Mirella Baroni1, Suely Kazue Nagahashi Marie2, Paola Fernanda Fedatto3, Augusto Faria Andrade1, Veridiana Kill Suazo3, Gustavo Alencastro Veiga Cruzeiro1, Rosane de Paula Queiroz3, Luiz Gonzaga Tone3,1, Carlos Alberto Scrideli4,5. 1. Department of Genetics, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil. 2. Department of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. 3. Department of Pediatrics, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil. 4. Department of Pediatrics, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil. scrideli@fmrp.usp.br. 5. Department of Pediatrics-Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto - FMRP, Universidade de São Paulo - USP, Avenida dos Bandeirantes, 3900, Ribeirão Preto, SP, 14049-900, Brazil. scrideli@fmrp.usp.br.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common malignant primary brain tumor affecting adults. In pediatric patients, GBM exhibits genetic variations distinct from those identified in the adult GBM phenotype. This tumor exhibits complex genetic changes leading to malignant progression and resistance to standard therapies including radiotherapy and temozolomide treatment. The GDF15 gene codes for a growth factor whose expression is altered in the presence of inflammations and malignancies. GDF15 is associated with a poor prognosis and with radio- and chemoresistance in a variety of tumors. The aim of this study was to compare the response to GDF15 knockdown in adult (U343) and pediatric (KNS42) GBM cell line models. METHODS: The expression of the GDF15 gene was investigated by qRT-PCR and overexpression was identified in both GBM cell lines. The KNS42 and U343 cell lines were submitted to lentiviral transduction with shRNA of GDF15 and validated at the protein level. To understand the difference between cell lines, RNAseq was performed after GDF15 knockdown. RESULTS: The data obtained demonstrated that the pathways were differentially expressed in adult GBM and pediatric GBM cell lines. This was confirmed by functional assays perfomed after independent treatments (radiotherapy and TMZ). CONCLUSION: These results demonstrated that GBM cell lines had distinct responses to GDF15 knockdown, a fact that can be explained by the different molecular profile of pediatric and adult GBM.
INTRODUCTION:Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common malignant primary brain tumor affecting adults. In pediatric patients, GBM exhibits genetic variations distinct from those identified in the adult GBM phenotype. This tumor exhibits complex genetic changes leading to malignant progression and resistance to standard therapies including radiotherapy and temozolomide treatment. The GDF15 gene codes for a growth factor whose expression is altered in the presence of inflammations and malignancies. GDF15 is associated with a poor prognosis and with radio- and chemoresistance in a variety of tumors. The aim of this study was to compare the response to GDF15 knockdown in adult (U343) and pediatric (KNS42) GBM cell line models. METHODS: The expression of the GDF15 gene was investigated by qRT-PCR and overexpression was identified in both GBM cell lines. The KNS42 and U343 cell lines were submitted to lentiviral transduction with shRNA of GDF15 and validated at the protein level. To understand the difference between cell lines, RNAseq was performed after GDF15 knockdown. RESULTS: The data obtained demonstrated that the pathways were differentially expressed in adult GBM and pediatric GBM cell lines. This was confirmed by functional assays perfomed after independent treatments (radiotherapy and TMZ). CONCLUSION: These results demonstrated that GBM cell lines had distinct responses to GDF15 knockdown, a fact that can be explained by the different molecular profile of pediatric and adult GBM.
Authors: A Broniscer; R G Tatevossian; N D Sabin; P Klimo; J Dalton; R Lee; A Gajjar; D W Ellison Journal: Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 8.090
Authors: David N Louis; Arie Perry; Guido Reifenberger; Andreas von Deimling; Dominique Figarella-Branger; Webster K Cavenee; Hiroko Ohgaki; Otmar D Wiestler; Paul Kleihues; David W Ellison Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 17.088
Authors: Sophie Shnaper; Isabelle Desbaillets; David A Brown; Anastasia Murat; Eugenia Migliavacca; Myriam Schluep; Sandrine Ostermann; Marie-France Hamou; Roger Stupp; Samuel N Breit; Nicolas de Tribolet; Monika E Hegi Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2009-12-01 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Dominik Sturm; Sebastian Bender; David T W Jones; Peter Lichter; Jacques Grill; Oren Becher; Cynthia Hawkins; Jacek Majewski; Chris Jones; Joseph F Costello; Antonio Iavarone; Kenneth Aldape; Cameron W Brennan; Nada Jabado; Stefan M Pfister Journal: Nat Rev Cancer Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 60.716
Authors: John R Prensner; Oana M Enache; Victor Luria; Karsten Krug; Karl R Clauser; Joshua M Dempster; Amir Karger; Li Wang; Karolina Stumbraite; Vickie M Wang; Ginevra Botta; Nicholas J Lyons; Amy Goodale; Zohra Kalani; Briana Fritchman; Adam Brown; Douglas Alan; Thomas Green; Xiaoping Yang; Jacob D Jaffe; Jennifer A Roth; Federica Piccioni; Marc W Kirschner; Zhe Ji; David E Root; Todd R Golub Journal: Nat Biotechnol Date: 2021-01-28 Impact factor: 54.908