| Literature DB >> 31519943 |
Tomaš Pilžys1, Michał Marcinkowski1, Wojciech Kukwa2, Damian Garbicz1, Małgorzata Dylewska1, Karolina Ferenc3, Adam Mieczkowski1, Andrzej Kukwa2, Ewa Migacz2, Dominika Wołosz4, Damian Mielecki1, Arne Klungland5, Jan Piwowarski1, Jarosław Poznański6, Elżbieta Grzesiuk7.
Abstract
The nine identified human homologues ofEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31519943 PMCID: PMC6744417 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-49550-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Expression of ALKBHs in individual type of cancer.
| Cancer | PROTEIN | Citation | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ALKBH2 | ALKBH3 | ALKBH5 | ALKBH8 | FTO | ||
| Prostate |
|
[ | ||||
| Renal |
|
[ | ||||
| Bladder |
|
|
|
[ | ||
| Rectal |
|
[ | ||||
| Lung |
|
[ | ||||
| Gastric |
|
|
[ | |||
| Pancreas |
|
[ | ||||
| Endometrial |
|
[ | ||||
| Breast |
|
|
[ | |||
| Glioblastoma |
|
|
[ | |||
| Acute myeloid leukemia |
|
[ | ||||
| Cervical |
|
[ | ||||
| Hepatocellular |
|
[ | ||||
Clinicopathological features of HNSCC patients included in this study (n = 41).
| Age | 59 [53.5-68.5] |
| |||||
| Weight | 73 [58.5-82] | Unknown | 10 (24%) | ||||
| BMI | 25 [20.5-27.9] | 1 | 1 (2%) | ||||
|
| 2 | 12 (29%) | |||||
| Male | 29 (57%) | 3 | 13 (32%) | ||||
| Female | 12 (24%) | 4 | 5 (12%) | ||||
| Unknown | 10 (20%) |
| |||||
|
| Unknown | 8 (20%) | |||||
| Neck | 5 (12%) | 0 | 18 (44%) | ||||
| Larynx | 29 (71%) | 1 | 4 (10%) | ||||
| Tongue | 3 (7%) | 2 | 10 (24%) | ||||
| Other | 4 (10%) | 3 | 1 (2%) | ||||
|
|
| ||||||
| Unknown | 7 (17%) | Unknown | 10 (24%) | ||||
| 1 | 1 (2%) | 0 | 31 (76%) | ||||
| 2 | 25 (61%) |
| |||||
| 3 | 8 (20%) | Unknown | 8 (20%) | ||||
| 1 | 1 (2%) | ||||||
| 2 | 5 (12%) | ||||||
| 3 | 12 (29%) | ||||||
| 4 | 15 (37%) | ||||||
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| Yes | 1 (2%) | Yes | 2 (5%) | Yes | 5 (12%) | Yes | 0 (0%) |
| No | 20 (49%) | No | 20 (49%) | No | 17 (41%) | No | 22 (54%) |
| Unknown | 20 (49%) | Unknown | 19 (46%) | Unknown | 19 (46%) | Unknown | 19 (46%) |
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| Yes | 1 (2%) | Yes | 1 (2%) | Yes | 3 (7%) | Yes | 1 (2%) |
| No | 20 (49%) | No | 21 (51%) | No | 18 (44%) | No | 22 (54%) |
| Unknown | 20 (49%) | Unknown | 19 (46%) | Unknown | 20 (49%) | Unknown | 18 (44%) |
Figure 1ALKBH expression in HNSCC and indicated cell lines: (A) WB analysis of ALKBH expression in HNSCC samples. siRNA - HeLa cells treated with siRNAs directed towards particular ALKBHs; Cont. - HeLa cells not treated by siRNA; Nor - normal periphery; Can- cancer; A-F - tumour samples. (B) WB analysis of ALKBH expression in various cell lines: normal, cancer and embryonic. (C) ALKBHs expression in cancer and normal tissues from HNSCC patients. Samples were classified into three groups according to the expression level of each protein: (i) stronger signal from cancer than normal surrounding; (ii) weaker signal from cancer than normal surrounding; (iii) no detectable expression of the proteins in the normal and cancer tissue. N – number of patients; p - p-value obtained from the Wilcoxon signed-rank test for paired samples. (D) Nonparametric Wilcoxon rank-sum test (for groups) were performed. n- number of samples from each group; P-values with Benjamini-Hochberg adjustment: *p < 0.025; **p < 0.005; ***p < 0.0005; ****p < 0.00005; *****p < 0.000005. (E) Heat map of changes of individual protein expression in HNSCC. Fold changes were calculated for tumour vs. adjacent normal tissue. White - no detectable expression of particular protein in cancer and adjacent tissue. Blue - decreased relative protein level. Orange - increased relative protein level. Grey - no data gathered.
Figure 2Relationships between protein levels within ALKBH family members. (A) Relationship between the levels of ALKBH proteins in healthy surrounding tissue and (B) HNSCC tumour. Each tabulated entry presents the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient and indicates the p-value of correlation. Hierarchical cluster analysis of matrices presents similarities between examined ALKBHs. P-values with Benjamini-Hochberg adjustment: ‘p < 0.005; *p < 0.0025; **p < 0.0005; ***p < 0.00005; ****p < 0.000005. (C) Impact of individual ALKBH protein silencing on expression of its homologs in HeLa. Silencing was done with the use of small interfering RNA, ALKBH protein levels were measured by WB.
Figure 3Relationship between ALKBH proteins level and tumour parameters and cancer cell viability. (A) Analysis of variance (ANOVA) of ALKBH protein levels in HNSCC tumours. Each tabulated entry shows F-value and p-value of F-test, providing information on the effect of the level of the particular ALKBH protein on the specific tumour parameter: G – tumour invasiveness, T, N, M - The Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) parameters. The sample size for ALKBH2 and ALKBH8 was too small to execute ANOVA with other ALKBH proteins, a separate analysis was performed for these two proteins. (B,C) Relationship between selected ALKBH protein and tumour size. P-values with Benjamini-Hochberg adjustment: *p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001. (D) Survival assay of HeLa cells treated with siRNA for a given ALKBH protein. HeLa cell viability was assessed 48 h after treatment. P-values with Benjamini-Hochberg adjustment: ****p < 0.0001. (E) Flow cytometry analysis of EUFA30, HeLa, and Jurkat cells stained with Annexin-FITC and propidium iodide. Cells were treated with 34 nM of siRNA on ALKBH1, 4, or FTO for 48 h.
Figure 4The level of N6meA in cancer and normal tissue. (A) For pairs, nonparametric Wilcoxon signed-tank test was performed. n - paired number; *p < 0.05; Nor- normal periphery; Can- cancer. (B) Comparison of relative expression levels of ALKBH5, FTO and N6meA. Deeper colours represent higher level of ALKBH5 (blue), FTO (green) or N6meA (red).
Figure 5ALKBH proteins expression in the HNSCC tissue in II stage accordingly to TMN stale visualized using confocal microscopy. Cell nuclei staining by Hoechst 3558 visualized as blue fluorescence (nuklei panel), ALKBH proteins expression was visualized using specific primary antibodies and secondary antibody conjugate with AlexaFluor 568 as red fluorescence (protein expression panel), merge (merge panel), transparent view of unstained tissue (unstained protein panel). Objective 20x. Additional zoom (2.5x) of part of view marked by white frame was performed to visualized cellular localization of ALKBH proteins in single cell. Basic microscope settings were as follows: scan layer = 200 μm; kalman = 8; offset = 0%, scanning: sequential for each channel: for Alexa Fluor 568 - green laser (HeNe 543 nm); for Hoechst 3558 (UV Ar, 351 nm).
Figure 6Design and in vitro examination of ALKBHs inhibitors. (A) Results of in silico screening for the binding of anthraquinone derivatives by ALKBH proteins. Molecular docking indicated that FTO and EcAlkB are the best targets, followed by ALKBH2 and ALKBH3, albeit each of these proteins displayed specificity towards particular ligands. Other ALKBH proteins virtually did not bind any of the ligands tested. (B,C) The results of the thermal shift assay for ALKBH3 and FTO in the presence of tested anthraquinones. ΔH - enthalpy, Tm - protein melting temperature. (D) Inhibitory effect of anthraquinones on EcAlkB protein and its human homologs.
Figure 7Viability assay and flow cytometry analysis for indicated anthraquinones. (A) Cytotoxic effect of natural anthraquinones and newly synthetized derivatives on EUFA30, HeLa, HEK293, U87, BICR18 cells after 48 h of treatment. Table includes IC50 value (μM). Therapeutic index is provided in brackets (TI = IC50 normal cells/IC50 cancer cells). (B) Flow cytometry analysis of EUFA30, HeLa, and Jurkat cells stained with Annexin-FITC and propidium iodide. Cells were treated with 250 or 500 µM rhein or 25 µM and 100 µM emodin, 7-chloroemodin and 5,7-dichloroemodin for 48 h. CPT - camptothecin (10 µM) and H2O2 (1 mM) were used as positive controls.