| Literature DB >> 28821813 |
Tatiana Altadill1, Tyrone M Dowdy2, Kirandeep Gill2, Armando Reques3, Smrithi S Menon2, Cristian P Moiola1, Carlos Lopez-Gil1, Eva Coll1, Xavier Matias-Guiu4, Silvia Cabrera5, Angel Garcia3, Jaume Reventos1,6, Stephen W Byers2,7, Antonio Gil-Moreno3,5, Amrita K Cheema2,7, Eva Colas8.
Abstract
Endometrial cancer (EC) remains the most common malignancy of the genital tract among women in developed countries. Although much research has been performed at genomic, transcriptomic and proteomic level, there is still a significant gap in the metabolomic studies of EC. In order to gain insights into altered metabolic pathways in the onset and progression of EC carcinogenesis, we used high resolution mass spectrometry to characterize the metabolomic and lipidomic profile of 39 human EC and 17 healthy endometrial tissue samples. Several pathways including lipids, Kynurenine pathway, endocannabinoids signaling pathway and the RNA editing pathway were found to be dysregulated in EC. The dysregulation of the RNA editing pathway was further investigated in an independent set of 183 human EC tissues and matched controls, using orthogonal approaches. We found that ADAR2 is overexpressed in EC and that the increase in expression positively correlates with the aggressiveness of the tumor. Furthermore, silencing of ADAR2 in three EC cell lines resulted in a decreased proliferation rate, increased apoptosis, and reduced migration capabilities in vitro. Taken together, our results suggest that ADAR2 functions as an oncogene in endometrial carcinogenesis and could be a potential target for improving EC treatment strategies.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28821813 PMCID: PMC5562852 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-09169-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Clinical and histopathological information of the patients included in this study.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control tissue | 17 | Post | Discovery and verification | ||
| EC tissue | 10 | IA | I | Post | Discovery and verification |
| 9 | IB | I | Post | Discovery and verification | |
| 10 | II | I | Post | Discovery and verification | |
| 10 | III | I | Post | Discovery and verification |
Figure 1Multivariate analysis showing metabolic profiles in EC. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) plots showing separation between EC tissue samples (T, in green) and control tissue samples (N, in red) (Panel A) and separation between different EC FIGO stages (stage 1: TI, stage 2: TII, stage 3: TIII) (Panel B) for the positive MS ionization mode. X-axis shows interclass separation and Y-axis illustrates the intra-class variability. Panel C. Heat map of ion rankings, corresponding to their relative concentrations (intensity) for positive MS ionization mode, in the same cohort of subjects. Each row represents a unique feature with a specific m/z and RT while each column represents a unique subject. (m/z: mass to charge ratio; RT: retention time).
Potential biomarkers confirmed by MS/MS. The table lists metabolites that showed significant change in the relative abundance in EC tissues compared to controls. (m/z = mass/charge; ppm = parts per million; RT = retention time; p-v = p-value; FC = fold change; FDR = false discovery rate; AUC = area under the curve).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Picolinic acid | 122.02446 | 2 | 0.6499 | ↓ | 0.1834 | 3.07E-03 | 3.47E-03 | 0.8275 | C6H5NO2 | Negative | 107.01, 105.02, 87.12, 81.53 |
| Linoleic acid | 279.2320 | 3 | 6.9054 | ↑ | 3.2817 | 2.33E-02 | 2.33E-02 | 0.6772 | C18H32O2 | Negative | 240.99, 170.99, 96.96 |
| Vaccenic acid | 281.2482 | 1 | 7.3972 | ↓ | 0.12817 | 1.65E-07 | 4.73E-07 | 0.6352 | C18H34O2 | Negative | 94.99, 96.96, 100.99, 126.90 |
| Arachidonic Acid (peroxide free) | 303.2325 | 1 | 6.8246 | ↓ | 0.29314 | 9,94E-04 | 1.30E-03 | 0.6439 | C20H32O2 | Negative | 259.25, 216.99, 205.19 |
| 5,8,11-eicosatrienoic acid | 305.2481 | 1 | 7.1599 | ↑ | 19.139 | 2.28E-05 | 4.09E-05 | 0.6189 | C20H34O2 | Negative | 216.99, 287.00, 216.98, 1165.93, 78.98 |
| PE(P-16:0/0:0) | 436.2827 | 1 | 5.8143 | ↑ | 8.4545 | 1.82E-03 | 2.24E-03 | 0.7984 | C21H44NO6P | Negative | 78.96, 140.01, 196.03 |
| PE(18:0/0:0) | 480.3092 | 0 | 6.3049 | ↑ | 11.4850 | 7.95E-04 | 1.07E-03 | 0.8246 | C23H48NO7P | Negative | 96.96, 140.01, 196.04, 283.27 |
| PG(22:6/0:0) | 555.2716 | 2 | 5.6562 | ↑ | 5.2860 | 4.68E-03 | 5.16E-03 | 0.8024 | C28H45O9P | Negative | 170.98, 283.24, 327.23 |
| UDP-N-acetyl-D-galactosamine | 606.07389 | 0 | 0.5454 | ↑ | 59.8910 | 4.41E-06 | 9.15E-06 | 0.8695 | C17H27N3O17 P2 | Negative | 111.0222, 158.92, 176.93, 282.04, 362.00, 385.00 |
| PE(16:1/P-18:1) | 698.5116 | 2 | 9.5703 | ↑ | 2.9631 | 9.80E-03 | 1.05E-02 | 0.7232 | C39H74NO7P | Negative | 78.96, 140.00, 253.21, 281.23 |
| PA (18:0/18:1) | 701.5236 | 0 | 9.8145 | ↓ | 0.1377 | 3.47E-06 | 7.85E-06 | 0.9056 | C38H75N2O7P | Negative | 281.25, 283.25, 419.25, 437.28 |
| 1-Palmitoyl-2-linoleoyl PE | 714.5078 | 0 | 9.4018 | ↑ | 14.4588 | 1.16E-04 | 1.92E-04 | 0.8549 | C39H74NO8P | Negative | 140.01, 255.23, 279.22 |
| PE(18:1/16:0) | 716.5231 | 0 | 9.2768 | ↑ | 20.1049 | 6.31E-04 | 8.75E-04 | 0.8491 | C39H76NO8P | Negative | 140.01, 196.04, 281.25 |
| PE(18:4/P-18:1) | 720.4964 | 1 | 9.8168 | ↑ | 12.3568 | 1.50E-04 | 2.39E-04 | 0.859 | C41H72NO7P | Negative | 259.20, 581.49 |
| PE(18:0/18:3) | 740.5213 | 3 | 9.4586 | ↑ | 2.4862 | 8.10E-07 | 2.18E-06 | 0.8823 | C41H76NO8P | Negative | 140.01, 283.24, 482.32 |
| PE(18:1/18:1) | 742.5388 | 0 | 9.4276 | ↑ | 86.8130 | 2.11E-06 | 5.04E-06 | 0.9324 | C41H78NO8P | Negative | 140.01, 281.24, 460.28, 478.30 |
| PG(O-16:0/20:1) | 761.5677 | 3 | 9.1881 | ↑ | 2.4041 | 3.40E-04 | 5.04E-04 | 0.8392 | C42H83O9P | Negative | 152.99, 255.23, 391.20, 465.25 |
| PE(16:0/22:6) | 762.5106 | 3 | 9.9369 | ↑ | 2.5258 | 2.95E-04 | 4.53E-04 | 0.8322 | C43H74NO8P | Negative | 140.01, 255.23, 283.24, 327.23, 452.27 |
| PE(22:6/P-18:1) | 772.5278 | 1 | 9.3001 | ↓ | 0.2313 | 2.17E-03 | 2.59E-03 | 0.7861 | C45H76NO7P | Negative | 140.01, 283.24, 327.23, 444.28, 462.29 |
| PS(13:0/22:1) | 774.5303 | 1 | 8.9030 | ↑ | 76.5521 | 2.09E-09 | 1.12E-08 | 0.9307 | C41H78NO10P | Negative | 152.99, 491.31, 687.49 |
| PE(18:1/22:6) | 788.5258 | 2 | 9.1145 | ↑ | 8.9976 | 9.22E-05 | 1.59E-04 | 0.8939 | C45H76NO8P | Negative | 78.95 140.01, 152.99, 281.24, 283.26, 327.23, 460.26, 478.29, 506.26 |
| PE(20:1/22:6) | 816.5526 | 2 | 8.9397 | ↓ | 0.5173 | 2.94E-12 | 2.53E-11 | 0.979 | C47H80NO8P | Negative | 78.95, 152.99, 283.25, 309.27, 506.32 |
| PI(16:0/18:1) | 835.5348 | 0 | 9.7641 | ↑ | 20.4232 | 5.08E-06 | 9.93E-06 | 0.8881 | C43H81O13P | Negative | 78.95, 152.99, 281.25, 391.22, 553.29, 579.29 |
| PG(19:0/22:4) | 839.5768 | 4 | 9.8027 | ↓ | 0.4242 | 4.47E-06 | 9.15E-06 | 0.8753 | C47H85O10P | Negative | 78.95, 152.99, 331.26 |
| PI(18:1/18:1) | 861.5505 | 0 | 9.7810 | ↑ | 72.7961 | 1.00E-07 | 3.07E-07 | 0.9237 | C45H83O13P | Negative | 152.99, 223.00, 241.00, 579.30, 597.29 |
| PI(14:0/22:1) | 863.5645 | 1 | 9.8451 | ↑ | 60.5400 | 8.37E-08 | 2.88E-07 | 0.9161 | C45H85O13P | Negative | 78.96, 152.99, 241.01 |
| PI(16:0/22:3) | 887.5644 | 1 | 8.3686 | ↑ | 56.9735 | 6.90E-13 | 9.89E-12 | 0.7633 | C47H85O13P | Negative | 78.95, 152.99, 241.01, 553.24 |
| Inosine | 267.07301 | 1 | 0.4075 | ↓ | 0.1724 | 2.68E-03 | 3.11E-03 | 0.7984 | C10H12N4O5 | Negative | 135.03, 108.02, 92.03 |
| Palmitic amide | 256.2643 | 3 | 1.5642 | ↓ | 0.1359 | 4.10E-13 | 8.82E-12 | 0.8695 | C16H33NO | Positive | 158.154, 144.1381, 116.1068, 102.0914, 88.0753, 74.0598, 57.06 |
| Oleamide | 282.2804 | 4 | 1.6536 | ↓ | 0.9586 | 7.55E-09 | 3.61E-08 | 0.8403 | C18H35NO | Positive | 265.25, 247.242, 135.117, 97.102, 83.0853, 69.07 |
| Stearamide | 284.2957 | 3 | 2.21027 | ↓ | 0.8763 | 1.03E-14 | 4.43E-13 | 0.8648 | C18H37NO | Positive | 228.23, 200.20, 186.18, 172.17, 144.13, 116.10, 102.09, 88.07, 74.06 |
| 13Z-Docosenamide | 338.3427 | 2 | 8.8864 | ↓ | 0.1942 | 1.94E-10 | 1.39E-09 | 0.8726 | C22H43NO | Positive | 321.3156, 303.3065, 149.1326, 135.117, 97.10, 83.08, 69.07 |
| 3-Deoxyvitamin D3 | 369.3527 | 3 | 12.7020 | ↑ | 14.4965 | 1.54E-06 | 3.90E-06 | 0.8619 | C27H44 | Positive | 287.26, 233.22, 215.18, 161.13, 147.11, 133.10, 109.10, 81.06, 67.05 |
| PC(16:0/0:0) | 496.3409 | 2 | 5.6375 | ↑ | 91.6590 | 1.93E-02 | 1.98E-02 | 0.7051 | C24H50NO7P | Positive | 478.32, 184.07, 166.06, 125.00, 104.10, 86.09, 60.08 |
| Glu Phe Arg Trp | 637.3067 | 3 | 1.2381 | ↓ | 0.2823 | 7.91E-06 | 1.48E-05 | 0.866 | C31H40N8O7 | Positive | 83.05, 147.11, 163.01, 239.04, 337.02, 393.07, 469.12, 525.17, 581.23 |
| PC(14:0/18:2) | 730.5416 | 4 | 8.9420 | ↑ | 286.1312 | 9.26E-10 | 5.69E-09 | 0.9312 | C40H76NO8P | Positive | 184.07, 242.11, 285.24 |
| PC(18:1/14:0) | 732.5552 | 1 | 7.6818 | ↑ | 4.9261 | 2.68E-12 | 2.53E-11 | 0.8275 | C40H78NO8P | Positive | 86.09, 184.07, 549.48 |
| PC(16:0/20:5) | 780.5545 | 0 | 8.8476 | ↑ | 40.7199 | 6.95E-08 | 2.72E-07 | 0.9161 | C44H78NO8P | Positive | 88.11, 184.07, 255.21, 393.24 |
| PC(16:0/20:4) | 782.5708 | 1 | 6.7811 | ↑ | 6.6011 | 1.17E-02 | 1.23E-02 | 0.6482 | C44H80NO8P | Positive | 86,09, 184.0, 125.00, 258.10, 313.27, 419.2485, 478.3295, 496.34, 526.32, 599.5016 |
| PC(16:0/22:6) | 806.5709 | 1 | 7.2133 | ↑ | 284.1474 | 1.52E-03 | 1.92E-03 | 0.7885 | C46H80NO8P | Positive | 184.07, 267.21, 478.32, 550.32, 623.50 |
| PC(18:0/20:2) | 814.6337 | 2 | 9.9895 | ↑ | 10.9063 | 3.56E-04 | 5.10E-04 | 0.7925 | C46H88NO8P | Positive | 184.07, 263.27, 341.30, 508.37 |
| PC(18:1/22:6) | 832.5861 | 1 | 9.8159 | ↑ | 9.9810 | 8.71E-08 | 2.88E-07 | 0.8922 | C48H82NO8P | Positive | 184.07, 522,35, 568,33 |
Potential biomarkers confirmed using tandem mass spectrometry. List of metabolites that showed significant alterations in early vs late stages of EC. (m/z = mass/charge; ppm = parts per million; RT = retention time; p-v = p-value; FC = fold change; FDR = false discovery rate; AUC = area under the curve).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arachidonic Acid | 303.2325 | 1 | 6.8246 | ↓ | 0.1402 | 6.24E-03 | 8.74E-03 | 0.778 | C20H32O2 | Negative | C18_BEH | 259.25, 216.99, 205.19 |
| PC(16:0/20:5) | 780.5545 | 0 | 8.8476 | ↓ | 0.3311 | 3.13E-03 | 5.48E-03 | 0.750 | C44H78NO8P | Positive | C18_BEH | 88.11, 184.07, 255.21, 393.24 |
| PC(16:0/22:6) | 806.5709 | 1 | 9.0460 | ↑ | 3.0814 | 7.86E-04 | 5.48E-03 | 0.807 | C46H80NO8P | Positive | C18_BEH | 184.07, 267.21, 478.32, 550.32, 623.50 |
| PE(16:0/22:6) | 762.5106 | 3 | 9.0937 | ↑ | 2.0349 | 8.36E-03 | 9.75E-03 | 0.752 | C43H74NO8P | Negative | C18_BEH | 140.01, 255.23, 283.24, 327.23, 452.27 |
| PE(18:1/22:6) | 788.5258 | 2 | 9.1145 | ↑ | 15.2799 | 2.2E-02 | 2.20E-02 | 0.676 | C45H76NO8P | Negative | CSH and C18_BEH | 78.95 140.01, 152.99, 281.24, 283.26, 327.23, 460.26, 478.29, 506.26 |
| PE(22:6/P-18:1) | 772.5278 | 1 | 9.3001 | ↓ | 0.4065 | 1.86E-03 | 5.48E-03 | 0.800 | C45H76NO7P | Negative | CSH and C18_BEH | 140.01, 283.24, 327.23, 444.28, 462.29 |
| UDP-N-acetyl-D-galactosamine | 606.0739 | 0 | 0.5454 | ↓ | 0.3765 | 2.97E-02 | 5.48E-03 | 0.688 | C17H27N3O17P2 | Negative | C18_BEH | 111.0222, 158.92, 176.93, 282.04, 362.00, 385.00 |
Clinical and histological information of patients included in the validation set.
| Cohort 1 | Cohort 2 | Cohort 3 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EEC (n = 20) | NEEC (n = 0) | Control (n = 20) | EEC (n = 36) | NEEC (n = 0) | Control (n = 0) | EEC (n = 78) | NEEC (n = 29) | Control (n = 0) | ||
| Age | > 50 | 20 | — | 20 | 36 | — | — | 78 | 29 | — |
| < 50 | — | — | — | —— | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Collection center | VHUH | 20 | — | 20 | 7 | — | — | 78 | 29 | — |
| Lleida | — | — | — | 13 | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Santiago | — | — | — | 6 | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Virgen Rocío | — | — | — | 8 | — | — | — | — | — | |
| MD Anderson | — | — | — | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Uterine condition | Pre-menopausal | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Post-menopausal | 20 | — | 20 | 36 | — | — | 78 | 29 | — | |
| FIGO stage | IA | 10 | — | — | 13 | — | — | 17 | 7 | — |
| IB | 6 | — | — | 10 | — | — | 31 | 5 | — | |
| II | 2 | — | — | 5 | — | — | 20 | 4 | — | |
| III | 2 | — | — | 8 | — | — | 7 | 11 | — | |
| IV | — | — | — | — | — | — | 3 | 2 | — | |
| Histologic grade | G1 | 4 | — | — | 12 | — | — | 13 | 0 | |
| G2 | 7 | — | — | 13 | — | — | 33 | 2 | ||
| G3 | 9 | — | — | 11 | — | — | 32 | 27 | ||
| Format | TMA | — | — | — | 36 | — | — | 78 | 29 | — |
| Individual slide | 20 | — | 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | |
Figure 2ADAR1 and ADAR2 proteins are overexpressed in EC. Panel A. ADAR1 and ADAR2 expression in EC tumors (T) compared to the paired control (C) tissues. Relative protein expression of each enzyme is plotted in the bar graphs. Panel B. Example of ADAR1 and ADAR2 staining levels in a matched EC tissue with the corresponding paired control. Panel C. ADAR1 and ADAR2 expression in EC tissues significantly correlate with the tumor grade. Panel D. Example of ADAR1 and ADAR2 staining levels in a set of 3 different EC tumor grades slides (grade 1, 2 and 3). Panel E. ADAR1 and ADAR2 levels are significantly increased in NEEC compared to EEC tumors. Panel F. Example of ADARs staining in EEC and NEEC tumors.
Figure 3Functional assays revealing that ADAR2 presents oncogenic functions in vitro. HEC-1A, Ishikawa and RL95-2 EC cell lines were used for the functional assays. Panel A. Proliferation assay showing a significant decrease in cell viability (OD 590 nm) in the 3 cell lines when inhibiting ADAR2 expression. Panel B. Apoptosis assay showing a significant increase in apoptosis rate when silencing ADAR2. Panel C. Wound healing assay indicating a significant decrease in HEC-1A and RL95-2 migration capabilities (% of wound healing) when treating cells with siRNA-ADAR2. No significant changes were seen when inhibiting ADAR1.
Figure 4Project workflow summary.