| Literature DB >> 31783700 |
Aya Nishiuchi1, Shigeo Hisamori1, Masazumi Sakaguchi1,2, Keita Fukuyama3, Nobuaki Hoshino1, Yoshiro Itatani1, Shusaku Honma1, Hisatsugu Maekawa1, Tatsuto Nishigori1, Shigeru Tsunoda1, Kazutaka Obama1, Hiroyuki Miyoshi4, Yohei Shimono5, M Mark Taketo6, Yoshiharu Sakai1.
Abstract
A lack of caudal-type homeobox transcription factor 2 (CDX2) protein expression has been proposed as a prognostic biomarker for colorectal cancer (CRC). However, the relationship between CDX2 levels and the survival of patients with stage II/III CRC along with the relationship between microRNAs (miRs) and CDX2 expression are unclear. Tissue samples were collected from patients with stage II/III CRC surgically treated at Kyoto University Hospital. CDX2 expression was semi-quantitatively evaluated by immunohistochemistry (IHC). The prognostic impacts of CDX2 expression on overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) were evaluated by multivariable statistical analysis. The expression of miRs regulating CDX2 expression and their prognostic impacts were analyzed using The Cancer Genome Atlas Program for CRC (TCGA-CRC). Eleven of 174 CRC tissues lacked CDX2 expression. The five-year OS and RFS rates of patients with CDX2-negative CRC were significantly lower than those of CDX2-positive patients. Multivariate analysis of clinicopathological features revealed that CDX2-negative status is an independent marker of poor prognosis in stage II/III CRC. miR-9-5p was shown to regulate CDX2 expression. TCGA-CRC analysis showed that high miR-9-5p expression was significantly associated with poor patient prognosis in stage II/III CRC. In conclusion, CDX2, the post-transcriptional target of microRNA-9-5p, is a useful prognostic biomarker in patients with stage II/III CRC.Entities:
Keywords: CDX2; microRNA-9-5p; stage II/III colorectal cancer
Year: 2019 PMID: 31783700 PMCID: PMC6966658 DOI: 10.3390/cancers11121891
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.639
Figure 1IHC examination of CDX2 in patients with stage II/III CRC: (a) Schematic representation of the workflow of immunohistochemistry of CDX2. (b) Expression of CDX2 in CRC specimens. Normal intestinal epithelial cells were used as an internal positive control. A Score 0 and B Score 0.5; were determined to be CDX2-negative. C Score 2 and D Score 3; were determined to be CDX2-positive. The scale bar represents 100 µm. (c,d) Kaplan–Meier curves for OS and RFS of the 174 patients with stage II/III CRC. CDX2: caudal-type homeobox transcription factor 2; CRC: colorectal cancer; OS: overall survival; RFS: relapse-free survival.
Patient characteristics and CDX2 expression.
| Factor | No. of Cases | CDX2 Expression | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive ( | Negative ( | ||||
| n (%) | n (%) | ||||
| Sex | Male | 102 | 97 (55.8) | 5 (2.9) | 0.364 |
| Female | 72 | 66 (37.9) | 6 (3.5) | ||
| Age (years) | <70 | 80 | 77(44.3) | 3(1.7) | 0.189 |
| ≥70 | 94 | 86(49.4) | 8(4.6) | ||
| Location | Right colon | 52 | 44 (25.3) | 8 (4.6) | <0.001 |
| Left colon | 73 | 73 (42.0) | 0 (0.0) | ||
| Rectum | 49 | 46 (26.4) | 3 (1.7) | ||
| T-factor | T 1–3 | 119 | 111 (63.8) | 8 (4.6) | 0.746 |
| T 4 | 55 | 52 (29.9) | 3 (1.7) | ||
| N-factor | N 0 | 95 | 91 (52.3) | 4 (2.3) | 0.201 |
| N + | 79 | 72 (41.4) | 7 (4.2) | ||
| Histology | Wel/Mod | 163 | 158 (90.8) | 5 (2.9) | <0.001 |
| Por/Sig/Muc | 11 | 5 (2.9) | 6 (3.5) | ||
| Lymphatic invasion | Ly 0 | 114 | 109 (62.6) | 5 (2.9) | 0.159 |
| Ly + | 60 | 54 (31.0) | 6 (3.5) | ||
| Venous invasion | V 0 | 68 | 65 (37.4) | 3 (1.7) | 0.396 |
| V + | 106 | 98 (56.3) | 8 (4.6) | ||
| Adjuvant chemotherapy | Yes | 89 | 82 (47.1) | 7 (4.0) | 0.389 |
| No | 85 | 81 (46.6) | 4 (2.3) | ||
Well: well differentiated adenocarcinoma; Mod: moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma; Por: poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma; Sig: signet ring cell carcinoma; Muc: mucinous adenocarcinoma.
Univariate and multivariate analysis for RFS.
| Factor | Category | No. of Cases | Univariate Analysis | Multivariate Analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95 % CI | HR | 95 % CI | |||||
| CDX2 expression | Positive | 163 | Ref | <0.001 | Ref | 0.014 | ||
| Negative | 11 | 5.17 | 2.24–10.47 | 4.33 | 1.37–12.3 | |||
| Sex | Male | 102 | Ref | 0.488 | Ref | 0.439 | ||
| Female | 72 | 0.82 | 0.46–1.43 | 0.79 | 0.43–1.42 | |||
| Age (years) | <70 | 80 | Ref | 0.954 | Ref | 0.705 | ||
| ≥70 | 94 | 1.02 | 0.59–1.77 | 1.12 | 0.70–2.33 | |||
| Location | Right colon | 52 | Ref | Ref | ||||
| Left colon | 73 | 0.91 | 0.47–1.81 | 0.784 | 1.37 | 0.65–3.08 | 0.416 | |
| Rectum | 49 | 1.07 | 0.53–2.19 | 0.850 | 1.60 | 0.71–3.75 | 0.260 | |
| T-factor | T 1–3 | 119 | Ref | 0.064 | Ref | 0.037 | ||
| T 4 | 55 | 1.70 | 0.96–2.95 | 1.87 | 1.04–3.30 | |||
| N-factor | N 0 | 95 | Ref | 0.091 | Ref | 0.109 | ||
| N + | 79 | 1.61 | 0.93–2.81 | 1.58 | 0.90–2.80 | |||
| Histology | Wel/Mod | 163 | Ref | <0.001 | Ref | 0.078 | ||
| Por/Sig/Muc | 11 | 4.95 | 2.15–10.05 | 2.61 | 0.89–7.01 | |||
| Lymphatic invasion | Ly 0 | 114 | Ref | 0.561 | ||||
| Ly + | 60 | 0.84 | 0.45–1.49 | |||||
| Venous invasion | V 0 | 68 | Ref | 0.199 | ||||
| V + | 106 | 1.46 | 0.82–2.71 | |||||
| Adjuvant chemotherapy | Yes | 89 | Ref | 0.395 | ||||
| No | 85 | 0.787 | 0.45–1.36 | |||||
RFS: relapse-free survival; HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval; Well: well differentiated adenocarcinoma; Mod: moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma; Por: poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma; Sig: signet ring cell carcinoma; Muc: mucinous adenocarcinoma.
Figure 2Search for miRs that regulate CDX2 expression. (a) Representative flow cytometry plot. EpCAM+/FVD−/CDX2low(1) and EpCAM+/FVD−/CDX2high(2) tumor cells in the same sample were collected by flow cytometry. (b) Computational prediction of miRNAs capable of targeting CDX2; eight miRs predicted by at least two algorithms were selected. (c) Comparison of the relative miRNA levels of different miRs in FACS-isolated CDX2high and CDX2low tumor cells. (* p < 0.05).
Figure 3(a) Schematic representation of the predicted miR-9-5p target site sequence within the 3′-UTR of CDX2. Two nucleotides in the miR-9-5p sequence were mutated in the CDX2 mutant plasmid. The numbers indicate the position of nucleotides in the wild-type sequence of CDX2 (NM_001265). (b) The activity of the firefly luciferase gene which were inserted the CDX2 3′-UTR and containing the target site for miR-9-5p. The data are presented as mean and SD of separate transfections (n = 3, *p < 0.05). (c) Semi-quantitative RT-PCR analysis of CDX2 mRNA expression levels in SW480 cells showing the expression of CDX2. (d) Suppression of the endogenous CDX2 protein in transient miR-9-5p-expressing SW480.
Figure 4Relationship of miR-9-1 and miR-9-5p. (a) Each sequence of pre-miR-9-1 and its mature RNAs miR-9-5p and miR-9-3p. (b) Relative expression of miR-9-5p in stable DLD-1-miR-9-1 and its control. (c) Suppression of the endogenous CDX2 protein both in stable DLD-1-miR-9-1 and transient miR-9-5p-expressing DLD-1.
Figure 5Functional assays in DLD-1-miR-9-1 and pathological therapeutic effect in NAC/NACRT cases. (a) Cell proliferation assay in DLD-1-miR-9-1 (n = 3, * p < 0.05). (b) Cell cycle assay in DLD-1-miR-9-1. Bar graph indicates the percentage of cells in G0/G1, S or G2/M phase (n = 3, * p < 0.05). (c) Cytotoxicity assays in DLD-1-miR-9-1. Results are presented as the mean and SD (n = 3, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001). (d) Relationship between CDX2 expression and pathological therapeutic effect of NAC/NACRT followed by surgical resection. NAC: neoadjuvant chemotherapy; NACRT: neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.
Figure 6OS in the low or high miR-9-5p expressing group who underwent curative resection of stage II/III and stage I–IV CRC according to TCGA database (Kaplan–Meier estimates).