| Literature DB >> 31695499 |
Zhengqing Bao1,2,3, Yonghao Zhan1,2,3,4, Shiming He1,2,3, Yifan Li1,2,3, Bao Guan1,2,3, Qun He1,2,3, Xinyu Yang1,2,3, Xuesong Li1,2,3, Dong Fang1,2,3,5, Liqun Zhou1,2,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The transcription factor SRY-related HMG-box 2 (SOX2) plays important regulatory roles in diverse biological processes (cell proliferation, migration, invasion and tumorigenicity). However, the relationship between SOX2 and upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) have not been intensively investigated. This study aims to analyze the expression of SOX2 in UTUC as well as the predictive value for prognosis and the effect on tumor aggressiveness of SOX2.Entities:
Keywords: SRY-related HMG-box 2; biomarker; prognosis; stemness; upper tract urothelial carcinoma
Year: 2019 PMID: 31695499 PMCID: PMC6817346 DOI: 10.2147/CMAR.S219568
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Manag Res ISSN: 1179-1322 Impact factor: 3.989
Figure 1The REMARK diagram of the study.
Figure 2SOX2 expression was upregulated in UTUC. The relative expression levels of SOX2 were detected using immunohistochemistry and real-time qPCR. (A): Representative IHC images are shown. (B): CSS curves were stratified by SOX2 expression. (C): DFS curves were stratified by SOX2 expression. (D). The relative expression level of SOX2 was significantly higher in UTUC tissue samples than in matched normal tissue samples. (E). SOX2 expression levels were higher in UTUC cell lines than in a normal urothelial cell line. **p < 0.01.
Associations Between SOX2 Expression And Clinicopathological Characteristics Of The Patients
| Variables | Group | Total | SOX2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive | Negative | p | |||
| Age | < 69 | 179 | 46(25.7%) | 133(74.3%) | 0.453 |
| ≥69 | 162 | 36(22.2%) | 126(77.8%) | ||
| Gender | Female | 190 | 52(27.4%) | 138(72.6%) | 0.107 |
| Male | 151 | 30(19.9%) | 121(80.1%) | ||
| BMI | < 24.5 | 182 | 47(25.8%) | 135(74.2%) | 0.430 |
| ≥24.5 | 158 | 35(22.2%) | 123(77.8%) | ||
| Largest tumor location | Ureter | 132 | 48(36.4%) | 84(63.6%) | <0.001* |
| Pelvis | 208 | 34(16.3%) | 174(83.7%) | ||
| Pathological T stage | Ta-T1 | 124 | 19(15.3%) | 105(84.7%) | 0.004* |
| T2-T4 | 217 | 63(29.0%) | 154(71%) | ||
| Tumor grade | Low | 93 | 8(8.6%) | 85(91.4%) | <0.001* |
| High | 248 | 74(29.8%) | 174(70.2%) | ||
| Lymph node status | N0 or Nx | 314 | 74(23.6%) | 240(76.4%) | 0.479 |
| N1 | 27 | 8(29.6%) | 19(70.4%) | ||
| LVI | No | 307 | 76(24.8%) | 231(75.2%) | 0.357 |
| Yes | 34 | 6(17.6%) | 28(82.4%) | ||
| Architecture | Papillary | 279 | 55(19.7%) | 224(80.3%) | <0.001* |
| Sessile | 62 | 27(43.5%) | 35(56.5%) | ||
| Squamous differentiation | No | 296 | 66(22.3%) | 230(77.7%) | 0.053 |
| Yes | 45 | 16(35.6%) | 29(64.4%) | ||
| Glandular differentiation | No | 323 | 74(22.9%) | 249(77.1%) | 0.037* |
| Yes | 18 | 8(44.4%) | 10(55.6%) | ||
| Sarcomas differentiation | No | 319 | 71(22.3%) | 248(77.7%) | 0.003* |
| Yes | 22 | 11(50%) | 11(50%) | ||
| PRF | No CKD | 139 | 29(20.9%) | 110(79.1%) | 0.515 |
| Early CKD | 147 | 39(26.5%) | 108(73.5%) | ||
| End CKD | 15 | 4(26.7%) | 11(73.3%) | ||
| Multifocality | No | 286 | 70(24.5%) | 216(70%) | 0.673 |
| Yes | 55 | 12(21.8%) | 43(78.2%) | ||
| Largest tumor size | < 4 | 118 | 31(26.3%) | 87(73.7%) | 0.440 |
| ≥4 | 222 | 50(22.5%) | 172(77.5%) | ||
Note: *Statistically significant.
Abbreviations: BMI, Body Mass Index; PRF, preoperative renal function; CKD, chronic kidney disease; LVI, lymphovescular invasion.
Univariable And Multivariable Analyses Of The Correlations Between SOX2 Expression And CSS In Patients With UTUC
| Variables | Univariable Analyses | Multivariable Analyses | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) | p | HR (95% CI) | p | |
| Age | 1.005 (0.986–1.025) | 0.584 | ||
| Gender (Male) | 1.981 (1.321–2.969) | 0.001* | 2.301 (1.497–3.537) | < 0.001* |
| BMI (≥24.5) | 1.042 (0.699–1.552) | 0.842 | ||
| PRF (eGFR < 30) | 0.776 (0.543–1.019) | 0.165 | ||
| Largest tumor location (Pelvis) | 0.866 (0.578–1.297) | 0.866 | ||
| Multifocality | 0.832 (0.503–1.445) | 0.552 | ||
| Largest tumor size (≥ 4) | 1.257 (0.820–1.938) | 0.293 | ||
| Pathological T stage (≥ 2) | 1.829 (1.160–2.884) | 0.009* | 1.213 (0.709–2.077) | 0.481 |
| Tumor grade (High) | 1.714 (1.159–2.534) | 0.007* | 1.075 (0.592–1.952) | 0.813 |
| Lymph node status | 3.779 (2.262–6.314) | <0.001* | 3.013 (1.654–5.488) | < 0.001* |
| LVI | 2.158 (0.943–2.575) | 0.005* | 2.143 (1.201–3.825) | 0.010* |
| Architecture (Sessile) | 2.456 (1.588–3.798) | <0.001* | 1.581 (0.928–2.694) | 0.092 |
| Squamous differentiation | 1.618 (0.945–2.711) | 0.080 | ||
| Glandular differentiation | 2.301 (1.063–4.981) | 0.034* | 1.289 (0.569–2.918) | 0.970 |
| Sarcomas differentiation | 2.255 (1.202–4.225) | 0.011* | 0.014 (0.495–2.077) | 0.543 |
| SOX2 positive | 1.589 (1.036–2.436) | 0.034* | 1.585 (1.002–2.508) | 0.049* |
Note: *Statistically significant.
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; PRF, preoperative renal function; LVI, lymphovescular invasion.
Univariable And Multivariable Analyses Of The Correlations Between SOX2 Expression And DFS In Patients With UTUC
| Variables | Univariable Analyses | Multivariable Analyses | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) | HR (95% CI) | |||
| Age | 0.993 (0.979–1.007) | 0.300 | ||
| Gender (Male) | 1.539 (1.140–2.078) | 0.005* | 1.746 (1.282–2.377) | <0.001* |
| BMI (≥24.5) | 1.105 (0.817–1.494) | 0.516 | ||
| PRF (eGFR < 30) | 1.001 (0.771–1.300) | 0.994 | ||
| Largest tumor location (Pelvis) | 0.769 (0.569–1.040) | 0.088 | ||
| Multifocality | 1.147 (0.782–1.681) | 0.483 | ||
| Largest tumor size (≥ 4) | 1.063 (0.776–1.457) | 0.702 | ||
| Pathological T stage (≥ 2) | 1.310 (0.952–1.802) | 0.097 | ||
| Tumor grade (High) | 1.722 (1.178–2.519) | 0.005* | 1.700 (1.136–2.544) | 0.010* |
| Lymph node status | 1.882 (1.166–3.029) | 0.010* | 1.600 (0.982–2.604) | 0.059 |
| LVI | 1.730 (1.105–2.708) | 0.016* | 1.656 (1.052–2.605) | 0.029* |
| Architecture (Sessile) | 1.389 (0.970–1.990) | 0.073 | ||
| Squamous differentiation | 1.021 (0.652–1.599) | 0.927 | ||
| Glandular differentiation | 1.697 (0.920–3.131) | 0.090 | ||
| Sarcomas differentiation | 1.472 (0.852–2.545) | 0.166 | ||
| SOX2 positive | 1.477 (1.064–2.052) | 0.020* | 1.442 (1.031–2.017) | 0.032* |
Note: *Statistically significant.
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; PRF, preoperative renal function; LVI, lymphovescular invasion.
Figure 3Effect of SOX2 on the proliferation and stemness of UTUC cells. (A and B): SOX2-specific shRNAs significantly decreased the expression level of SOX2 in UM-UC-14 and MC-SV-HUC T2 cells. (C and D): Cell proliferation changes in UTUC cells were determined using an EdU assay. (E and F): Cell proliferation changes in UTUC cells were determined using a colony-formation assay. (G and H): The cell stemness of UTUC cells was determined using a sphere-forming assay. Cell proliferation was inhibited by silencing SOX2 in UM-UC-14 and MC-SV-HUC T2 cells. Data are shown as the mean ± SD. **p < 0.01.
Figure 4Effect of SOX2 on the migration and invasion of UTUC cells. (A and B): The migratory abilities of UTUC cells were determined using a wound healing assay. Cell migration was inhibited by silencing SOX2 in UM-UC-14 and MC-SV-HUC T2 cells. (C and D): The invasive abilities of UTUC cells were determined using a transwell assay. Cell invasion was inhibited by silencing SOX2 in UM-UC-14 and MC-SV-HUC T2 cells. Data are shown as the mean ± SD. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.
Figure 5Effect of SOX2 on the tumorigenicity of UTUC cells. (A): Tumors collected from mice are shown. (B): The weights of nude mice in different groups were measured and analyzed. (C): Tumor volume curves of different groups were measured and analyzed. (D): Tumor weights in different groups were measured and analyzed. Knocking down SOX2 expression inhibited the tumorigenicity of UTUC cells in vivo. (E and F): shRNA-SOX2 decreased SOX2 expression in UTUC cells in vivo. Data are shown as the mean ± SD. **p < 0.01.