| Literature DB >> 31186683 |
Manuel Nolasco-Quiroga1, Marisol Rosas-Díaz2, José Moreno3, Ricardo Godínez-Aguilar3, María José López-Ibarra1, Patricia Piña-Sánchez4, Isabel Alvarado-Cabrero5, Gerardo Vázquez-Gómez6, Leticia Rocha-Zavaleta7, Diego Arenas-Aranda1, Fabio Salamanca-Gómez1,8.
Abstract
Focal adhesion kinase (FAK) is a non-receptor tyrosine kinase that is expressed in most human cell types (example: Epithelial cells, fibroblasts and endothelial), it serves a key role in the control of cell survival, proliferation and motility. The abnormal expression of FAK has been associated with poor prognosis in cancer, including ovarian cancer. However, although FAK isoforms with specific molecular and functional properties have been characterized, there are a limited number of published studies that examine FAK isoforms in ovarian cancer. The aim of the present study was to analyze the expression level of FAK and its isoforms in ovarian cancer. The expression of FAK kinase and focal adhesion targeting (FAT) domains was determined with immunohistochemistry in healthy ovary, and serous and mucinous cystadenoma, borderline tumor and carcinoma samples. Additionally, the expression of FAK and its isoforms were investigated in three ovarian cancer-derived cell lines with western blotting and reverse transcription-semi-quantitative polymerase chain reaction. An increased expression of FAK kinase domain was determined in serous tumor samples and was associated with advancement of the lesion. FAK kinase domain expression was moderate-to-low in mucinous tumor samples. The expression of the FAK FAT domain in tumor samples was reduced, compared with healthy ovary samples; however, the FAT domain was localized to the cellular nucleus. Expression of alternative transcripts FAK°, FAK28,6 and FAK28 was determined in all three cell lines investigated. In conclusion, FAK kinase and FAT domains are differentially expressed among ovarian tumor types. These results indicated the presence of at least two isoforms of FAK (FAK and the putative FAK-related non-kinase) in tumor tissue, which is supported by the cells producing at least three FAK alternative transcripts. These results may support the use of FAK and its isoforms as biomarkers for ovarian cancer.Entities:
Keywords: biomarkers; focal adhesion kinase; isoforms; mucinous; ovarian cancer; serous
Year: 2019 PMID: 31186683 PMCID: PMC6507456 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2019.10147
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncol Lett ISSN: 1792-1074 Impact factor: 2.967
Expression of focal adhesion kinase kinase domain in healthy ovary, serous and mucinous samples.
| Histological type | No. of cases | Negative expression (−) | Low expression (+) | Moderate expression (++) | High expression (+++) | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Healthy ovary samples | 16 | 2 | 6 | 8 | 0 | |
| Serous tumor types | ||||||
| Cystadenoma | 25 | 11 | 10 | 4 | 0 | <0.05[ |
| Borderline | 25 | 0 | 5 | 19 | 1 | <0.05[ |
| Carcinoma | 50 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 37 | <0.05[ |
| Mucinous tumor types | ||||||
| Cystadenoma | 25 | 7 | 8 | 10 | 0 | NS[ |
| Borderline | 14 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 2 | NS[ |
| Carcinoma | 6 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | NS[ |
vs. normal ovaries
vs. cystadenoma
vs. borderline. P-values were calculated using the Kruskal-Wallis Test. NS, not significant.
Figure 1.Expression of FAK in ovarian tumor and healthy ovary samples. Expression of FAK kinase and FAT domains was evaluated with immunohistochemistry in serous and mucinous cystadenoma, borderline tumor and ovarian carcinoma samples. A group of healthy ovary samples was included as negative controls. FAT, focal adhesion targeting; FAK, focal adhesion kinase.
Figure 2.Densitometric analysis of FAK expression in ovarian cancer and healthy ovary samples. Following immunohistochemistry staining, three microphotographs were captured for each serous and mucinous cystadenoma, borderline tumor and ovarian carcinoma samples. Healthy ovary samples were included as negative controls. The samples were analyzed as described in the Materials and methods section. Relative intensity of (A) FAK kinase and (B) FAT domain immunostaining are depicted. Error bars represent the standard deviation of the mean. Differences were calculated using the analysis of variance test, considering a value of P<0.05 as significant difference. *P<0.05, compared with healthy ovary samples; **P<0.05, compared with cystadenoma samples; ***P<0.05, compared with borderline serous tumor samples. FAT, focal adhesion targeting; FAK, focal adhesion kinase.
Expression of focal adhesion kinase focal adhesion targeting domain in healthy ovary, serous and mucinous samples.
| Histological type | No. of cases | Negative expression (−) | Low expression (+) | Moderate expression (++) | High expression (+++) | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Healthy ovary samples | 16 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 11 | |
| Serous tumor types | ||||||
| Cystadenoma | 25 | 3 | 7 | 9 | 6 | <0.05[ |
| Borderline | 25 | 0 | 8 | 14 | 3 | <0.05[ |
| NS[ | ||||||
| Carcinoma | 50 | 0 | 10 | 18 | 22 | NS[ |
| 0.02[ | ||||||
| 0.01[ | ||||||
| Mucinous tumor types | ||||||
| Cystadenoma | 25 | 8 | 11 | 6 | 0 | <0.05[ |
| Borderline | 14 | 0 | 3 | 8 | 3 | NS[ |
| <0.05[ | ||||||
| Carcinoma | 6 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 2 | NS[ |
| <0.05[ | ||||||
| NS[ |
vs. normal ovaries
vs. cystadenoma
vs. borderline. P-values were calculated using the Kruskal-Wallis Test. NS, not significant.
Figure 3.Expression of FAK kinase and alternative transcripts in ovarian cancer cell lines. (A) Expression of FAK was assessed in SKOV3, NIH-OVCAR3 and TOV-112D ovarian cancer-derived cells with western blotting using an anti-FAK kinase domain antibody. HeLa cells were included as a FAK expression control. Detection of GAPDH was used as loading control. (B) Expression of FAK28,6, FAK°, and FAK28 alternative transcripts were investigated in SKOV3, NIH-OVCAR3 and TOV-112D cells with reverse transcription-semi-quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Expression of the β-actin gene was included as an internal control. Amplified fragments from each cell line were analyzed in separate agarose gels. FAK, focal adhesion kinase.