| Literature DB >> 28631396 |
Weiwei Weng1,2,3, Shujuan Ni1,2,3, Yiqin Wang4, Midie Xu1,2,3, Qiongyan Zhang1,2,3, Yusi Yang1,2,3, Yong Wu1,2,3, Qinghua Xu1,2,3, Peng Qi1,2,3, Cong Tan1,2,3, Dan Huang1,2,3, Ping Wei1,2,3, Zhaohui Huang5, Yuqing Ma6, Wei Zhang6, Weiqi Sheng1,2,3, Xiang Du1,2,3,6,7.
Abstract
Pseudogenes play a crucial role in cancer progression. However, the role of pituitary tumour-transforming 3, pseudogene (PTTG3P) in gastric cancer (GC) remains unknown. Here, we showed that PTTG3P expression was abnormally up-regulated in GC tissues compared with that in normal tissues both in our 198 cases of clinical samples and the cohort from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database. High PTTG3P expression was correlated with increased tumour size and enhanced tumour invasiveness and served as an independent negative prognostic predictor. Moreover, up-regulation of PTTG3P in GC cells stimulated cell proliferation, migration and invasion both in vitro in cell experiments and in vivo in nude mouse models, and the pseudogene functioned independently of its parent genes. Overall, these results reveal that PTTG3P is a novel prognostic biomarker with independent oncogenic functions in GC.Entities:
Keywords: PTTG3P; gastric cancer; invasion; prognosis; proliferation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28631396 PMCID: PMC5706523 DOI: 10.1111/jcmm.13239
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cell Mol Med ISSN: 1582-1838 Impact factor: 5.310
Figure 1PTTG3P is up‐regulated in GC tissues and is correlated with patient prognosis. (A) PTTG3P expression was evaluated using TCGA RNA‐seq data and compared between GC tissues and normal tissues. (B) The expression of PTTG3P in adjacent non‐tumour (ANT) and GC tissues was determined by qRT–PCR. β‐actin was used as an endogenous control to normalize the data. (C) Kaplan–Meier curves for DFS and OS of patients with GC based on PTTG3P expression.
Relationship between PTTG3P expression and histopathological factors in patients with gastric cancer
| Characteristics | Number ( | % | PTTG3P expression |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low | High | ||||
| Age (years) | 0.152 | ||||
| <60 | 86 | 43.43 | 38 | 48 | |
| ≥60 | 112 | 56.57 | 61 | 51 | |
| Gender | 0.192 | ||||
| Male | 148 | 74.75 | 78 | 70 | |
| Female | 50 | 25.25 | 21 | 29 | |
| Size (cm) | 0.043 | ||||
| <5 | 116 | 58.59 | 65 | 51 | |
| ≥5 | 82 | 41.41 | 34 | 48 | |
| Differentiation | 0.185 | ||||
| Poor and other | 150 | 75.76 | 71 | 79 | |
| Well and moderate | 48 | 24.24 | 28 | 20 | |
| Lymphatic invasion | 0.107 | ||||
| Absent | 75 | 37.88 | 43 | 32 | |
| Present | 123 | 62.12 | 56 | 67 | |
| Nerve invasion | 0.300 | ||||
| Absent | 71 | 35.86 | 39 | 32 | |
| Present | 127 | 64.14 | 60 | 67 | |
| T grade | 0.294 | ||||
| T1 | 3 | 1.52 | 3 | 0 | |
| T2 | 16 | 8.08 | 7 | 9 | |
| T3 | 25 | 12.63 | 14 | 11 | |
| T4 | 154 | 77.78 | 75 | 79 | |
| LNM | 0.103 | ||||
| Absent | 28 | 14.14 | 18 | 10 | |
| Present | 170 | 85.86 | 81 | 89 | |
| TNM | 0.468 | ||||
| I | 10 | 5.05 | 6 | 4 | |
| II | 31 | 15.66 | 19 | 12 | |
| III | 137 | 69.19 | 65 | 72 | |
| IV | 20 | 10.10 | 9 | 11 | |
| Recurrence | 0.022 | ||||
| Absent | 110 | 55.56 | 63 | 47 | |
| Present | 88 | 44.44 | 36 | 52 | |
LNM: lymph node metastasis.
P < 0.05.
Univariate and multivariate analyses of clinicopathological factors associated with disease‐free survival in gastric cancer patients
| Characteristics | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) |
| HR (95% CI) |
| |
| Tumour grade (T1, T2, T3, T4) | 1.907 (1.366–2.663) | 0.000 | ||
| LNM (present/absent) | 2.541 (1.403–4.602) | 0.002 | ||
| TNM (I, II, III, IV) | 2.015 (1.508–2.694) | 0.000 | 1.553 (1.058–2.279) | 0.025 |
| PTTG3P (high/low) | 1.887 (1.343–2.653) | 0.000 | 1.684 (1.195–2.374) | 0.003 |
HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval; LNM: lymph node metastasis.
P < 0.05.
Univariate and multivariate analyses of clinicopathological factors associated with overall survival in gastric cancer patients
| Characteristics | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) |
| HR (95% CI) |
| |
| Tumour grade (T1, T2, T3, T4) | 3.025 (1.333–6.868) | 0.008 | – | – |
| LNM (present/absent) | 3.132 (1.590–6.171) | 0.001 | – | – |
| TNM (I, II, III, IV) | 2.079 (1.549–2.792) | 0.000 | 1.619 (1.104–2.373) | 0.014 |
| PTTG3P (high/low) | 1.794 (1.266–2.541) | 0.001 | 1.578 (1.110–2.243) | 0.011 |
HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval; LNM: lymph node metastasis.
P < 0.05.
Figure 2PTTG3P stimulates GC tumour cell proliferation. (A) PTTG3P expression was quantitated in 5 GC cell lines and the GES‐1 cell line using qRT–PCR. (B) The GC cell lines AGC and HGC‐27 were transfected with either PTTG3P or a vector control, and PTTG3P overexpression was verified by qRT–PCR. (C) Cell viability of AGS and HGC‐27 cells transfected with PTTG3P or a vector control was measured using a CCK8 assay. (D) The cell colony‐formation ability of AGS and HGC‐27 cells transfected with PTTG3P or the vector control was measured. Data are shown as the mean ± SD of three replicates; *P < 0.05 and **P < 0.01.
Figure 3PTTG3P promotes G1‐S cell cycle transition in GC cells. (A) EdU incorporation was evaluated using an EdU imaging kit. Quantitative analysis showed a greater number of EdU‐positive cells in the PTTG3P‐overexpression group compared to the control. Cells were counted by immunofluorescence microscopy under 200× magnification (scale bars = 100 μm). (B) Cell cycle distribution of AGS and HGC‐27 cells transfected with PTTG3P or a vector control was evaluated using a flow cytometer. (C) Western blotting analysis of the expression levels of cyclin D1 and p27. GAPDH was used as a reference. Data are shown as the mean ± SD of three replicates; **P < 0.01.
Figure 4PTTG3P inhibits GC tumour cell apoptosis. (A) GC cells were transfected with PTTG3P or control vector and treated with or without 5‐FU for 24 hrs. Then, all the cells were stained with Annexin V and PI. The Annexin V−PI−, Annexin V+PI−, Annexin V−PI+ and Annexin V+PI+ subgroups indicate live cells, early apoptotic cells, necrotic cells and late apoptotic cells, respectively. (B) Western blotting analysis of the expression levels of PARP1, cleaved PARP1, caspase‐3 and cleaved caspase‐3. GAPDH was used as a reference. Data are shown as the mean ± SD of three replicates; *P < 0.05.
Figure 5PTTG3P promotes GC cell migration and invasion. (A) Cell migration ability was evaluated using a wound‐healing assay; images of AGS and HGC‐27 cells were taken at 0 and 6 hrs post‐scratch. (B) Cell invasion potential in AGS and HGC‐27 cells was assessed using a transwell assay. (C) Western blotting analysis of the expression levels of E‐cadherin, N‐cadherin, MMP2 and MMP9. GAPDH was used as a reference. Data are shown as the mean ± SD of three replicates; *P < 0.05.
Figure 6PTTG3P promotes GC tumour growth and metastasis in vivo. (A) Tumour volumes of xenograft models were measured every 4 days. Representative photographs of tumour macroscopic appearance are shown. (B) Tumour size and body weight in the PTTG3P‐overexpression xenograft group compared with the control. (C) CT scanning of the metastasis models. Red arrows denote potential pulmonary metastases in PTTG3P‐overexpressing nude mice. (D) H&E staining was used to verify the formation of pulmonary metastatic tumours in the PTTG3P‐overexpression group (top scale bars = 200 μm; bottom scale bars = 50 μm). Data are shown as the mean ± SD of three replicates; *P < 0.05.
Figure 7PTTG3P overexpression is not correlated with PTTG1 or PTTG2 expression. (A) The expression of PTTG1 and PTTG2 in adjacent non‐tumour (ANT) and GC tissues was determined by qRT–PCR. (B) Correlations between PTTG3P expression and PTTG1 or PTTG2 expression were evaluated. (C) mRNA expression levels of PTTG1 and PTTG2 in cells overexpressing PTTG3P were evaluated by qRT–PCR. (D) Protein expression levels of PTTG1 and PTTG2 in cells overexpressing PTTG3P were evaluated by Western blotting; GAPDH was used as a reference. Data are shown as the mean ± SD of three replicates; **P < 0.01.