| Literature DB >> 31695778 |
Catarina Gomes1,2, Andreia Almeida3,4, Ana Barreira1,2, Juliana Calheiros1,2, Filipe Pinto1,2, Rafaela Abrantes1,2, Ana Costa1,2, António Polonia1,2, Diana Campos1,2, Hugo Osório1,2,5, Hugo Sousa5, João Pinto-de-Sousa2,5, Daniel Kolarich3,4, Celso A Reis1,2,5,6.
Abstract
Malignant transformation of gastric cells is accompanied by the deregulated expression of glycosyltransferases leading to the biosynthesis of tumor-associated glycans such as the sialyl-Lewis X antigen (SLex). SLex presence on cell surface glycoconjugates increases the invasive capacity of gastric cancer cells and is associated with tumor metastasis. ST3Gal IV enzyme is involved in the synthesis of SLex antigen and overexpressed in gastric carcinomas. Herein, we identified the glycoproteins carrying SLex in gastric cancer cells overexpressing ST3Gal IV enzyme and evaluated their biomarker potential for gastric carcinoma.Entities:
Keywords: Carcinoembryonic antigen; Gastric Cancer; Glycosylation; ST3Gal IV; Sialyl-Lewis X
Year: 2019 PMID: 31695778 PMCID: PMC6831293 DOI: 10.7150/thno.33858
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Theranostics ISSN: 1838-7640 Impact factor: 11.556
Figure 1Switching of protein sialylation in ST3Gal IV expressing gastric carcinoma cells leading to SLe Periodic Acid-Schiff (PAS) staining of SDS-PAGE glycoproteins from Mock and MST3Gal IV total cell lysates showed no differences in total cell protein glycosylation on both cell lines; Horseradish peroxidase was used as positive staining control; Arrows 1 and 2 indicate the bands selected for protein identification by MALDI-TOF/TOF mass spectrometry. B - Evaluation of α2-6 and α2-3 linked NeuAc by SNA, MAL I and MAL II lectin staining on Mock and MST3Gal IV cells. Results showed a reduce intensity of α2-6 linked NeuAc carrying glycans accompanied by an increase in α2-3 linked NeuAc at high molecular weight protein in ST3Gal IV expressing cells. Mackia ammorensis lectins, capable of recognizing different α2-3 linked NeuAc carrying glycans structures, further demonstrated the presence of α2-3 linked NeuAc in Galβ1-4GlcNAc structures; C - Western blot analysis of SLeX structures using two different antibodies showed the presence of SLex antigens on high molecular weight proteins from ST3Gal IV expressing cells with no expression on Mock control cells.
Figure 2CEA is the carrier of SLe Four independent assays were employed to assess the presence SLex on CEA in Mock and MST3Gal IV cells: immunoprecipitation assay, PLA, CEA KO by CRISPR/Cas9 and E-selectin immunoprecipitation. A - CEA immunoprecipitation in MST3Gal IV and Mock cell lysates. Upper panel: CEA western blot analysis confirmed the expression of CEA in Mock and MST3Gal IV cells; middle panel: in MST3Gal IV cells the SLex epitope is largely attached to CEA glycans; lower panel: CEA expressed in MST3Gal IV cells showed a reduced presence of α2-6 NeuAc on CEA high molecular weight glycoforms. Immunoprecipitation flow through and a mouse IgG immunoprecipitation assay were used as experiment control. B - Immunofluorescence analysis confirmed the presence of CEA in Mock and MST3Gal IV gastric carcinoma cells while SLex is just found in the MST3Gal IV overexpressing cell line. The positive PLA signal only observed in MST3Gal IV cells is indicative of the close proximity of CEA and SLex. C - Knockout of CEA in both cell lines using CRISPR/Cas9 lead to the loss of SLex expression in MST3Gal IV cells. D - Immunoprecipitation of SLex carrying glycoproteins using E-selectin Fc protein chimera showed the high specificity of E-selectin for capturing SLex expressing glycoproteins in MST3Gal IV cells. A CEA western blot analysis after E-Selectin immunoaffinity enrichment was only positive for the MST3Gal IV cell lysates, clearly emphasizing the presence of SLeX on CEA.
Figure 3PNGase F treatment on immunoprecipitated CEA demonstrated the presence of SLe CEA from both cell lines is heavily N-glycosylated as PNGase F mediated deglycosylation shifts the SDS-PAGE migration of CEA from 150-200 kDa towards its predicted molecular weight of around 71 kDa. The PNGase F treated CEA from MST3Gal IV cells was negative in the SLex western blot analysis confirming that the SLex epitope is present on CEA N-glycans (black arrows).
Figure 4Overview on the N-glycans were released from immunoprecipitated CEA, analyzed by porous graphitized carbon nanoLC-ESI-MS/MS and qualitatively and quantitatively assessed. The N‑glycans were classified into 3 classes: oligomannose (green), mono sialylated (blue) and di sialylated (purple). A - CEA immunoprecipitated from Mock and MST3Gal IV cells exhibited different complex N-glycan profiles despite similar levels of oligomannose N-glycans. Mock cells expressed CEA was mainly carrying monosialylated N-glycans while disialylated N-glycans were the major complex type N-glycans in MST3Gal IV overexpressing cells. B - Mock cell derived CEA carried type II N-glycans (Galβ1-4GlcNAc) capped with α2-6 linked NeuAc (light blue) while CEA from MST3Gal IV cell lines carried type II N-glycans capped with α2-3 linked NeuAc (purple). The major sialylated N-glycan structures of immunoprecipitated CEA were highlighted on top of each linkage type. The symbol nomenclature for glycans (SNFG) recommendations were followed for glycan structure depiction 27. Detailed information of the identified N-glycans is summarized in Table S2 and Figure S2.
Figure 5ST3Gal IV expression predicts overall survival in gastric cancer patients. A publicly available database (Kaplan-Meier Plotter) was used to investigate the effect of ST3Gal IV and CEACAM5 expression on overall survival (OS) in a cohort of 882 gastric cancer patients. Patients were divided in two groups by the median expression for each probe used (ST3Gal IV: 203759_at; CEACAM5: 201884_at). A - High ST3Gal IV expression predicts a worse prognosis, whereas B - CEACAM5 did not have any effect on the OS of gastric cancer patients. p-value, hazard ratio (HR), and confidence interval (CI) were calculated by the log-rank method.
CEA and SLeX expression in gastric carcinoma tissues and association with clinicopathological data.
| CEA | SLeX | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Neg. | 5-25% | 25-75% | >75% | Neg. | 5-25% | 25-75% | >75% | |||
| Intestinal (n=22) | 1 (4.5%) | 3 (13.6%) | 4 (18.2%) | 14 (63.6%) | 0.289 | 4 (18.2%) | 4 (18.2%) | 11 (50%) | 3 (13.6%) | 0.232 |
| Diffuse (n=5) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (60.0%) | 2 (40.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 4 (80.0%) | 1 (20.0%) | ||
| Unclassified (n=24) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (4.2%) | 10 (41.7%) | 13 (54.2%) | 3 (12.5%) | 4 (16.7%) | 8 (33.3%) | 9 (37.5%) | ||
| Glandular (n=22) | 1 (4.5%) | 3 (13.6%) | 4 (18.2%) | 14 (63.6%) | 0.481 | 4 (18.2%) | 4 (18.2%) | 11 (50%) | 3 (13.6%) | 0.476 |
| Mixed (n=24) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (4.2%) | 10 (41.7%) | 13 (54.2%) | 3 (12.5%) | 4 (16.7%) | 8 (33.3%) | 9 (37.5%) | ||
| Isolated cells (n=4) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (50.0%) | 2 (50.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (75.0%) | 1 (25.0%) | ||
| Solid (n=1) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (100%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (100%) | 0 (0.0%) | ||
| Expansive (n=18) | 1 (5.6%) | 2 (11.1%) | 6 (33.3%) | 9 (50%) | 0.344 | 5 (27.8%) | 6 (33.3%) | 5 (27.8%) | 2 (11.1%) | 0.008 |
| Infiltrative (n=31) | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (6.5%) | 9 (29.0%) | 20 (64.5%) | 2 (6.5%) | 1 (3.2%) | 17 (54.8%) | 11 (35.5%) | ||
| Unclassified (n=2) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (100%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (50.0%) | 1 (50.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | ||
| Absent (n=12) | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (16.7%) | 5 (41.7%) | 5 (41.7%) | 0.419 | 3 (25.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 6 (50.0%) | 3 (25.0%) | 0.130 |
| Present (n=39) | 1 (2.6%) | 2 (5.1%) | 12 (30.8%) | 24 (61.5%) | 4 (10.3%) | 8 (20.5%) | 17 (43.6%) | 10 (25.6%) | ||
| Absent (n=21) | 0 (0.0%) | 4 (19.0%) | 9 (42.9%) | 8 (38.1%) | 0.022 | 4 (19.0%) | 4 (19.0%) | 9 (42.9%) | 4 (19.0%) | 0.656 |
| Present (n=30) | 1 (3.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | 8 (26.7%) | 21 (70.0%) | 3 (10.0%) | 4 (13.3%) | 14 (46.7%) | 9 (30.0%) | ||
| I+II (n=30) | 1 (3.3%) | 3 (10.0%) | 12 (40.0%) | 14 (46.7%) | 0.329 | 6 (20.0%) | 4 (13.3%) | 13 (43.3%) | 7 (23.3%) | 0.470 |
| III+IV (n=21) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (4.8%) | 5 (23.8%) | 15 (71.4%) | 1 (4.8%) | 4 (19.0%) | 10 (47.6%) | 6 (28.6%) | ||
| Average survival (months±SD) | ND | ND | 67.6 ± 12.7 | 58.6 ± 8.5 | 0.117 | 76.8 ± 19.3 | 78.2 ± 16.2 | 51.7 ± 10.6 | 82.3 ± 11.0 | 0.293 |
| 95% CI | ND | ND | 42.5 - 92.7 | 41.8 - 75.4 | 38.9 - 11.7 | 46.5 - 110.0 | 30.9 - 72.4 | 60.6 - 104.0 | ||
Detection of CEA+SLeX by PLA analysis and correlation with clinicopathological data.
| PLA signal | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Neg. | Pos. | ||
| Intestinal (n=22) | 6 (27.3%) | 16 (72.7%) | 0.942 |
| Diffuse (n=5) | 1 (20.0%) | 4 (80.0%) | |
| Unclassified (n=24) | 6 (25.0%) | 18 (75.0%) | |
| Glandular (n=22) | 6 (27.3%) | 16 (72.7%) | 0.357 |
| Mixed (n=24) | 5 (20.8%) | 19 (79.2%) | |
| Isolated cells (n=4) | 1 (25.0%) | 3 (75.0%) | |
| Solid (n=1) | 1 (100%) | 0 (0.0%) | |
| Expansive (n=18) | 8 (44.4%) | 10 (55.6%) | 0.063 |
| Infiltrative (n=31) | 5 (16.1%) | 26 (83.9%) | |
| Unclassified (n=2) | 0 (0%) | 2 (100%) | |
| Absent (n=12) | 5 (41.7%) | 7 (58.3%) | 0.138 |
| Present (n=39) | 8 (20.5%) | 31 (79.5%) | |
| Absent (n=21) | 8 (38.1%) | 13 (61.9%) | 0.081 |
| Present (n=30) | 5 (16.7%) | 25 (83.3%) | |
| I+II (n=30) | 11 (36.7%) | 19 (6.3%) | 0.028 |
| III+IV (n=21) | 2 (9.5%) | 19 (90.5%) | |
| 13 (25.5%) | 38 (74.5%) | ||
| Average survival (months±SD) | 88.1 ± 13.0 | 60.5 ± 7.8 | 0.168 |
| 95% CI | 62.6 - 113.6 | 45.1 - 75.9 | |
Figure 6CEA is a SLe Representative images of the immunohistochemical expression of CEA, SLex and PLA for both CEA+SLex in two gastric carcinoma cases as well as in normal gastric mucosa. Normal gastric mucosa (left column) was CEA and SLex negative, while two exemplary gastric carcinoma tissue samples (middle and right column) were positive for both epitopes. The PLA signal indicative for a conjoint presence of CEA-SLex was only observed in gastric carcinoma tissues (200x magnification). B - Kaplan-Meier analysis for CEA, SLeX and the CEA+SLeX. CEA+SLeX showed a strong tendency to be associated with poor patient's overall survival.
Figure 7Analysis of the conjoint presence of CEA+SLe Western blot expression analysis of CEA and SLex in protein extracts from gastric carcinoma tissues and healthy controls (upper panel) and in immunoprecipitated CEA (down panel). CEA is present in all the gastric carcinoma tissues with no expression in healthy controls. SLeX was present in 7 out of the 8 studied cases. CEA immunoprecipitation confirmed the presence of SLeX epitopes in CEA glycoforms in some cases.