| Literature DB >> 30214002 |
Nitya Bhaskaran1, Jennifer Luu1, Scott T Kelley1, Mohammad W Khan1, Priyadarshini Mamindla1, Kathleen L McGuire2.
Abstract
Elevated Microsatellite Alterations at Selected Tetranucleotide repeats (EMAST) occur in up to 60% of colorectal cancers and may associate with aggressive and advanced disease in patients. Although EMAST occurs in many cancer types, current understanding is limited due to the lack of an animal model. Reported here is the design and implementation of an algorithm for detecting EMAST repeats in mice. This algorithm incorporates properties of known human EMAST sequences to identify repeat sequences in animal genomes and was able to identify EMAST-like sequences in the mouse. Seven of the identified repeats were analyzed further in a colon cancer mouse model and six of the seven displayed EMAST instability characteristic of that seen in human colorectal cancers. In conclusion, the algorithm developed successfully identified EMAST repeats in an animal genome and, for the first time, EMAST has been shown to occur in a mouse model of colon cancer.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30214002 PMCID: PMC6137214 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-32057-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Developing an algorithm to identify potential EMAST CTTT repeats in animal genomes. Novel motifs in flanking regions provided an additional parameter, beyond repeat number and type, to identify unstable tetranucleotide repeat sequences in the mouse genome. (A) The number of CTTT repeat sequences found in human and mouse genomes, with and without the identified motifs. (B) Sequence logo from Meme showing the 11 nucleotide motifs found in 5′ and 3′ flanking regions of known human CTTT EMAST loci (E-values < 0.001). (C) Flow diagram of the programming logic used once motifs were added, from data input to output. The algorithm follows a basic search of the input animal genome for repeat sequences that match the user’s input in type and length. The queries that match are then analyzed for both flanking motifs. If both motifs are found, the algorithm calculates the percentage similarity between the found animal sequence to known human sequences before listing the sequence and values as output. It is important to note that the algorithm as written only reads one strand of DNA; it can be easily modified to find CTTT repeats on the other strand as well.
Figure 2Histology of tumor sections from mouse colon. 5 µ sections were stained with Meyer’s hematoxylin for histological evaluation. Representative samples shown: (A) Invasive tumor tissue sample T3 from mouse #T2. The red arrow indicates where the tumor has invaded into the submucosa; (B) non invasive tumor tissue sample T2 from mouse #122; (C) non invasive tumor tissue sample T7 from mouse #134; (D) normal mouse colon tissue sample N2 from mouse #122. All pictures were taken at 100x magnification.
Figure 3Sequencing chromatographs of marker C9R17 and C10R18. (A) Chromatograph showing sequencing peaks of normal mouse tissue sample N6 with marker C9R17. (B) Chromatograph showing sequencing peaks of tumor mouse tissue sample T6 with marker C9R17. (C) Chromatograph showing sequencing peaks of normal mouse tissue sample N5 with marker C10R18. (D) Chromatograph showing sequencing peaks of tumor mouse tissue sample T5 with marker C10R18.
Figure 4Sequencing alignments of marker C9R17 and C10R18. (A) Sequence alignment of marker C9R17 published sequence (top) to sample N6 (bottom). (B) Sequence alignment of marker C9R17 published sequence (top) to sample T6 (bottom). (C) Sequence alignment of marker C10R18 published sequence (top) to sample N1 (bottom). (D) Sequence alignment of marker C10R18 published sequence (top) to sample N2 (bottom). (E) Sequence alignment of marker C10R18 sample N1 (top) to sample T1 (bottom).
The number of TCCC repeat lengths found in the seven loci tested from each mouse normal and tumor colon tissue sample assayed.
| Loci Namea | Published # of Repeatsb | Sample Type | Samples | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | |||
| C6R16 | 16 | Normal | 15* | 16 | 15* | 15* | 15* | 16 | 15* |
| Tumor | 15 |
| 15 |
| 15 |
| 15 | ||
| C8R17 | 17 | Normal | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 |
| Tumor | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 |
| 17 |
| ||
| C9R17 | 17 | Normal | 17 | 17 | 17 | 16* | 17 | 17 | 17 |
| Tumor | 17 | 17 | 17 | 16 | 17 | 17 | 17 | ||
| C10R18 | 18 | Normal | 17* | 18 | 17* | 17* | 17* | 17* | 18 |
| Tumor |
|
| 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 18 | ||
| C14R15 | 15 | Normal | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 16* | 15 |
| Tumor | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 |
| 15 | ||
| C14R16 | 16 | Normal | 15* | 16 | 15* | 16 | 16 | 15* | 15* |
| Tumor |
|
| 15 | 16 |
|
|
| ||
| C19R16 | 16 | Normal | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | |
| Tumor | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | ||
| Ch18R14.1 | 14 | Normal | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 |
| Tumor | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | ||
| Ch18R14.2 | 14 | Normal | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 |
| Tumor | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | 14 | ||
| C10R18 | 18 | Parental | 18 | 18 | 18 | 18 | 18 | 18 | 18 |
aLoci name (generated from the chromosome #Followed by the repeat length), the published number of repeats, the sample type, and sample #1–7, as reported.
bPublished number of repeats for comparison. For each locus, the number of repeats in each normal sample can be compared to the published genomic data, and to the corresponding tumor data (indicated in the row directly below) to determine sequence instability and/or EMAST.
*Results determining instability between individual mice in normal samples are marked with an asterisk.
Bold – Results identifying EMAST, as determined by human studies (comparison of normal DNA sequence vs. tumor samples).