| Literature DB >> 29050215 |
Agnieszka Latosinska1,2, Marika Mokou1,3, Manousos Makridakis1, William Mullen4, Jerome Zoidakis1, Vasiliki Lygirou1, Maria Frantzi2, Ioannis Katafigiotis5, Konstantinos Stravodimos5, Marie C Hupe6, Maciej Dobrzynski7, Walter Kolch7, Axel S Merseburger6, Harald Mischak2,4, Maria G Roubelakis3,1, Antonia Vlahou1.
Abstract
Patients with advanced bladder cancer have poor outcomes, indicating a need for more efficient therapeutic approaches. This study characterizes proteomic changes underlying bladder cancer invasion aiming for the better understanding of disease pathophysiology and identification of drug targets. High resolution liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry analysis of tissue specimens from patients with non-muscle invasive (NMIBC, stage pTa) and muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC, stages pT2+) was conducted. Comparative analysis identified 144 differentially expressed proteins between analyzed groups. These included proteins previously associated with bladder cancer and also additional novel such as PGRMC1, FUCA1, BROX and PSMD12, which were further confirmed by immunohistochemistry. Pathway and interactome analysis predicted strong activation in muscle invasive bladder cancer of pathways associated with protein synthesis e.g. eIF2 and mTOR signaling. Knock-down of eukaryotic translation initiation factor 3 subunit D (EIF3D) (overexpressed in muscle invasive disease) in metastatic T24M bladder cancer cells inhibited cell proliferation, migration, and colony formation in vitro and decreased tumor growth in xenograft models. By contrast, knocking down GTP-binding protein Rheb (which is upstream of EIF3D) recapitulated the effects of EIF3D knockdown in vitro, but not in vivo. Collectively, this study represents a comprehensive analysis of NMIBC and MIBC providing a resource for future studies. The results highlight EIF3D as a potential therapeutic target.Entities:
Keywords: EIF3D; RHEB; bladder cancer; tissue proteomics; translation
Year: 2017 PMID: 29050215 PMCID: PMC5642490 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.17279
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Figure 1Schematic representation of the MS data analysis workflow
A total of 11 bladder cancer tissue proteomic profiles were generated and analyzed using two independent approaches. This includes analysis using Proteome Discoverer and Trans Proteomic Pipeline followed by quantification based on peak area and spectral counting (i.e. APEX), respectively. Following consolidation of the individual proteomics profiles, proteins identified in at least 60% of samples of at least one group (pTa/pT2+) were considered in differential expression analysis. For those, statistical analysis was performed to identify disease-associated proteins (p < 0.05). A total of 60 proteins were found to be significantly altered according to both approaches. The overlap increases to 144 proteins, when considering proteins found to be differentially expressed (statistically significant level) by at least one approach and exhibiting the same regulation trend based on the other quantification approach (up/down-regulation by at least 1.5 fold). These latter 144 proteins were further analyzed by pathway and interactome approaches.
Figure 2Verification of proteomics findings using immunohistochemistry
(A) Stained sections and (B) quantification results for (i) FUCA 1, (ii) PGRMC1 (iii) BROX and (iv) PSMD12 from control, pTa, pT1 and pT2+ human samples are presented. Immunohistochemistry analysis was performed using tissue microarrays (total n = 30 including 6 controls, 8 pTa, 8 pT1, 8 pT2+). For each protein, the exact number of tissue sections included for the quantification is presented in the figure. Quantification of the staining intensity was performed using the Image J software. Mean staining intensities and standard deviations per analyzed group are presented. Statistical analysis was performed using an independent sample t-test.
The top 20 pathways, with at least 3 molecules assigned, predicted based on proteomics data
| Pathway | # associated molecules | Pathway Activation (z-score) | Molecules | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Up-regulated in MIBC | Down-regulated in MIBC | ||||
| Protein synthesis-related pathways: | |||||
| EIF2 Signaling | 6.9E-07 | 10/185 | Activated (2.24) | RPL12, RPS13, EIF3D, RPS9, RPS18, RPL22, RPL31, RPS14, RPL27A, RPL10A | |
| tRNA Charging | 2.5E-03 | 3/39 | TARS, VARS, WARS | ||
| Regulation of eIF4 and p70S6K Signaling | 3.6E-03 | 5/146 | RPS13, EIF3D, RPS9, RPS18, RPS14 | ||
| mTOR Signaling | 2.0E-03 | 6/188 | RPS13, EIF3D, RPS9, RPS18, RPS14 | PRKAG2 | |
| Oxidative response/xenobiotic metabolism -related pathways: | |||||
| NRF2-mediated Oxidative Stress Response | 5.5E-07 | 10/180 | Activated (1.00) | EPHX1, FTL, PPIB, ACTG2 | GSTM1, GSTM5, UBB, GSTM2, GSTM3, GSTM4 |
| Glutathione-mediated Detoxification | 1.9E-06 | 5/30 | GSTM1, GSTM5, GSTM2, GSTM3, GSTM4 | ||
| Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor Signaling | 5.8E-05 | 7/140 | SRC, GSTM1, GSTM5, GSTM2, GSTM3, GSTM4, NEDD8 | ||
| Endocytosis-related pathways: | |||||
| Caveolar-mediated Endocytosis Signaling | 1.6E-03 | 4/72 | COPA, COPG1, ACTG2 | SRC | |
| Clathrin-mediated Endocytosis Signaling | 1.9E-03 | 6/185 | ARPC2, AP2A1, ACTG2 | UBB, SRC, CD2AP | |
| Cell-ECM interactions, cytoskeletal remodeling, cell adhesion -related pathways: | |||||
| Remodeling of Epithelial Adherens Junctions | 7.9E-06 | 6/68 | ARPC2, ACTN2, ACTN1, ACTN4, ACTG2 | SRC | |
| Epithelial Adherens Junction Signaling | 7.4E-05 | 7/146 | ARPC2,ACTN2, MYH10, ACTN1, ACTN4, ACTG2 | SRC | |
| Integrin Signaling | 8.7E-05 | 8/202 | Activated (2.12) | ARPC2,MYLK, ACTN2, ACTN1, ACTN4, ACTG2 | SRC, VASP |
| Actin Cytoskeleton Signaling | 1.4E-04 | 8/217 | ARPC2, GSN, MYLK, ACTN2, MYH10, ACTN1, ACTN4, ACTG2 | ||
| Paxillin Signaling | 7.4E-04 | 5/102 | Activated (1.34) | ACTN2, ACTN1, ACTN4, ACTG2 | SRC |
| Regulation of Cellular Mechanics by Calpain Protease | 6.8E-04 | 4/57 | ACTN2, ACTN1, ACTN4 | SRC | |
| Angiogenesis -related pathways: | |||||
| VEGF Signaling | 4.4E-04 | 5/91 | Activated (1.34) | ACTN2, ACTN1, ACTN4, ACTG2 | SRC |
| Other pathways: | |||||
| Leukocyte Extravasation Signaling | 4.8E-04 | 7/198 | Activated (1.89) | ACTN2, ACTN1, ACTN4, GNAI3, ACTG2 | SRC, VASP |
| Germ Cell-Sertoli Cell Junction Signaling | 9.1E-04 | 6/160 | GSN, ACTN2, ACTN1, ACTN4, ACTG2 | SRC | |
| Sertoli Cell-Sertoli Cell Junction Signaling | 1.5E-03 | 6/178 | ACTN2, ACTN1, ACTN4, ACTG2 | SRC, PRKAG2 | |
| Protein Ubiquitination Pathway | 7.6E-05 | 9/255 | PSMD12, PSMA7,PSMA2,PSMB2, PSMB3, UBE2D3 | UBB,UCHL3, HSPE1 | |
The findings were prioritized based on the significance level and number of associated proteins (≥ 3). The latter’s (e.g. associated proteins) trend of expression (up- or down- regulated) in MIBC versus NMIBC is indicated. Pathways were generated through the use of QIAGEN’s Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA®, QIAGEN Redwood City, www.qiagen.com/ingenuity).
Figure 3Interactome network of proteins altered during bladder cancer invasion
Functional annotations of the proteins included in the interaction network was conducted using Gene Ontology Annotation (UniProt-GOA) Database [123]. Proteins involved in protein degradation/protein synthesis clusters are marked in red circles.
Figure 4Evaluation of EIF3D knockdown in T24M cells at the RNA and protein level
(A) Bar graph representing the downregulation of EIF3D in T24M shEIF3D cells in comparison to T24M shscramble and untransduced T24M cells analysed by real-time PCR. The data were normalized to the human GAPDH reference gene and then to the control T24M untransduced cells. (B) Western blot analysis for EIF3D in cell extracts derived from T24M, T24M shscramble and T24M shEIF3D cells. (C) Bar chart showing data from the quantification analysis of EIF3D protein bands detected in T24M, T24M shscramble and T24M shEIF3D. The quantification of the proteins was performed by using the Quantity One software (BioRad) and the results were normalized to β-Actin loading control and then to the T24M untransduced cells. The values represent the means ± SD from three independent experiments performed in duplicate (two-tailed Student’s t-test, *p ≤ 0.05, **p ≤ 0.01, ***p ≤ 0.001).
Figure 5Impact of EIF3D downregulation on cell proliferation, migration and colony forming ability of T24M cells
(A) The knockdown of EIF3D significantly reduced the proliferation rate of T24M cells. The bar graph represents the proliferation rate of T24M, T24M shscramble and T24M shRHEB cells at three different time points (Day 0, Day 3, Day 4). The values represent the means ± SD from three independent experiments performed in five replicates (two-tailed Student’s t-test, ****p ≤ 0.0001). (B) A significant reduction was also observed in the migratory capacity of T24M cells following EIF3D knockdown. The graph illustrates the number of cells migrated towards conditioned media derived from T24M cells. The cells were allowed to migrate for 6h toward the CM. Representative images of the migrated cells from each condition are displayed below the graph. Magnification: 10×. The values represent the means ± SD from two independent experiments performed in duplicate (two-tailed Student’s t-test, ***p ≤ 0.001). (C) The colony forming ability of T24M cells was significantly reduced in the case of EIF3D knockdown after 10 days of growth on matrigel. i) The bar graph illustrates the mean number of colonies formed by T24M shscramble and T24M shEIF3D cells. ii) Bar graph presenting the average diameter of the colonies formed by T24M shscramble and T24M shEIF3D cells. Although no significant difference in the number of colonies was detected, a remarkable decrease in the diameter of the colonies was observed upon to EIF3D knockdown. Colony diameters were measured by using ImageJ software and their length was given in pixels. iii) Representative images of the colonies formed by T24M shscramble and T24M shEIF3D cells. Magnification: 10x. The values represent the means ± SD from two independent experiments performed in duplicate (two-tailed Student’s t-test, **p ≤ 0.01).
Figure 6The knockdown of EIF3D impairs tumor growth in vivo
(A) Tumor growth in T24M, T24M shscramble and T24M shEIF3D tumor bearing NOD/SCID mice. Tumor volume was significantly smaller (***p < 0.01, Student’s t-test) in T24MshEIF3D compared with T24M or T24M shscramble tumor bearing animals 59 days after the injections. (B) The expression of EIF3D was estimated in excised tumors from all groups of mice, 60 days after the injections, at the RNA level. Bar graph representing the downregulation of EIF3D in T24M shEIF3D tumors in comparison to T24M shscramble and T24M tumors analyzed with real-time PCR (*p < 0.05, Student’s t-test). (C) The knockdown of EIF3D in the tumors was also confirmed 60 days after the injections at the protein level. i) Western blot analysis for EIF3D in T24M, T24M shscramble and T24M shEIF3D tumors. ii) Bar chart showing the decreased levels of EIF3D in T24M shEIF3D tumors compared to T24M and T24M shscramble tumors (*p < 0.05, Student’s t-test).