| Literature DB >> 31927310 |
Armand Bankhead1, Thomas McMaster2, Yin Wang2, Philip S Boonstra3, Phillip L Palmbos4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Half ofEntities:
Keywords: Biomarker; Bladder Cancer; Cancer; Isoforms; TP63
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31927310 PMCID: PMC6953644 DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2019.11.022
Source DB: PubMed Journal: EBioMedicine ISSN: 2352-3964 Impact factor: 8.143
Fig. 1Pan-cancer survey of TP63 expression and associations with survival: (a) TP63 expression shown for 8,519 TCGA patients from 29 disease cohorts where expression has been z-score normalized per patient for comparability. (b) Pan-cancer hazard ratios calculated using a Cox regression. Diseases with less than 100 patients or fewer than 10% patients events were excluded. (c) Bladder cancer patient TP63 expression distribution was bi-modal with a larger proportion (90%) having expression greater than 1 log2 TPM. Dashed line indicates 1 log2 TPM cut off. (d) Kaplan–Meier visualization comparing survival of bladder cancer patients with low TP63 expression versus patients with increased TP63 expression using a 10th percentile threshold. (e) Bladder cancer patients were stratified using bladder cancer molecular subtypes from Robertson et al. with luminal subtypes combined as a single class. Hazard ratios and maximum likelihood statistics calculated using Cox regression. Upper/lower quartiles and medians represented as boxplots with whiskers indicating +/– 1.5 IQR. Forest plot HR error bars represent 95% CI. (Robertson et al. [4]).
Fig. 2Identification of TP63 Isoforms Expressed in Bladder Cancer: (a) RNA-Seq evidence of un-annotated DNp63 isoforms with alternative splice junction expressed in TCGA bladder cancer patients. Drop-off in expression (red arrows) indicates that both forms of exon 8 are expressed. TCGA-4Z-AA7M and TCGA-2F-A9KO are two bladder cancer patients represented in TCGA BLCA cohort. (b) Catalog of TP63 isoforms derived from Refgene, Gencode, and de novo isoform discovery using Cufflinks. DBD = DNA Binding Domain, OD = C-terminal oligomerization domain, SAM = Sterile Alpha Motif, TA = Trans-activation, NA =none. (c) Schematic of primers used to detect prime and nonprime TP63 isoform expression. 5′ was specific for either prime (8A-9) or nonprime (8B-9) exon junction. There was a 1 bp difference between prime and nonprime products. (d) PCR confirms expression of prime isoforms in human bladder cancer cell lines. 253J and UM-UC10 have low endogenous TP63 expression and serve as negative controls. dNp63alpha (non-prime) ectopic expression serves as a positive control for p63-alpha PCR.
Fig. 3Quantification of TP63 Isoform Expression. (a) TCGA bladder cancer expression of 15 TP63 isoforms was dominated by DNp63 expression with a subset of patients exhibiting low levels of TAp63 expression. Independent cohort of primary bladder cancer tumors (b) and bladder cancer cell lines exhibited similar isoform expression patterns (c). (d) Quantification of Prime vs. Non-prime TP63 isoform expression in human bladder cancer cell lines based on RNA-sequencing and Salmon quantification. (e) Quantification of Prime and Non-Prime TP63 isoform expression using RT-PCR. (f) Quantification of Alpha, Beta and Delta isoform expression based on Salmon quantification. (g) Quantification of Alpha, Beta and Delta TP63 isoform expression using RT-PCR. (h) Immunoblot of TP63 protein expression in bladder cancer cell lines. UM-UC5, UC13, UC14 and UC10 are shown. UM-UC10 has no endogenous TP63 expression and was transfected with GFP vector control or DNp63alpha expression vector. Left panel = immunoblot with anti-TP63 antibody. Right panel = immunoblot with antibody specific for alpha isoform. Arrows indicate 3 distinct TP63 isoforms. (i) Pan-cancer TP63 isoform expression summarized as mean z-score per disease. On average TP63 isoform expression is dominated by DNp63alpha, DNp63alphaP, DNp63beta, DNp63betaP with moderate levels of TAp63 isoform expression. TA, DN, prime, and non-prime columns represent the sum of isoform expression signal for each isoform group as quantified by Salmon and then normalized as a z-score using the mean and standard deviation of all quantified transcripts. Only diseases with at least 1 log2 TPM average TP63 gene expression are shown. Upper/lower quartiles and medians represented as boxplots with whiskers indicating +/– 1.5 IQR. Barplot error bars represent mean +/– standard deviation.
Fig. 4Bladder Cancer TP63 Isoform Expression in Molecular Subtypes: (a) isoform expression shown for all 408 bladder cancer tumor samples grouped by Robertson molecular sub-types. (b) Significantly higher DNp63 expression observed in Basal Squamous (BS) and Luminal Papillary (LP) sub-types while (c) TAp63 expression was significantly higher in Basal Squamous as compared to luminal patients. Upper/lower quartiles and medians represented as boxplots with whiskers indicating +/– 1.5 IQR.
Fig. 5TP63 isoform expression is associated with survival: Higher expression of DNp63 was associated with improved survival (a) and higher expression of TAp63 was associated with reduced patient survival (b). Similar TP63 isoform-specific survival associations were observed in bladder cancer, breast cancer, and lung squamous carcinoma patient cohorts. (c) Bladder cancer patients were grouped by molecular subtype and evaluated for association of DNp63 and TAp63 isoform expression with survival using univariate Cox regression. (d) Multivariate Cox regression analysis. High DNp63/TAp63 expression associated with reduced/increased hazard ratio, respectively. Forest plot HR error bars represent 95% CI.
Fig. 6Univariate Cox proportional-hazards regression used to quantify association of DNp63 (a) or TAp63 (b) with survival. Diseases with less than 100 patients, fewer than 10% dying patients, or no patients with isoform expression greater than log2 TPM > 1 were excluded from pan-cancer survival analysis. (c) Increased average DN proportion in each TCGA disease cohort correlated with reduced TP63 specific HR. (d) Diseases with higher average TA proportion tended to have increased TP63 hazard ratios. Proportions of expression per disease were calculated by dividing TA/DN group expression by TP63 gene expression per patient and then averaging proportions across all patients per disease. Forest plot HR error bars represent 95% CI.
Fig. 7TP63 Isoform Expression Signaling Programs: GSEA was used to identify gene sets enriched for genes with increased expression in patients with high levels of DNp63 (a) and TAp63 (b). 11 and 30 gene sets were commonly enriched in DNp63 and TAp63 high expressing patient cohorts, respectively. (c) A bladder cancer specific TAp63 signaling network was constructed by connecting genes with the most significant differential expression (yellow) in TAp63 patients with intermediate interacting partners (blue) identified using HPRD protein interactions. Fisher's exact gene set enrichment was used to identify gene ontology (GO) categories enriched in sub-networks.