| Literature DB >> 30428884 |
Bin Chang1,2, Jiao Meng3,2, Huimin Zhu4, Xiang Du1,2, Lili Sun4, Lei Wang1,2, Shugang Li5, Gong Yang6,7,8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Regulated in development and DNA damage response (REDD1), a gene responding to hypoxia or multiple DNA damage events, was recently implicated in cancer development and progression. Previously, in vivo and in vitro experiments indicated that REDD1 functions as an oncogene in ovarian cancer cells. However, the role of REDD1 in cancer cell migration and invasion and in clinical significance of prognostic values is not examined in detail.Entities:
Keywords: Invasion; Migration; Ovarian cancer; Prognosis; REDD1
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30428884 PMCID: PMC6236897 DOI: 10.1186/s13000-018-0754-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diagn Pathol ISSN: 1746-1596 Impact factor: 2.644
REDD1 expression in different ovarian epithelial tissues
| Pathological type | Total No. | Cytoplasmic REDD1 expression | Nuclear REDD1 expression | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low expression No. (%) | High expression No. (%) | Negative No. (%) | Positive No. (%) | ||||
| Normal ovarian or fallopian epithelia | 18 | 15(83.3) | 3(16.7) | 0.009 | 9(50) | 9(50) | 0.000 |
| Borderline tumor | 24 | 22(91.7) | 2(8.3) | 9(37.5) | 15(62.5) | ||
| Carcinoma | 229 | 148(64.6) | 81(35.4) | 186(81.2) | 43(18.8) | ||
Correlation between cytoplasmic REDD1 expression and clinicopathologic factors
| Characteristic | REDD1 expression | Total No. | χ2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low expression No. (%) | High expression No. (%) | ||||
| Age | |||||
| 20- | 4(66.7) | 2(33.3) | 6 | 0.911* | |
| 30- | 7(70.0) | 3(30.0) | 10 | ||
| 40- | 31(67.4) | 15(32.6) | 46 | ||
| 50- | 42(68.9) | 19(31.1) | 61 | ||
| 60- | 45(58.4) | 32(41.6) | 77 | ||
| 70- | 16(64.0) | 9(36.0) | 25 | ||
| 80- | 3(75.0) | 1(25.0) | 4 | ||
| Stage | 20.283 | < 0.001 | |||
| Stage I | 27(81.8) | 6(18.2) | 33 | ||
| Stage II | 24(85.7) | 4(14.3) | 28 | ||
| Stage III | 85(62.5) | 51(37.5) | 136 | ||
| Stage IV | 12(37.5) | 20(62.5) | 32 | ||
| Histologic type | < 0.001* | ||||
| Serous carcinoma | 58(46.4) | 67(53.6) | 125 | ||
| Mucinous carcinoma | 6(100.0) | 0(0.0) | 6 | ||
| Endometrioid carcinoma | 30(96.8) | 1(3.2) | 31 | ||
| Clear-cell carcinoma | 11(78.6) | 3(21.4) | 14 | ||
| Mixed-type carcinoma | 43(81.1) | 10(18.9) | 53 | ||
| Ascites | 18.699 | < 0.001 | |||
| Yes | 75(54.7) | 62(45.3) | 137 | ||
| No | 44(72.1) | 17(27.9) | 61 | ||
| Unknown | 26(93.5) | 2(6.5) | 31 | ||
| Chemotherapy response | < 0.001* | ||||
| Responders | 119(74.8) | 40(25.2) | 159 | ||
| Partial responders | 14(34.1) | 27(65.9) | 41 | ||
| Non responders | 8(42.1) | 11(57.9) | 19 | ||
| NC/URa | 7(70.0) | 3(30.0) | 10 | ||
| CA125 | |||||
| < 500 | 38(59.4) | 26(40.6) | 64 | 0.529* | |
| ≥ 500 | 38(58.5) | 27(41.5) | 65 | ||
| Unknown | 72(72.0) | 28(28.0) | 100 | ||
*Fisher’s exact test
aNC/UR: No chemotherapy or Unknown response
Fig. 1Immunoreactivity patterns of REDD1 in ovarian carcinomas. a REDD1-high expression in serous carcinoma. b Serous carcinoma cells show no REDD1 staining. c Diffuse and strong positive staining for REDD1 in endometrioid carcinoma. d Endometrioid carcinoma cells show very weak cytoplasmic REDD1 staining. e REDD1-positive staining in mucinous adenocarcinoma. f Mucinous adenocarcinoma do not exhibit REDD1 staining. g Positive nuclear staining for REDD1 in clear cell carcinoma. h Clear cell carcinoma cells do not show staining for REDD1 (original magnification × 200)
Correlation between nuclear REDD1 expression and clinicopathologic factor
| Characteristic | REDD1 expression | Total No. | χ2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Negative | Positive | ||||
| No. (%) | No. (%) | ||||
| Age | 0.508* | ||||
| 20- | 5(83.3) | 1(16.7) | 6 | ||
| 30- | 6(60.0) | 4(40.0) | 10 | ||
| 40- | 37(80.4) | 9(19.6) | 46 | ||
| 50- | 49(80.3) | 12(19.7) | 61 | ||
| 60- | 66(85.7) | 11(14.3) | 77 | ||
| 70- | 19(76.0) | 6(24.0) | 25 | ||
| 80- | 4(100.0) | 0(0.0) | 4 | ||
| Stage | 3.4 | 0.334 | |||
| Stage I | 25(75.8) | 8(24.2) | 33 | ||
| Stage II | 20(71.4) | 8(28.6) | 28 | ||
| Stage III | 115(84.6) | 21(15.4) | 136 | ||
| Stage IV | 26(81.3) | 6(18.8) | 32 | ||
| Histologic type | 0.043* | ||||
| Serous carcinoma | 105(84.0) | 20(16.0) | 125 | ||
| Mucinous carcinoma | 6(100.0) | 0(0.0) | 6 | ||
| Endometrioid carcinoma | 24(77.4) | 7(22.6) | 31 | ||
| Clear cell carcinoma | 7(50.0) | 7(50.0) | 14 | ||
| Mixed-type carcinoma | 44(83.0) | 9(17.0) | 53 | ||
| Ascites | 3.633 | 0.161 | |||
| Yes | 108(78.8) | 29(21.2) | 137 | ||
| No | 49(80.3) | 12(19.7) | 61 | ||
| Unknown | 29(93.5) | 2(6.5) | 31 | ||
| Chemotherapy response | 0.801* | ||||
| Completely Responders | 130(81.8) | 29(18.2) | 159 | ||
| Partial responders | 34(82.9) | 7(17.1) | 41 | ||
| Non responders | 14(73.7) | 5(26.3) | 19 | ||
| NC/URa | 8(80.0) | 2(20.0) | 10 | ||
| CA125 | 0.750* | ||||
| < 500 | 50 (78.1) | 14 (21.9) | 64 | ||
| ≥ 500 | 54 (83.1) | 11 (16.9) | 65 | ||
| Unknown | 82 (82.0) | 18 (18.0) | 100 | ||
*Fisher’s exact test
aNC/UR: No chemotherapy or Unknown response
Cytoplasmic REDD1 expression and OS
| REDD1 expression | No. of patients | Median survival months (95% CI) | Survival rate (95% CI) | χ2 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 36-months | 60-months | 120-months | |||||
| Low expression | 148 | 125.000(113.914,137.086) | 0.76(0.671, 0.828) | 0.71(0.007,0.976) | 0.33(0.217,0.448) | 40.115 | < 0.001 |
| High expression | 81 | 32.700(16.536,48.864) | 0.41(0.273,0.542) | 0.24(0.119,0.384) | 0.08(0.017,0.211) | ||
Cytoplasmic REDD1 expression and DFS
| REDD1 expression | No. of patients | Median survival months (95% CI) | Survival rate (95% CI) |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 36-months | 60-months | 120-months | |||||
| Low expression | 148 | 103.200(76.880,129.520) | 0.76(0.671,0.828) | 0.60(0.495,0.690) | 0.27(0.161,0.391) | 60.873 | < 0.001 |
| High expression | 81 | 20.000(15.954,24.046) | 0.41(0.292,0.524) | 0 | 0 | ||
Fig. 2Kaplan–Meier survival curves ovarian carcinoma patients grouped by low and high REDD1 expression levels. a OS curves in all patients with ovarian cancer (n = 229). b DFS curves in all patients (n = 229). c OS curves in patients with ovarian serous carcinoma (n = 125). d DFS curves in patients with ovarian serous carcinoma (n = 125)
The multivariate Cox proportional- hazards regression for OS
| 95.0% CI for Exp(B) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B | SE | Wald | df | Exp(B) | Lower | Upper | ||
| Age(years) | ||||||||
| < 40 | 12.931 | 2 | 0.002 | |||||
| 40–60 | −1.99 | 0.594 | 11.217 | 1 | 0.001 | 0.137 | 0.043 | 0.438 |
| ≥ 60 | −2.096 | 0.585 | 12.82 | 1 | < 0.001 | 0.123 | 0.039 | 0.387 |
| Histologic type | ||||||||
| Serous carcinoma | 12.222 | 4 | 0.016 | |||||
| Mucinous carcinoma | 1.813 | 0.785 | 5.331 | 1 | 0.021 | 6.13 | 1.315 | 28.57 |
| Endometrioid carcinoma | 0.014 | 0.385 | 0.001 | 1 | 0.972 | 1.014 | 0.476 | 2.158 |
| Clear-cell carcinoma | 1.722 | 0.634 | 7.366 | 1 | 0.007 | 5.593 | 1.613 | 19.391 |
| Mixed-type carcinoma | −0.121 | 0.415 | 0.085 | 1 | 0.771 | 0.886 | 0.393 | 1.997 |
| Ascites | ||||||||
| No | 6.469 | 2 | 0.039 | |||||
| Yes | 0.444 | 0.291 | 2.336 | 1 | 0.126 | 1.559 | 0.882 | 2.756 |
| Unknown | −1.378 | 0.796 | 2.999 | 1 | 0.083 | 0.252 | 0.053 | 1.199 |
| Stage (II-IVvsI) | 1.554 | .338 | 21.096 | 1 | < 0.001 | 4.729 | 2.437 | 9.177 |
| cytoplasmic REDD1 expression | 1.201 | 0.318 | 14.23 | 1 | < 0.001 | 3.325 | 1.781 | 6.206 |
Dependent variable: overall survival
Independent variables: age, stage, histologic type, ascites, serum CA125 level, chemotherapy response, cytoplasmic REDD1 expression
B:regression coefficient, SE:standard error, Wald:Wald chi square, Df: degree of freedom
The multivariate Cox proportional- hazards regression for DFS
| 95% CI for Exp(B) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B | SE | Wald | df | Exp(B) | Lower | Upper | ||
| Age (years) | ||||||||
| < 40 | 1.562 | 2.000 | 0.458 | 1.000 | ||||
| 40–60 | 0.488 | 0.394 | 1.536 | 1.000 | 0.215 | 1.629 | 0.753 | 3.524 |
| ≥ 60 | 0.040 | 0.229 | 0.031 | 1.000 | 0.860 | 1.041 | 0.665 | 1.629 |
| Histologic type | ||||||||
| Serous carcinoma | 16.706 | 3.000 | 0.001 | 1.000 | ||||
| Mucinous carcinoma | 0.380 | 0.450 | 0.713 | 1.000 | 0.399 | 1.462 | 0.605 | 3.533 |
| Endometrioid carcinoma | 1.953 | 0.587 | 11.065 | 1.000 | 0.001 | 7.053 | 2.231 | 22.297 |
| Clear-cell carcinoma | 1.192 | 0.700 | 2.900 | 1.000 | 0.089 | 3.292 | 0.835 | 12.972 |
| Mixed-type carcinoma | 0.656 | 0.483 | 1.844 | 1.000 | 0.174 | 1.926 | 0.748 | 4.961 |
| Response to chemotherapy | ||||||||
| Completely Responders | 17.056 | 3.000 | 0.001 | 1.000 | ||||
| Partial responders | 1.885 | 0.503 | 14.051 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 6.584 | 2.458 | 17.639 |
| Non-responders | 0.956 | 0.656 | 2.120 | 1.000 | 0.145 | 2.600 | 0.718 | 9.412 |
| Unknown response | −0.839 | 0.672 | 1.559 | 1.000 | 0.212 | 0.432 | 0.116 | 1.613 |
| Stage (II-IVvsI) | 0.904 | 0.312 | 8.361 | 1.000 | 0.004 | 2.468 | 1.338 | 4.554 |
| Cytoplasmic REDD1 expression | −1.479 | 0.295 | 25.102 | 1.000 | < 0.001 | 0.228 | 0.128 | 0.407 |
Dependent variable: disease-free survival time
Independent variables: age, stage, histologic type, ascites, serum CA125 level, stage, chemotherapy response, and cytoplasmic REDD1 expression
B: regression coefficient, SE: standard error, Wald: Wald error, Wald: Wald chi square, Df: degree of freedom
Fig. 3REDD1 enhance cell migration and invasion in ovarian cancer. a Western blotting detected REDD1 expression level in human ovarian epithelial cancer cell lines. b Construction of ovarian cancer cell lines with REDD1 overexpression or knockdown. c Transwell assays illustrate that REDD1 enhances ovarian cancer cell migration and invasion ability
Research of REDD1 in different tumor types
| First author | Journal (year) | Results | Function of REDD1 | Tumortype |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Horak P | Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. (2010) [ | • REDD1 inactivation induces ROS dysregulation and consequent HIF-1α induction that promotes tumorigenesis. | Suppresses tumorigenesis | breast cancer |
| Kucejova B | Mol Cancer Res. (2011) [ | • REDD1 is highly expressed in VHL-deficient clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). | possibly a tumor suppressor in sporadic ccRCC. | ccRCC |
| Jin HO | Cancer Lett. (2013) [ | • Sustained overexpression of Redd1 leads to mTORC1 inhibition and to consequent Akt activation that is involved in cell survival. | / | lung cancer cells. |
| Zeng Q | Clin Cancer Res. (2018) [ | • The significant increase of REDD1 expression is detected in bladder urothelial carcinoma(BUC) tissue. | REDD1 is an oncogene. | BUC |