.50 | ±0.73 | 10,983 | 0.19 |
| 971.56 * | ±0.65 | 15,998 | 0.18 |
| 1111.58 | ±0.51 | 13,473 | 0.09 |
| 1570.70 | ±0.17 | 12,029 | 0.05 |
| 864.63 | ±0.70 | 11,114 | 0.05 |
1 The abundance weighted means (AWM) m/z was calculated for the overall peak group; 2 Number of Spectra in each peak group compiled from all acquisition spectra across the patient cohort; 3 Peak groups were heuristically ranked based on the maximum difference, d, in median log intensity between the tissue regions of interest; * CK5 peptides.
CK5 matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry imaging peak groups of interest with matched nanoflow liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry results.
| Peptide AWM [M + H] 1 | LC-MS/MS | LC-MS/MS MR 4 | Peptide Score 5 | Peptide Significance 6 | Peptide Sequence 7 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 810.48 | 0.45 | 405.7087 | 809.4028 | 21.44 | 0.0072 | QSSVSFR |
| 865.42 | 0.41 | 433.1998 | 864.3851 | 26 | 0.0025 | SGGGGGGGFGR |
| 884.52 | 0.37 | 442.7286 | 883.4427 | 24.74 | 0.0034 | TSFTSVSR |
| 971.56 | 0.18 | 486.2429 | 970.4712 | 25.1 | 0.0031 | FVSTTSSSR |
| 1143.65 | 0.36 | 572.3175 | 1142.6205 | 39.59 | 0.00011 | LAELEEALQK |
| 1410.72 | 0.58 | 705.8674 | 1409.7203 | 115.28 | 3 × 10−12 | SFSTASAITPSVSR |
| 1410.72 | 0.58 | 705.872 | 1409.7295 | 150.55 | 8.8 × 10−16 | TTAENEFVMLKK |
1 The peptide abundance weighted mean (AWM) m/z calculated for each peak group; 2 Heuristically ranked maximum difference, d, between the healthy epithelium, dVIN, and VSCC; 3 Experimental m/z of the CK5 matched nano-LC-MS/MS detected peptide; 4 Experimental mass of the CK5 matched nano-LC-MS/MS detected peptide; 5 Mascot Ions Score; 6 Mascot Expected Score; 7 CK5 matched peptide sequence.
Figure 1A MALDI-MSI annotated ion intensity map from a representative vulvar tissue section for the peak group m/z 1410.67. (A) An ion intensity map for m/z 1410.67, which matches to the CK5 peptides SFSTASAITPSVSR and TTAENEFVMLKK (both with a [M + H] m/z 1410.67). The regions of healthy epithelium are outlined in green, the dVIN is outlined in blue, and the VSCC is outlined in red; (B) H & E stain of Healthy (green), dVIN (blue) and VSCC (red) tissue post MALDI-MSI data acquisition; (C) A ROC curve and (D) boxplot analysis of the MALDI-MSI data for m/z 1410.67 comparing the annotated healthy epithelium to the dVIN region, AUC = 0.934; (E) A ROC curve and (F) boxplot analysis of the MALDI-MSI data for m/z 1410.67 comparing the annotated dVIN to the VSCC region, AUC = 0.89. Blue dots represent the m/z 1410.67 spectra intensity interval between the lower and upper quartiles. Red dots represent the spectra intensities outside of the intervals.
Figure 2IHC analysis of CK5 on vulvar tissues containing regions of healthy epithelium, dVIN, and VSCC, all at 40× magnification. (A) CK5 staining of healthy epithelium; (B) dVIN; (C) VSCC from a single section; (D) CK5 staining of healthy epithelium; (E) dVIN; (F) VSCC from a single section of a different patient; (G) Quantitative analysis of CK5 staining across the tissue types was performed using IHC profiler-Image J. For each tissue section, three representative photo-micrographic images at 40× magnification were used and each image was assigned a staining score of negative, low positive, positive, and high positive; (H) The percent of negative staining was significantly different between the dVIN and the VSCC (p < 0.0001), but not between the dVIN and healthy epithelium (p = 0.11); (I) The percent of positive and high positive staining was significantly different between the dVIN and the VSCC (p< 0.0001), but not between the dVIN and healthy epithelium (p = 0.59).
Figure 3A comparison of the expression pattern observed for the CK5 peptides SFSTASAITPSVSR and TTAENEFVMLKK, both m/z 1410.72, in the dVIN (blue) and VSCC (red) using: MALDI-MSI ion intensity map (middle); H & E staining (top); and CK5 IHC staining (bottom) on consecutively cut vulvar tissue sections.