| Literature DB >> 29890952 |
Jean M Winter1,2, Natasha L Curry1, Derek M Gildea3, Kendra A Williams1, Minnkyong Lee1, Ying Hu4, Nigel P S Crawford5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is well known that development of prostate cancer (PC) can be attributed to somatic mutations of the genome, acquired within proto-oncogenes or tumor-suppressor genes. What is less well understood is how germline variation contributes to disease aggressiveness in PC patients. To map germline modifiers of aggressive neuroendocrine PC, we generated a genetically diverse F2 intercross population using the transgenic TRAMP mouse model and the wild-derived WSB/EiJ (WSB) strain. The relevance of germline modifiers of aggressive PC identified in these mice was extensively correlated in human PC datasets and functionally validated in cell lines.Entities:
Keywords: CCDC115; DNAJC10; Germline variation; LNCaP; Prostate cancer; Quantitative trait loci; RNF149; STYXL1; TRAMP mouse model
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29890952 PMCID: PMC5996485 DOI: 10.1186/s12864-018-4827-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Genomics ISSN: 1471-2164 Impact factor: 3.969
Fig. 1Schematic outline of mouse experimental study. a Mouse breeding strategy to produce experimental (TRAMP x WSB) F2 mouse population. WSB male and female mice were bred to generate an F1 population of WSB mice. Male WSB F1 mice were then crossed with SV40 transgene positive TRAMP B6 female mice to generate an F2 population of WSB mice that are SV40 Transgene positive (Tg+). b A total of 307 male (TRAMP x WSB) F2 mice were maintained for 210 days, or until humane endpoints were reached, and sacrificed to quantify phenotypic traits of aggressive PC, including primary tumor and metastasis burden. These phenotypic traits were used further in genomic and transcriptomic analyses to identify loci associated with aggressive disease traits in (TRAMP x WXB) F2 mice
Fig. 2Summary of phenotypic data collected from n = 307 (TRAMP x WSB) F2 transgene positive mice. At 210 days, or when human end points were reached, mice were scarified and tissues collected and analyzed for primary tumor burden and distant metastases. a Age of death. b Prostate tumor burden. c Seminal vesicle tumor burden. d Visceral and lymph node metastasis (Incidence %). Representative H&E staining. e Lung. f Liver. g Lymph node
Significant aggressive PC susceptibility modifier loci in (TRAMP x WSB) F2 mice
| Trait | Chromosome | LOD Score | P-Value | 2-LOD Confidence Interval | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proximal (bp) | Distal (bp) | ||||
| Primary Tumor Burden | 1 | 4.96 | 0.004 | 16,278,642 | 64,873,174 |
| 2 | 4.13 | 0.026 | 44,988,302 | 107,465,137 | |
| 5 | 4.22 | 0.023 | 129,258,884 | 139,764,653 | |
| 13 | 6.92 | < 0.001 | 60,718,040 | 98,858,290 | |
| 18 | 4.28 | 0.02 | 73,432,362 | 88,633,996 | |
| Seminal Vesicle Tumor Burden | 4 | 13.77 | < 0.001 | 3,722,677 | 46,175,356 |
bp base pair
Fig. 3Genome wide QTL plots of significant modifier loci in (TRAMP x WSB) F2 mice. a Prostate tumor burden. b Seminal vesicle tumor burden
Associations between aggressive disease occurrence and SNPs using case-only analyses of two publicly available human prostate cancer GWAS
| Cohort | Gene | Chr. | Clinical Trait | SNP ID | t value | P value | OR (95% CI) | Permutation P valuea |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CGEMS |
| 2q21.1 | Gleason Score | rs11542411 | 3.05 | 0.0023 | 1.21 (1.07–1.36) | 0.0024 |
|
| 2q32.1 | Gleason Score | rs288324 | −2.74 | 0.0062 | 0.87 (0.80–0.96) | 0.0049 | |
|
| 3p21.31 | Metastasis Stage | rs13321717 | 2.82 | 0.0049 | 1.05 (1.02–1.09) | 0.005 | |
|
| 5q14 | Gleason Score | rs154447 | 2.85 | 0.0045 | 1.17 (1.05–1.30) | 0.005 | |
|
| 6p12.2 | Gleason Score | rs1266922 | 2.98 | 0.0029 | 1.17 (1.06–1.30) | 0.0026 | |
| rs4711987 | −2.72 | 0.0067 | 0.87 (0.79–0.96) | 0.0072 | ||||
| rs9382070 | −2.65 | 0.0081 | 0.88 (0.80–0.97) | 0.0081 | ||||
| rs10948675 | −2.64 | 0.0083 | 0.88 (0.80–0.97) | 0.0061 | ||||
| rs1937147 | −2.64 | 0.0083 | 0.88 (0.80–0.97) | 0.0085 | ||||
| Metastasis Stage | rs10484879 | −2.95 | 0.0033 | 0.94(0.90–0.98) | 0.0039 | |||
| Tumor Stage | rs10484879 | −3.07 | 0.0022 | 0.93 (0.88–0.97) | 0.0023 | |||
| rs9370043 | −2.77 | 0.0056 | 0.60 (0.41–0.86) | 0.0048 | ||||
| rs1567215 | −2.64 | 0.0083 | 0.61 (0.42–0.88) | 0.0071 | ||||
| rs1326585 | −2.60 | 0.0096 | 0.62 (0.43–0.89) | 0.0104 | ||||
|
| 6q13 | Tumor Stage | rs12200732 | −2.90 | 0.0038 | 0.89 (0.82–0.96) | 0.0025 | |
|
| 6q14 | Gleason Score | rs9442812 | −3.05 | 0.0023 | 0.65 (0.49–0.86) | 0.0035 | |
| rs9351947 | −2.73 | 0.0064 | 0.85 (0.76–0.96) | 0.0059 | ||||
| rs9341399 | −2.64 | 0.0085 | 0.58 (0.39–0.87) | 0.0079 | ||||
| rs6952753 | 2.65 | 0.0081 | 1.32 (1.08–1.62) | 0.0087 | ||||
| Nodal Stage | rs9442812 | 3.61 | 0.0003 | 1.09 (1.04–1.14) | 0.0004 | |||
| Tumor Stage | rs10046418 | −2.97 | 0.0030 | 0.49 (0.31–0.78) | 0.0036 | |||
|
| 7q11.23 | Tumor Stage | rs2840794 | −2.88 | 0.0041 | 0.50 (0.31–0.80) | 0.0036 | |
| ICPCG |
| 19p12 | Aggressive vs. non-aggressive | rs283168 | 2.65 | 0.0080 | 1.16 (1.04–1.30) | 0.0087 |
|
| 2q11.2 | Aggressive vs. non-aggressive | rs11677690 | −2.64 | 0.0084 | 0.87 (0.78–0.96) | 0.0096 | |
|
| 5q14 | Aggressive vs. non-aggressive | rs871775 | −2.60 | 0.0093 | 0.83 (0.72–0.95) | 0.0097 | |
|
| 6p12.1 | Aggressive vs. non-aggressive | rs9474334 | −2.59 | 0.0095 | 0.88 (0.80–0.97) | 0.0086 | |
|
| 6p12.2 | Aggressive vs. non-aggressive | rs1413917 | 2.86 | 0.0043 | 1.22 (1.06–1.40) | 0.0062 | |
|
| 6q14 | Aggressive vs. non-aggressive | rs9446848 | −3.14 | 0.0017 | 0.66 (0.51–0.85) | 0.0016 | |
| rs9442891 | −3.12 | 0.0018 | 0.66 (0.50–0.86) | 0.0023 | ||||
| rs7772526 | −3.11 | 0.0019 | 0.75 (0.63–0.90) | 0.0022 | ||||
| rs6453613 | 3.04 | 0.0024 | 1.18 (1.06–1.31) | 0.0023 | ||||
| rs6911751 | −2.85 | 0.0044 | 0.77 (0.64–0.92) | 0.0047 | ||||
| rs9446844 | −2.84 | 0.0045 | 0.78 (0.65–0.92) | 0.0047 | ||||
| rs6933440 | −2.84 | 0.0046 | 0.78 (0.65–0.92) | 0.0048 | ||||
| rs7748968 | −2.82 | 0.0048 | 0.69 (0.53–0.89) | 0.0054 | ||||
| rs9343009 | −2.77 | 0.0056 | 0.78 (0.66–0.93) | 0.0057 | ||||
| rs1935530 | −2.65 | 0.0081 | 0.79 (0.66–0.94) | 0.007 |
aLD-block wide correction
Regression correlation of mRNA expression with clinical traits of aggressive PC in the TCGA cohort: Five candidate genes harbor significant expression associations with aggressive disease traits
| Gene | Clinical trait | OR (CIs) | P value | FDR |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Disease Free Survival | 0.67 (0.53–0.85) | 0.0007 | 0.020 |
| Gleason Score | 0.73 (0.58–0.91) | 0.0063 | 0.094 | |
|
| Tumor Stage | 0.67 (0.55–0.81) | 0.0001 | 0.007 |
| Gleason Score | 0.56 (0.44–0.71) | 0.0001 | 0.007 | |
| Disease Free Survival | 0.63 (0.46–0.88) | 0.0066 | 0.094 | |
|
| Tumor Stage | 1.42 (1.12–1.79) | 0.0034 | 0.061 |
|
| Gleason Score | 0.68 (0.55–0.85) | 0.0007 | 0.020 |
| Tumor Stage | 0.69 (0.55–0.86) | 0.0009 | 0.021 | |
| Nodal Metastasis | 0.57 (0.40–0.80) | 0.0012 | 0.025 | |
|
| Gleason Score | 1.42 (1.16–1.74 | 0.0006 | 0.020 |
Fig. 4TCGA Cohort of candidate gene expression profiles. a. Comparison of differential expression between normal prostate (PAN) Vs adenocarcinoma tissue (PCa) for five candidate genes. b. Survival plot for cases with dysregulation of all 4 candidate genes CCDC115, DNAJC10, RNF149 and STYXL1 (red) compared to cases with normal expression (blue). c. Survival plot of cases with upregulated DNACJ10 expression (red) compared to cases with normal DNAJC10 expression levels (blue). d. Survival plot of cases with CCDC115 dysregulation (red) compared to all cases without CCDC115 differential expression (blue). e. Survival plot of those cases with dysregulated CCDC115 expression comparing loss of CCDC115 expression (blue) and upregulated CCDC115 expression (red). f. Oncoprint showing prostate tumor expression changes in individual cases for each candidate gene (red = upregulated; blue = down regulated). ***p < 0.001
Fig. 5Lentiviral ectopic over-expression of candidate genes CCDC115, DNAJC10, RNF149 and STYXL1 in the LNCaP PC cell line and their functional effect in vitro and in vivo. a Cell proliferation rates. b Anchorage independent growth. c Invasion. d Flank xenograft tumor growth over time. e Final tumor weight after 5 weeks growth. *p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001