Kecheng Zhang1, Canrong Lu1, Xiaohui Huang1, Jianxin Cui1, Jiyang Li1, Yunhe Gao1, Wenquan Liang1, Yi Liu1, Yang Sun2, Hanxuan Liu3, Bo Wei1, Lin Chen4. 1. Department of General Surgery & Institute of General Surgery, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing, PR China. 2. Department of Ultrasound, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, PR China. 3. Medical Experiment and Analysis Center, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing, PR China. 4. Department of General Surgery & Institute of General Surgery, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Fuxing Road 28, Beijing 100853, PR China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The clinical relevance and biological role of tissular AOC4P in gastric cancer (GC) remains to be clarified. METHODS: The association between AOC4P expression and clinicopathological characteristics was investigated. In vitro, 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT), colony formation, wound healing and terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL) assays were performed to explore the biological effects of AOC4P on GC cell proliferation, migration, invasion, and apoptosis in MGC-803 and BGC-823 cell lines. In vivo, animal experiments were conducted to confirm the in vitro findings. Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction, western blotting, and immunofluorescence were used to investigate the potential mechanisms. RESULTS: Expression levels of AOC4P were significantly higher in tumor tissues than in noncancerous tissues, and patients with high levels of AOC4P had poor overall and disease-free survival. AOC4P expression was correlated with lymphovascular invasion. In vitro, knockdown of AOC4P inhibited tumor cell proliferation, migration, and invasion, and promoted apoptosis of MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells. In vivo, BGC-823 cells transfected with AOC4P siRNA formed smaller and lighter tumors than BGC-823 cells transfected with negative control siRNA in severe combined immunodeficiency mice. Additionally, the si-AOC4P group had less proliferating cells and more apoptotic cells in tumor xenografts compared with the negative control. Mechanistically, knockdown of AOC4P decreased the expression of vimentin and MMP9, while increasing the expression of E-cadherin. Immunofluorescence confirmed the relationship between AOC4P expression and E-cadherin, vimentin, and MMP9 levels in clinical GC specimens. CONCLUSIONS: AOC4P promotes tumorigenesis and progression partly through epithelial-mesenchymal transition in GC. Additionally, AOC4P may serve as a prognostic biomarker for clinical decision making.
BACKGROUND: The clinical relevance and biological role of tissular AOC4P in gastric cancer (GC) remains to be clarified. METHODS: The association between AOC4P expression and clinicopathological characteristics was investigated. In vitro, 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT), colony formation, wound healing and terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL) assays were performed to explore the biological effects of AOC4P on GC cell proliferation, migration, invasion, and apoptosis in MGC-803 and BGC-823 cell lines. In vivo, animal experiments were conducted to confirm the in vitro findings. Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction, western blotting, and immunofluorescence were used to investigate the potential mechanisms. RESULTS: Expression levels of AOC4P were significantly higher in tumor tissues than in noncancerous tissues, and patients with high levels of AOC4P had poor overall and disease-free survival. AOC4P expression was correlated with lymphovascular invasion. In vitro, knockdown of AOC4P inhibited tumor cell proliferation, migration, and invasion, and promoted apoptosis of MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells. In vivo, BGC-823 cells transfected with AOC4P siRNA formed smaller and lighter tumors than BGC-823 cells transfected with negative control siRNA in severe combined immunodeficiency mice. Additionally, the si-AOC4P group had less proliferating cells and more apoptotic cells in tumor xenografts compared with the negative control. Mechanistically, knockdown of AOC4P decreased the expression of vimentin and MMP9, while increasing the expression of E-cadherin. Immunofluorescence confirmed the relationship between AOC4P expression and E-cadherin, vimentin, and MMP9 levels in clinical GC specimens. CONCLUSIONS: AOC4P promotes tumorigenesis and progression partly through epithelial-mesenchymal transition in GC. Additionally, AOC4P may serve as a prognostic biomarker for clinical decision making.
Entities:
Keywords:
AOC4P; long noncoding RNAs; metastasis; prognosis; stomach neoplasm
Gastric cancer (GC) is a heterogeneous disease with an estimated 5-year overall
survival of 27.4% in China.[1] Current approaches for GC management largely depend on multimodal therapeutic
strategies including gastrectomy, chemotherapy, and chemoradiotherapy in
perioperative settings. However, 25–40% of GC patients have recurrence after
treatment.[2-4] Hence, more
research that focuses on the molecular mechanisms promoting cancer progression is
needed, which would aid in the discovery and development of effective diagnostic
biomarkers and therapeutic targets for GC and thus provide patients with potentially
better outcomes.[5,6]Long noncoding RNA (lncRNA) is a class of RNAs of 200 nucleotides in length without a
protein-coding ability. Sequencing technologies have shown that only ˂2% of
transcripts transcribed from the human genome code for proteins,[7,8] leaving much of the noncoding
transcripts unexplored. Recent studies have revealed that lncRNAs are associated
with GC tumorigenesis and metastasis, and have the potential to serve as diagnostic
and prognostic biomarkers.[9,10] For example, our previous study established a novel five plasma
lncRNA-based panel [terminal differentiation-induced noncoding RNA
(TINCR), CCAT2, AOC4P, BRAF-activated
noncoding RNA (BANCR) and LINC00857] that
discriminates GC from precancerous individuals with relatively high accuracy
compared with widely used serum carcinoembryonic antigen, CA19-9, and CA125.[11] However, the molecular mechanism of these lncRNAs in GC initiation and
development need to be clarified further.In the present study, we investigated the clinical relevance and biological role of
AOC4P in GC, as the role of TINCR, CCAT2,
BANCR and LINC00857 in GC has been previously
reported.
Methods
Tissue specimens
GC tissues and adjacent normal tissues were collected from 63 patients who
underwent surgery between January 2013 and December 2013 at the Department of
General Surgery, Chinese PLA General Hospital. All patients were diagnosed by
pathology. None of the patients had received preoperative chemotherapy or
radiochemotherapy. Patient characteristics were obtained, including age, sex, T
stage, lymph node status, tumor size, tumor differentiation, and TNM
(tumor-node-metastasis) stage according to the 7th edition American Joint
Committee on Cancer Staging manual. Patients were followed up every 6 months.
Patients with suspicion of recurrence were assessed by computed tomography. The
last follow-up time was May 2017. Disease-free survival and overall survival
times were calculated. All patients provided written informed consent about
their tumor specimen for research use. The collection and use of patient’s
specimen was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Chinese PLA General
Hospital (NO.S2016-057-01).
Cell lines and culture
Human GC cell lines MGC-803 and BGC-823 were purchased from the Chinese Academy
of Sciences Committee on Type Culture Collection cell bank (Shanghai, China).
The immortalized human gastric epithelial cell line GES-1 was obtained from the
Institute of General Surgery at the Chinese PLA General Hospital. The cell lines
were cultured as described previously.[11]
RNA extraction and quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction
RNA was extracted from tissues and cultured cells using Trizol reagent
(Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA), according to the manufacturer’s protocol. RNA
concentrations and purity were measured by a NanoDrop 2000/2000c
spectrophotometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Wilmington, USA). cDNA was
synthesized from 3 μg extracted RNA using a reverse transcription kit
(Invitrogen). Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) was
performed as described previously.[11] Primer sequences are shown in the supplementary files.
Western blot assay
Western blot assays were performed as described previously.[12] In brief, extracted proteins from tissues and cell lines were separated
by sodium dodecyl sulfate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and then
transferred to polyvinylidene fluoride membranes (Bio-Rad Laboratories, USA).
After blocking, the membranes were incubated with a primary antibody overnight
at 4°C. Then, the blotted membranes were incubated with a horseradish
peroxidase-conjugated secondary antibody (1:2000) for 2 h at room temperature.
Labeled proteins were detected using enhanced chemiluminescence following the
manufacturer’s protocol. β-Actin (1:1000, Cell Signaling, USA) was used as an
internal control. Antibodies against the following proteins were used:
E-cadherin (1:1000, Cell Signaling), matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9; 1:1000,
Abcam, USA), vimentin (1:1000, Cell Signaling), cleaved caspase-3 (1:1000, Cell
Signaling) and cleaved poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP; 1:1000, Cell
Signaling).
Immunohistochemistry
Immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed using a standard technique with an
avidin-biotinylated peroxidase complex as described previously.[12,13] Sections
were incubated with an anti-Ki-67 antibody (1:400, Cell Signaling) at 4°C
overnight. Diaminobenzidine (DAKO, China) staining was used to detect
immunoreactivity. The intensity of immunoreactivity was graded as 0, 1+, 2+, and
3+ for no staining, weak, medium, and strong staining, respectively. Scores of 0
and 1+ were regarded as low expression, while scores of 2+ and 3+ were
considered as high expression. The proliferation index of the cancer cells =
high expression cells/total cells × 100%.
Immunofluorescence staining
The 5 μm-thick, formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue sections were incubated
with a primary antibody at 4°C overnight. Then, the sections were rinsed three
times for 5 min each with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) followed by incubation
with Alexa Fluor-conjugated secondary antibodies at room temperature for 1 h.
Fluorescence imaging was performed using a laser scanning confocal microscope
(Fluoview FV1000, Olympus, Japan). Fluorescence staining was quantified using
Tissue-Quest software (TissueGnostics GmbH). Tumor tissues were classified as
high or low expression using a cutoff of the mean expression level of proteins
(high expression ⩾ mean; low expression < mean). Antibodies against the
following proteins were used: E-cadherin (1:100, Cell Signaling), MMP-9 (1:500,
Abcam), and vimentin (1:100, Cell Signaling).
Colony formation assay
A total of 500 cells per well were seeded in a six-well plate in triplicate and
maintained in a humidified atmosphere containing 5% CO2 at 37°C.
After culture for 10–14 days, cell colonies were washed with PBS, fixed with 4%
paraformaldehyde for 30 min, and stained with a 0.1% crystal violet solution for
20 min. Colonies containing more than 50 cells were counted.
Proliferation assay
Proliferation of cells was measured by MTT assays using Cell Proliferation
Reagent Kit I (Roche Applied Science, USA), according to the manufacturer’s
protocols. A total of 3 × 103 cells/well transfected with the
indicated vector were seeded in a 96-well flat-bottomed plate and cultured in
normal medium for 24 h. At 0, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h after transfection, MTT
solution (5 mg/ml, 20 µl) was added to each well. The relative number of
surviving cells was assessed by measuring the optical density of cell lysates at
560 nm. For each treatment group, cells were assessed in triplicate.
Cell migration and invasion assays
Cell migration was measured using a Transwell chamber with an 8 μm pore size
membrane according to the manufacturer’s instructions. In brief, 3 ×
105 cells in 200 μl serum-free medium were added to the upper
chamber. For the invasion assay, 5 × 105 cells in 200 μl serum-free
medium were added to the upper chamber coated with 1 mg/ml Matrigel.
Subsequently, 500 μl serum-containing medium was added to the lower chamber.
Cells were incubated at 37°C for 24 h, and then cells on the upper surface of
the membrane were scraped off with cotton swabs. Cells that had migrated and
invaded to the lower surface of the membrane were fixed and stained with a 0.1%
crystal violet solution. Four random microscopic fields of the membrane were
photographed, and cells were counted for statistical analysis.
Wound healing assay
A total of 5 × 105 cells per well were seeded in six-well plates and
cultured until 90% confluence. A 200 μl sterile pipette tip was used to make a
straight scratch on the culture surface. Detached cells were washed off gently,
and images of the scratch were photographed as a baseline. The medium was then
replaced, and images of the same location were obtained under a microscope after
48 h. The healing rate was calculated as follows: (Widthbaseline −
Width48h)/Widthbaseline.
Flow cytometric analysis
Cells were harvested, washed with PBS and fixed overnight in 4% formaldehyde at
−20°C. Then, the cell was stained with propidium iodide using cell cycle kit (BD
Biosciences, NJ, USA) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The cells
were analyzed by FACScan (BD Biosicences, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA).
In vivo tumorigenicity
Animal experiments were conducted in accordance with the recommendations in the
Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of
Health. Animal experiments were approved by the Animal Care and Use Committee of
Chinese PLA Hospital. The 4-week-old severe combined immunodeficiency mice were
maintained under specific pathogen-free conditions. BGC-823 cells stably
transfected with AOC4P siRNA (si-AOC4P) or the
empty vector were harvested and washed. Then, 5 × 106 cells
transfected with si-AOC4P or the empty vector were injected
subcutaneously into the left and right flanks of each mouse, respectively. Tumor
volumes were measured by ultrasound every 7 days, and the mice were euthanized
after 4 weeks. Tumor volumes were calculated by the following formula[14]: (width2 × length)/2.
Terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labeling assay
Tumor xenografts were fixed in 4% formalin and embedded in paraffin. An
in situ terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end
labeling (TUNEL) kit (Roche Applied Science) was used to detect cell apoptosis
in the implanted tumors according to the manufacturer’s protocol. Apoptotic
cells and the total number of cells in five random fields were counted in each
group. The apoptotic index of the cancer cells = apoptotic cells/total cells ×
100%.
Statistical analysis
Data are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (SD) and were analyzed with
SPSS software version 22.0. Continuous variables were analyzed using an
independent Student’s t-test or paired t-test.
Discrete variables were compared using the Chi-square test or Fisher’s exact
test. Kaplan–Meier plots were used to analyze overall and disease-free survival
that was compared by the log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate Cox
regression analysis was performed to investigate the prognostic factors. A
two-sided p value of less than 0.05 was considered as
statistically significant.
Results
AOC4P is upregulated in GC cell lines and tumor
tissues
To investigate the expression levels of AOC4P in GC, we
performed qRT-PCR in two GC cell lines (MGC-803 and BGC-823) and a human gastric
epithelial cell line (GES-1). Consistent with our previous study, as shown in
Figure 1(a),
AOC4P was highly expressed in GC cell lines compared with
the gastric epithelial cell line. Next, we determined the relative expression of
AOC4P in 63 paired GC tumor tissues and corresponding
adjacent noncancerous tissues. The expression levels of AOC4P
were also significantly higher in tumor tissues than in noncancerous tissues,
suggesting involvement of AOC4P in the tumorigenesis of GC
[Figure 1(b)].
Figure 1.
AOC4P expression levels in GC cell lines and specimens,
and its prognostic value for GC. (a) Determination of
AOC4P expression in GES-1, MGC-803 and BGC-823
cells by qRT-PCR. (b) Determination of AOC4P expression
in GC specimens. (c) Relative expression of AOC4P in
tumor tissues. (d) Correlation of AOC4P expression with
overall survival. (e) Correlation of AOC4P expression
with disease-free survival.
AOC4P expression levels in GC cell lines and specimens,
and its prognostic value for GC. (a) Determination of
AOC4P expression in GES-1, MGC-803 and BGC-823
cells by qRT-PCR. (b) Determination of AOC4P expression
in GC specimens. (c) Relative expression of AOC4P in
tumor tissues. (d) Correlation of AOC4P expression with
overall survival. (e) Correlation of AOC4P expression
with disease-free survival.GC, gastric cancer; qRT-PCR, quantitative real-time polymerase chain
reaction.
High expression of AOC4P correlates with poor
prognoses
Using the median expression level of AOC4P in tumor tissues as
the cutoff, we divided the patients into two groups: patients with high or low
expression of AOC4P [Figure 1(c)]. After a median follow-up
time of 41 months (range: 4–49 months), as illustrated in Figure 1(d), patients with a high
expression level of AOC4P had poorer overall survival than
those with a low expression level of AOC4P. Similarly, patients
with high expression of AOC4P had poorer disease-free survival
[Figure 1(e)].
Additionally, expression of AOC4P was correlated with
lymphovascular invasion (Table 1), a critical step for tumor dissemination. As shown in Table 2, univariate
and multivariate Cox regression analysis has revealed that
AOC4P expression was strongly associated with disease-free
survival and overall survival. These findings suggest that
AOC4P is associated with metastasis and can serve as a
prognostic biomarker.
Table 1.
Relationship between expression level of AOC4P and
characteristics.
Characteristics
No.
lncRNA AOC4P
expression
p value
Low expression (n = 31)
High expression (n = 32)
Age, years
0.373
>60
21
12
9
⩽60
42
19
23
Sex
0.353
Female
17
10
7
Male
46
21
25
pT stage
0.252
T1/T2
14
5
9
T3/T4
49
26
23
Lymph node
0.822
Positive
15
7
8
Negative
48
24
24
Lymphovascular invasion
0.0021
Positive
22
5
17
Negative
41
26
15
Perineural invasion
0.353
Positive
17
10
7
Negative
46
21
25
pTNM stage
0.163
I
7
3
4
II
29
11
18
III
27
17
10
lncRNA, long noncoding RNA; TNM, tumor, nodes, metastasis.
Table 2.
Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis for DFS and OS.
Variables
DFS
OS
HR (95% CI)
p value
HR (95% CI)
p value
Univariate analysis
Age (>60 versus ⩽60 years)
1.43 (0.67–3.06)
0.354
1.72 (0.79–3.74)
0.174
Sex (female versus male)
1.83 (0.84–3.98)
0.128
1.46 (0.98–2.18)
0.061
pT stage (T3/T4 versus T1/T2)
1.06 (0.43–2.61)
0.906
0.96 (0.39–2.40)
0.937
Lymph node (positive versus negative)
4.78 (2.22–10.27)
<0.001
4.91 (2.23–10.79)
<0.001
Lymphovascular invasion (positive versus
negative)
Relationship between expression level of AOC4P and
characteristics.lncRNA, long noncoding RNA; TNM, tumor, nodes, metastasis.Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis for DFS and OS.CI, confidence interval; DFS, disease-free survival; HR, hazard
ratio; OS, overall survival; TNM, tumor, nodes, metastasis.
Knockdown of AOC4P inhibits cellular proliferation and
colony formation in vitro
To investigate the biological effects of AOC4P on cellular
growth and colony formation, loss-of-function experiments were conducted. We
first knocked down AOC4P expression by transfection of
si-AOC4P into MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells. The results of
qRT-PCR analyses revealed that AOC4P expression was knocked
down by 89% and 83% in si-AOC4P-transfected MGC-803 and BGC-823
cells, respectively, compared with siRNA negative control (si-NC)-transfected
cells (Figure S1). MTT assays showed inhibition of cell growth by
knockdown of AOC4P expression in MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells
compared with controls [Figure
2(a)]. Additionally, clonogenic abilities were impaired following
downregulation of AOC4P in MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells [Figure 2(b)]. In
situ TUNEL assays revealed that the proportion of apoptotic cells
was higher among si-AOC4P-transfected MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells
than si-NC-transfected cells [Figure 2(c)]. Flow cytometric analysis revealed that knockdown of
AOC4P significantly increased GC cells in the G0/G1 phase,
while reduced cells in the S phase [Figure 3(a)]. Meanwhile, western blot
assay showed that the expression of apoptosis-related proteins, including
cleaved caspase-3 and cleaved PARP, were significantly increased after knockdown
of AOC4P [Figure 3(b)]. Collectively, these data indicate that knockdown of
AOC4P inhibits GC cells proliferation and promotes
apoptosis.
Figure 2.
Knockdown of AOC4P inhibits proliferation and colony
formation and promotes apoptosis in vitro. (a) Cell
proliferation was measured by MTT assays in MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells.
(b) Colony formation assay results. Colonies were photographed and then
counted. (c) TUNEL assays to investigate the effect of
AOC4P on apoptosis of MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells.
Results are expressed as the mean ± SD (n = 3).
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01,
***p < 0.001.
MTT, 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT);
SD, standard deviation; TUNEL, terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase
dUTP nick end labeling.
Figure 3.
Effect of AOC4P on cell cycle and apoptosis-related
proteins. (a) Cell cycle analysis in MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells.
Knockdown of AOC4P induced more number of cells in the
G0/G1 phase and reduced the number of cells in the S phase. (b)
Apoptosis-related proteins detected by western blotting assay.
**p < 0.01.
Knockdown of AOC4P inhibits proliferation and colony
formation and promotes apoptosis in vitro. (a) Cell
proliferation was measured by MTT assays in MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells.
(b) Colony formation assay results. Colonies were photographed and then
counted. (c) TUNEL assays to investigate the effect of
AOC4P on apoptosis of MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells.
Results are expressed as the mean ± SD (n = 3).
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01,
***p < 0.001.MTT, 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT);
SD, standard deviation; TUNEL, terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase
dUTP nick end labeling.Effect of AOC4P on cell cycle and apoptosis-related
proteins. (a) Cell cycle analysis in MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells.
Knockdown of AOC4P induced more number of cells in the
G0/G1 phase and reduced the number of cells in the S phase. (b)
Apoptosis-related proteins detected by western blotting assay.
**p < 0.01.
Effect of AOC4P on migration and invasion of GC
cells
We used Transwell and wound healing assays to determine the effect of
AOC4P on migration and invasion of GC cells. As shown in
Figure 4(a) and
(b), the migration
and invasion abilities of GC cells were significantly decreased when
AOC4P expression was reduced in MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells.
These results suggested that AOC4P promotes the migration and
invasion of GC cells.
Figure 4.
Knockdown of AOC4P inhibits migration and invasion
in vitro. (a) Transwell assays were performed to
investigate the effect of AOC4P on migration and
invasion of MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells. (b) Evaluation of cell motility
by wound healing assays in MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells.
***p < 0.001.
Knockdown of AOC4P inhibits migration and invasion
in vitro. (a) Transwell assays were performed to
investigate the effect of AOC4P on migration and
invasion of MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells. (b) Evaluation of cell motility
by wound healing assays in MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells.
***p < 0.001.
Knockdown of AOC4P inhibits GC tumorigenesis in
vivo
To explore whether AOC4P affects tumorigenesis in
vivo, BGC-823 cells were stably transfected with
si-AOC4P or the empty vector and then injected
subcutaneously into the left and right flanks of each mouse, respectively. At 14
days after injection, tumors formed in the si-AOC4P group were
significantly smaller than those in the si-NC group [Figure 5(a) and (b)]. The tumor weight was also lower in
the si-AOC4P group compared with the si-NC group [Figure 5(c)]. qRT-PCR
analysis revealed that AOC4P expression was significantly lower
in si-AOC4P tumor xenografts [Figure 5(d)]. The results of IHC and
in situ TUNEL assays of xenografts showed that
si-AOC4P tumor xenografts had reduced proportions of
Ki-67-positive cells and increased proportions of TUNEL-positive cells compared
with si-NC tumor xenografts [Figure 4(e)]. Consistent with the aforementioned in
vitro results, these data indicate that AOC4P
affects GC tumorigenesis in vivo.
Figure 5.
Knockdown of AOC4P inhibits tumorigenesis in
vivo. (a) BGC-823 cells stably transfected with
si-AOC4P or the empty vector were injected
subcutaneously into the left and right flanks of each mouse,
respectively (n = 6). Representative image of an
ultrasound is shown. Upper and lower tumor tissues are si-NC and
si-AOC4P groups, respectively. (b) Subcutaneous
tumor growth curve of the si-AOC4P group compared with
the si-NC group. (c) Comparison of tumor weights between
si-AOC4P and si-NC groups. (d) Relative expression
levels of AOC4P in tumor xenografts. (e) Hematoxylin
and eosin staining, Ki-67 expression analysis, and TUNEL assays were
performed to evaluate proportions of proliferating and apoptotic cells
in tumor xenografts. *p < 0.05, **p
< 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
si-NC, siRNA negative control; TUNEL, terminal deoxynucleotidyl
transferase dUTP nick end labeling.
Knockdown of AOC4P inhibits tumorigenesis in
vivo. (a) BGC-823 cells stably transfected with
si-AOC4P or the empty vector were injected
subcutaneously into the left and right flanks of each mouse,
respectively (n = 6). Representative image of an
ultrasound is shown. Upper and lower tumor tissues are si-NC and
si-AOC4P groups, respectively. (b) Subcutaneous
tumor growth curve of the si-AOC4P group compared with
the si-NC group. (c) Comparison of tumor weights between
si-AOC4P and si-NC groups. (d) Relative expression
levels of AOC4P in tumor xenografts. (e) Hematoxylin
and eosin staining, Ki-67 expression analysis, and TUNEL assays were
performed to evaluate proportions of proliferating and apoptotic cells
in tumor xenografts. *p < 0.05, **p
< 0.01, ***p < 0.001.si-NC, siRNA negative control; TUNEL, terminal deoxynucleotidyl
transferase dUTP nick end labeling.
AOC4P modulates GC tumorigenesis via epithelial–mesenchymal
transition
A recent study reported that AOC4P suppresses hepatocellular
carcinoma via inhibition of epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT).[15] Therefore, we investigated whether AOC4P functions in a
similar manner in GC. After knockdown of AOC4P in BGC-823 and
MGC-803 cells, qRT-PCR analysis revealed an increase in E-cadherin expression,
while vimentin and MMP9 expression was reduced [Figure 6(a)]. Western blot assays
confirmed these changes at the protein level [Figure 6(b)]. Interestingly,
immunofluorescence results of cancer tissues showed that tumors with high
expression AOC4P had relatively low levels of E-cadherin and
high levels of vimentin and MMP9 (Figure 7). Therefore, these results
suggest that AOC4P modulates GC tumorigenesis by regulating
EMT.
Figure 6.
AOC4P is involved in EMT processes. (a) Determination of
E-cadherin, vimentin, and MMP9 mRNA levels by qRT-PCR following
knockdown of AOC4P in MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells. (b)
Protein expression of E-cadherin, vimentin, and MMP9 analyzed by western
blotting after knockdown of AOC4P in MGC-803 and
BGC-823 cells.
Immunofluorescence of tumor tissues to investigate the association
between AOC4P expression and E-cadherin, vimentin, and
MMP9 levels.
AOC4P is involved in EMT processes. (a) Determination of
E-cadherin, vimentin, and MMP9 mRNA levels by qRT-PCR following
knockdown of AOC4P in MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells. (b)
Protein expression of E-cadherin, vimentin, and MMP9 analyzed by western
blotting after knockdown of AOC4P in MGC-803 and
BGC-823 cells.EMT, epithelial–mesenchymal transition; qRT-PCR, quantitative real-time
polymerase chain reaction.Immunofluorescence of tumor tissues to investigate the association
between AOC4P expression and E-cadherin, vimentin, and
MMP9 levels.
Discussion
GC is frequently diagnosed as locally advanced in China, leading to the fact that
patients in China have a poor estimated 5-year overall survival of 27.4% compared
with 73.2% in Korea.[1,16] One of the solutions to improve prognoses of patients with GC
is early detection and intervention strategies. Therefore, we have focused on
investigating novel diagnostic markers and potential therapeutic targets of
GC.[11,17,18]Recently we identified five differentially expressed lncRNAs between tumor and
adjacent normal tissues by lncRNA microarray profiling, including TINCR,
CCAT2, AOC4P, BANCR, and LNC00857.[11] Using these circulating lncRNAs, we established a five-lncRNA panel for early
detection of GC. In the present study, we investigated the role of tissular
AOC4P in GC. We found significant upregulation of
AOC4P in GC tissues, and that a high expression level of
AOC4P was correlated with poor survival and lymphovascular
invasion in patients with GC. Functionally, in vitro and in
vivo assays demonstrated that AOC4P promoted tumor
growth by inducing proliferation, migration, and invasion, and reducing apoptosis.
Mechanistically, the oncogenic effect of AOC4P in GC might be
partly attributed to AOC4P-mediated EMT. These data are helpful to
explain the significance of AOC4P upregulation in GC and its
correlation with clinicopathological characteristics.Thus far, the functions of AOC4P have only been investigated in
colon cancer and hepatocellular carcinoma.[15,19] In colon cancer,
AOC4P (also termed UPAT) is upregulated in highly tumorigenic
colon cancer cells and involved in epigenetic regulation of cancer cells by
modulating protein ubiquitination and degradation.[19] Similar to its functions in GC, Taniue and colleagues found that
AOC4P plays a critical role in tumorigenicity of colon cancer cells.[19] However, in hepatocellular carcinoma, the expression of
AOC4P was downregulated in 68% of tumor tissues.[15] Our results, together with earlier findings, indicated varied expression of
AOC4P in different types of carcinomas. A previous study has
also reported different expression levels of lncRNA BANCR in GC and
colon cancer.[20,21] The fact that AOC4P is expressed
differentially in various carcinomas might be partly explained by its various
functions. In this study, we found that inhibition of AOC4P
increased the expression of E-cadherin, while reducing the expression of vimentin
and MMP9. Consistent with these findings, immunofluorescence of tumor specimens
confirmed the correlation of AOC4P expression with E-cadherin,
vimentin, and MMP9 levels. Therefore, AOC4P might exert its
oncogenic effect in GC via EMT processes.As a central driver of tumor malignancy, EMT is involved in cancer cell
dissemination, drug resistance, subsequent disease recurrence, and acquisition of
immunosuppressive capabilities in a variety of cancers.[22] It has been proposed that essentially all carcinomas develop
malignancy-associated characteristics via activation of an EMT
process in their constituent neoplastic cells.[22] One of the hallmarks of EMT is replacement of E-cadherin by N-cadherin, which
results in the formation of far weaker cell–cell adhesions between adjacent cells.
Importantly, a study from the Asian Cancer Research Group has classified GC into
four molecular subtypes, among which the EMT type has the worst prognosis, the
tendency to occur at an earlier age, and the highest recurrence frequency.[5] Therefore, as a regulator of EMT, AOC4P might be a potential
therapeutic target for GC treatment.Our earlier findings demonstrated a correlation between circulating
AOC4P and tissular AOC4P.[11] Circulating lncRNAs in blood are usually incorporated into exosomes, which
are small vesicles of endocytic origin that carry a variety of bioactive molecules,
including proteins, lipids, RNA, and DNA.[23] Metastasis is a multistep process including invasion of tumor cells into
local tissues at a primary tumor site, invasion into blood and lymph vessels,
survival in circulation, extravasation from circulation to distant sites, and
adaptation and proliferation in the metastatic site. Evidence has shown the
involvement of exosomes in all processes of metastasis.[24] Currently, we have only demonstrated that AOC4P promoted
tumorigenesis and cancer progression intracellularly. Therefore, our future study
will focus on how tissular AOC4P incorporates into exosomes and is
released into circulation, and the role of AOC4P-incorporated
exosomes in metastatic sites.Several limitations of present study should be taken into consideration when
interpreting the results. First, the prognostic role of AOC4P
needed to be validated in another independent cohort. Second, we did not unveil the
downstream molecules which AOC4P regulated, therefore the molecular
pathway through which AOC4P exerts its function needed a further
in-depth investigation.
Conclusion
Taken together, our results revealed a relationship between AOC4P
and clinicopathological characteristics and demonstrated the prognostic potential of
AOC4P for GC. We also revealed the involvement of
AOC4P in proliferation, migration, invasion, and apoptosis of
MGC-803 and BGC-823 cells. Our study indicates that AOC4P promotes
tumorigenesis and progression partly through EMT.Click here for additional data file.Supplemental material, Figure_S1 for Long noncoding RNA AOC4P regulates tumor
cell proliferation and invasion by epithelial–mesenchymal transition in gastric
cancer by Kecheng Zhang, Canrong Lu, Xiaohui Huang, Jianxin Cui, Jiyang Li,
Yunhe Gao, Wenquan Liang, Yi Liu, Yang Sun, Hanxuan Liu, Bo Wei and Lin Chen in
Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology
Authors: J S Macdonald; S R Smalley; J Benedetti; S A Hundahl; N C Estes; G N Stemmermann; D G Haller; J A Ajani; L L Gunderson; J M Jessup; J A Martenson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-09-06 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ewan Birney; John A Stamatoyannopoulos; Anindya Dutta; Roderic Guigó; Thomas R Gingeras; Elliott H Margulies; Zhiping Weng; Michael Snyder; Emmanouil T Dermitzakis; Robert E Thurman; Michael S Kuehn; Christopher M Taylor; Shane Neph; Christoph M Koch; Saurabh Asthana; Ankit Malhotra; Ivan Adzhubei; Jason A Greenbaum; Robert M Andrews; Paul Flicek; Patrick J Boyle; Hua Cao; Nigel P Carter; Gayle K Clelland; Sean Davis; Nathan Day; Pawandeep Dhami; Shane C Dillon; Michael O Dorschner; Heike Fiegler; Paul G Giresi; Jeff Goldy; Michael Hawrylycz; Andrew Haydock; Richard Humbert; Keith D James; Brett E Johnson; Ericka M Johnson; Tristan T Frum; Elizabeth R Rosenzweig; Neerja Karnani; Kirsten Lee; Gregory C Lefebvre; Patrick A Navas; Fidencio Neri; Stephen C J Parker; Peter J Sabo; Richard Sandstrom; Anthony Shafer; David Vetrie; Molly Weaver; Sarah Wilcox; Man Yu; Francis S Collins; Job Dekker; Jason D Lieb; Thomas D Tullius; Gregory E Crawford; Shamil Sunyaev; William S Noble; Ian Dunham; France Denoeud; Alexandre Reymond; Philipp Kapranov; Joel Rozowsky; Deyou Zheng; Robert Castelo; Adam Frankish; Jennifer Harrow; Srinka Ghosh; Albin Sandelin; Ivo L Hofacker; Robert Baertsch; Damian Keefe; Sujit Dike; Jill Cheng; Heather A Hirsch; Edward A Sekinger; Julien Lagarde; Josep F Abril; Atif Shahab; Christoph Flamm; Claudia Fried; Jörg Hackermüller; Jana Hertel; Manja Lindemeyer; Kristin Missal; Andrea Tanzer; Stefan Washietl; Jan Korbel; Olof Emanuelsson; Jakob S Pedersen; Nancy Holroyd; Ruth Taylor; David Swarbreck; Nicholas Matthews; Mark C Dickson; Daryl J Thomas; Matthew T Weirauch; James Gilbert; Jorg Drenkow; Ian Bell; XiaoDong Zhao; K G Srinivasan; Wing-Kin Sung; Hong Sain Ooi; Kuo Ping Chiu; Sylvain Foissac; Tyler Alioto; Michael Brent; Lior Pachter; Michael L Tress; Alfonso Valencia; Siew Woh Choo; Chiou Yu Choo; Catherine Ucla; Caroline Manzano; Carine Wyss; Evelyn Cheung; Taane G Clark; James B Brown; Madhavan Ganesh; Sandeep Patel; Hari Tammana; Jacqueline Chrast; Charlotte N Henrichsen; Chikatoshi Kai; Jun Kawai; Ugrappa Nagalakshmi; Jiaqian Wu; Zheng Lian; Jin Lian; Peter Newburger; Xueqing Zhang; Peter Bickel; John S Mattick; Piero Carninci; Yoshihide Hayashizaki; Sherman Weissman; Tim Hubbard; Richard M Myers; Jane Rogers; Peter F Stadler; Todd M Lowe; Chia-Lin Wei; Yijun Ruan; Kevin Struhl; Mark Gerstein; Stylianos E Antonarakis; Yutao Fu; Eric D Green; Ulaş Karaöz; Adam Siepel; James Taylor; Laura A Liefer; Kris A Wetterstrand; Peter J Good; Elise A Feingold; Mark S Guyer; Gregory M Cooper; George Asimenos; Colin N Dewey; Minmei Hou; Sergey Nikolaev; Juan I Montoya-Burgos; Ari Löytynoja; Simon Whelan; Fabio Pardi; Tim Massingham; Haiyan Huang; Nancy R Zhang; Ian Holmes; James C Mullikin; Abel Ureta-Vidal; Benedict Paten; Michael Seringhaus; Deanna Church; Kate Rosenbloom; W James Kent; Eric A Stone; Serafim Batzoglou; Nick Goldman; Ross C Hardison; David Haussler; Webb Miller; Arend Sidow; Nathan D Trinklein; Zhengdong D Zhang; Leah Barrera; Rhona Stuart; David C King; Adam Ameur; Stefan Enroth; Mark C Bieda; Jonghwan Kim; Akshay A Bhinge; Nan Jiang; Jun Liu; Fei Yao; Vinsensius B Vega; Charlie W H Lee; Patrick Ng; Atif Shahab; Annie Yang; Zarmik Moqtaderi; Zhou Zhu; Xiaoqin Xu; Sharon Squazzo; Matthew J Oberley; David Inman; Michael A Singer; Todd A Richmond; Kyle J Munn; Alvaro Rada-Iglesias; Ola Wallerman; Jan Komorowski; Joanna C Fowler; Phillippe Couttet; Alexander W Bruce; Oliver M Dovey; Peter D Ellis; Cordelia F Langford; David A Nix; Ghia Euskirchen; Stephen Hartman; Alexander E Urban; Peter Kraus; Sara Van Calcar; Nate Heintzman; Tae Hoon Kim; Kun Wang; Chunxu Qu; Gary Hon; Rosa Luna; Christopher K Glass; M Geoff Rosenfeld; Shelley Force Aldred; Sara J Cooper; Anason Halees; Jane M Lin; Hennady P Shulha; Xiaoling Zhang; Mousheng Xu; Jaafar N S Haidar; Yong Yu; Yijun Ruan; Vishwanath R Iyer; Roland D Green; Claes Wadelius; Peggy J Farnham; Bing Ren; Rachel A Harte; Angie S Hinrichs; Heather Trumbower; Hiram Clawson; Jennifer Hillman-Jackson; Ann S Zweig; Kayla Smith; Archana Thakkapallayil; Galt Barber; Robert M Kuhn; Donna Karolchik; Lluis Armengol; Christine P Bird; Paul I W de Bakker; Andrew D Kern; Nuria Lopez-Bigas; Joel D Martin; Barbara E Stranger; Abigail Woodroffe; Eugene Davydov; Antigone Dimas; Eduardo Eyras; Ingileif B Hallgrímsdóttir; Julian Huppert; Michael C Zody; Gonçalo R Abecasis; Xavier Estivill; Gerard G Bouffard; Xiaobin Guan; Nancy F Hansen; Jacquelyn R Idol; Valerie V B Maduro; Baishali Maskeri; Jennifer C McDowell; Morgan Park; Pamela J Thomas; Alice C Young; Robert W Blakesley; Donna M Muzny; Erica Sodergren; David A Wheeler; Kim C Worley; Huaiyang Jiang; George M Weinstock; Richard A Gibbs; Tina Graves; Robert Fulton; Elaine R Mardis; Richard K Wilson; Michele Clamp; James Cuff; Sante Gnerre; David B Jaffe; Jean L Chang; Kerstin Lindblad-Toh; Eric S Lander; Maxim Koriabine; Mikhail Nefedov; Kazutoyo Osoegawa; Yuko Yoshinaga; Baoli Zhu; Pieter J de Jong Journal: Nature Date: 2007-06-14 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Sarah Djebali; Carrie A Davis; Angelika Merkel; Alex Dobin; Timo Lassmann; Ali Mortazavi; Andrea Tanzer; Julien Lagarde; Wei Lin; Felix Schlesinger; Chenghai Xue; Georgi K Marinov; Jainab Khatun; Brian A Williams; Chris Zaleski; Joel Rozowsky; Maik Röder; Felix Kokocinski; Rehab F Abdelhamid; Tyler Alioto; Igor Antoshechkin; Michael T Baer; Nadav S Bar; Philippe Batut; Kimberly Bell; Ian Bell; Sudipto Chakrabortty; Xian Chen; Jacqueline Chrast; Joao Curado; Thomas Derrien; Jorg Drenkow; Erica Dumais; Jacqueline Dumais; Radha Duttagupta; Emilie Falconnet; Meagan Fastuca; Kata Fejes-Toth; Pedro Ferreira; Sylvain Foissac; Melissa J Fullwood; Hui Gao; David Gonzalez; Assaf Gordon; Harsha Gunawardena; Cedric Howald; Sonali Jha; Rory Johnson; Philipp Kapranov; Brandon King; Colin Kingswood; Oscar J Luo; Eddie Park; Kimberly Persaud; Jonathan B Preall; Paolo Ribeca; Brian Risk; Daniel Robyr; Michael Sammeth; Lorian Schaffer; Lei-Hoon See; Atif Shahab; Jorgen Skancke; Ana Maria Suzuki; Hazuki Takahashi; Hagen Tilgner; Diane Trout; Nathalie Walters; Huaien Wang; John Wrobel; Yanbao Yu; Xiaoan Ruan; Yoshihide Hayashizaki; Jennifer Harrow; Mark Gerstein; Tim Hubbard; Alexandre Reymond; Stylianos E Antonarakis; Gregory Hannon; Morgan C Giddings; Yijun Ruan; Barbara Wold; Piero Carninci; Roderic Guigó; Thomas R Gingeras Journal: Nature Date: 2012-09-06 Impact factor: 49.962