| Literature DB >> 32093034 |
Lutfi H Alfarsi1, Rokaya El-Ansari1, Madeleine L Craze1, Brendah K Masisi1, Omar J Mohammed1, Ian O Ellis1,2, Emad A Rakha1,2, Andrew R Green1.
Abstract
The majority of breast cancers are oestrogen-receptor-positive (ER+) and are subject to endocrine therapy; however, an unpredictable subgroup of patients will develop resistance to endocrine therapy. The SLC7A5/SLC3A2 complex is a major route for the transport of large neutral essential amino acids through the plasma membrane. Alterations in the expression and function of those amino-acid transporters lead to metabolic reprogramming, which contributes to the tumorigenesis and drug resistance. This study aims to assess the effects and roles of SLC7A5/SLC3A2 co-expression in predicting responses to endocrine therapy in patients with ER+ breast cancer. The biological and clinical impact of SLC7A5/SLC3A2 co-expression was assessed in large annotated cohorts of ER+/HER2- breast cancer with long-term follow-up at the mRNA and protein levels. In vitro experiments were conducted to investigate the effect of SLC7A5/SLC3A2 knockdown in the proliferation of cancer cells and to the sensitivity to tamoxifen. We found that proliferation-related genes are highly expressed in a subgroup of patients with high SLC7A5/SLC3A2, and knockdown of SLC7A5/SLC3A2 decreased proliferation of ER+ breast cancer cells. In patients treated with endocrine therapy, high SLC7A5/SLC3A2 co-expression was associated with poor patient outcome, and depletion of SLC7A5/SLC3A2 using siRNA increased the sensitivity of breast cancer cells to tamoxifen. On the basis of our findings, SLC7A5/SLC3A2 co-expression has the potential of identifying a subgroup of ER+/HER2- breast cancer patients who fail to benefit from endocrine therapy and could guide the choice of other alternative therapies.Entities:
Keywords: SLC3A2; SLC7A5; breast cancer; endocrine resistance; oestrogen receptor
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32093034 PMCID: PMC7073058 DOI: 10.3390/ijms21041407
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1(A) Negative and positive SLC7A5 protein expression and (B) negative and positive SLC3A2 protein expression in invasive breast cancer cores using IHC. Association of SLC7A5/SLC3A2 mRNA co-expression with proliferation associated-genes, including (C) CCNA2, (D) CCNB1, (E) TOP2A and (F) PCNA, using the METABRIC cohort. A one-way ANOVA with the post-hoc Tukey multiple comparison test was used, and p values of ≤ 0.05 were considered significant. (G) MCF-7 and (I) MDA-MB-175-VII cells were transfected with control siRNA or SLC7A5 and SLC3A2 siRNA (si-SLC7A5/SLC3A2) for 24 h. Cells were then seeded in duplicate in corresponding media, and on the indicated days, cells were trypsinized and stained with trypan-blue and counted. Results shown are mean ± SE of two independent experiments. Asterisks denote p-values as follows: * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.005; *** p < 0.001. The efficiency of SLC7A5 and SLC3A2 knockdown in (H) MCF7 and (J) MDA-MB-175-VII cells were confirmed by Western blotting.
Clinicopathological associations of SLC7A5/SLC3A2 co-expression in ER+/HER2− breast cancer.
| METABRIC Cohort | SLC7A5/SLC3A2 mRNA | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parameters |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |||
| No. (%) | No. (%) | No. (%) | No. (%) | |||
|
| 0.039 | 0.06 | ||||
|
| 67 (72.8) | 9 (9.8) | 9 (9.8) | 7 (7.6) | ||
|
| 48 (52.7) | 17 (18.7) | 12 (13.2) | 14 (15.4) | ||
|
| 3.8 × 10−12 | <0.0001 | ||||
|
| 52 (67.5) | 2 (2.6) | 17 (22.1) | 6 (7.8) | ||
|
| 132 (51.8) | 20 (7.8) | 78 (30.6) | 28 (9.8) | ||
|
| 59 (28.5) | 23 (11.1) | 60 (29) | 65 (31.4) | ||
|
| 0.2 | 0.23 | ||||
|
| 77 (67.5) | 13 (11.4) | 14 (12.3) | 10 (8.8) | ||
|
| 34 (59.6) | 10 (17.5) | 4 (7) | 9 (15.8) | ||
|
| 4 (36.4) | 2 (18.2) | 3 (27.3) | 2 (18.2) | ||
|
| 8.3 × 10−8 | <0.0001 | ||||
|
| 111 (55.8) | 11 (5.5) | 63 (31.7) | 14 (7) | ||
|
| 121 (42.3) | 23 (8) | 79 (27.6) | 63 (22) | ||
|
| 15 (22.4) | 12 (17.9) | 21 (31.3) | 19 (28.4) | ||
|
| 0.01 | 0.02 | ||||
|
| 82 (71.3) | 12 (10.4) | 12 (10.4) | 9 (7.8) | ||
|
| 33 (48.5) | 14 (20.6) | 9 (13.2) | 12 (17.6) | ||
|
| 0.1 | 0.14 | ||||
|
| 60 (40.5) | 8 (5.4) | 48 (32.4) | 32 (21.6) | ||
|
| 184 (45.9) | 38 (9.5) | 115 (28.7) | 64 (16) | ||
|
|
| |||||
|
| 0.002 | 0.003 | ||||
|
| 432 (54.8) | 27 (3.4) | 288 (36.5) | 42 (5.3) | ||
|
| 266 (48.6) | 37 (6.8) | 197 (36) | 47 (8.6) | ||
|
| 2.6 × 10−35 | <0.0001 | ||||
|
| 184 (65.2) | 0 (0) | 96 (34) | 2 (0.8) | ||
|
| 356 (56) | 20 (3.1) | 245 (38.5) | 15 (2.4) | ||
|
| 158 (37.9) | 44 (10.6) | 144 (34.5) | 71 (17) | ||
|
| 1.1 × 10−32 | <0.0001 | ||||
|
| 436 (59.4) | 10 (1.4) | 279 (38) | 9 (1.2) | ||
|
| 133 (49.8) | 21 (7.9) | 90 (33.7) | 23 (8.6) | ||
|
| 109 (35.5) | 32 (10.4) | 110 (35.8) | 56 (18.2) | ||
|
| 0.136 | 0.15 | ||||
|
| 450 (52.7) | 34 (4) | 316 (37) | 54 (6.3) | ||
|
| 204 (52.7) | 20 (5.2) | 137 (35.4) | 26 (6.7) | ||
|
| 44 (47.3) | 10 (10.8) | 31 (33.3) | 8 (8.6) | ||
|
| 1.1 × 10−16 | <0.0001 | ||||
|
| 339 (60) | 9 (1.6) | 209 (37) | 8 (1.4) | ||
|
| 297 (49) | 36 (5.9) | 214 (35.3) | 59 (9.7) | ||
|
| 62 (38) | 19 (11.7) | 60 (36.8) | 22 (13.5) | ||
|
| 0.0004 | 0.0009 | ||||
|
| 500 (54.6) | 30 (3.3) | 329 (35.9) | 57 (6.2) | ||
|
| 197 (47.1) | 34 (8.1) | 156 (37.3) | 31 (7.4) | ||
|
| 0.116 | 0.13 | ||||
|
| 147 (47.7) | 20 (6.5) | 115 (37.3) | 26 (8.4) | ||
|
| 548 (53.7) | 44 (4.3) | 366 (35.8) | 63 (6.2) | ||
p *: Adjusted p value. NPI: Nottingham prognostic index; GPG: Good prognostic group; MPG: Moderate prognostic group; PPG: Poor prognostic group. PR: Progesterone Receptor.
Figure 2Kaplan–Meier of SLC7A5/SLC3A2 mRNA co-expression and patient outcome in ER+/HER2− breast cancer using the METABRIC cohort: (A) recurrence, (B) distant metastasis and (C) breast-cancer-specific survival. Kaplan–Meier of SLC7A5/SLC3A2 protein co-expression and patient outcome in ER+/HER2− breast cancer: (D) recurrence, (E) distant metastasis and (F) breast-cancer-specific survival.
Univariate analysis of associations between SLC7A5/SLC3A2 co-expression in ER+/HER2− breast cancer of the Nottingham cohort.
| SLC7A5−SLC3A2− vs | Outcome | Hazard Ratio | 95% Confidence Interval |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SLC7A5+SLC3A2− | Recurrence | 1.3 | 0.8–2.0 | 0.239 | 0.4 |
| Distant metastasis | 1.4 | 0.8–2.4 | 0.147 | 0.2 | |
| Survival | 1.6 | 0.9–3.0 | 0.106 | 0.2 | |
| SLC7A5−SLC3A2+ | Recurrence | 0.9 | 0.7–1.2 | 0.720 | 0.9 |
| Distant metastasis | 1.0 | 0.7–1.3 | 0.821 | 1.0 | |
| Survival | 1.1 | 0.8–1.6 | 0.289 | 0.3 | |
| SLC7A5+SLC3A2+ | Recurrence | 1.7 | 1.2–2.5 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Distant metastasis | 2.4 | 1.6–3.5 | 0.000004 | <0.0001 | |
| Survival | 3.2 | 2.0–4.9 | 1.0 × 10−7 | <0.0001 |
p *: Adjusted p value.
Multivariate cox analysis of associations between SLC7A5/SLC3A2 co-expression and clinicopathological parameters in the ER+/HER2− cohort.
|
| |||
|
| |||
| HR (95% CI) |
| ||
| SLC7A5−SLC3A2− vs. SLC7A5+SLC3A2+ | 2.0 (1.1–3.7) | 0.01 | 0.05 |
| Tumour size | 1.2 (0.8–2.0) | 0.2 | 0.3 |
| Tumour grade | 1.3 (0.9–1.9) | 0.09 | 0.2 |
| Nodal stage | 1.1 (0.7–1.5) | 0.6 | 0.7 |
|
| |||
| HR (95% CI) |
| ||
| SLC7A5−SLC3A2− vs. SLC7A5+SLC3A2+ | 2.1 (1.1–3.9) | 0.01 | 0.05 |
| Tumour size | 1.8 (1.0–3.1) | 0.02 | 0.05 |
| Tumour grade | 1.5 (1.0–2.2) | 0.03 | 0.5 |
| Nodal stage | 1.3 (0.9–1.9) | 0.1 | 0.12 |
|
| |||
| HR (95% CI) |
| ||
| SLC7A5−SLC3A2− vs. SLC7A5+SLC3A2+ | 2.2 (1.1–4.3) | 0.02 | 0.05 |
| Tumour size | 1.8 (1.0–3.2) | 0.04 | 0.06 |
| Tumour grade | 2.0 (1.2–3.2) | 0.002 | 0.01 |
| Nodal stage | 1.3 (0.8–2.0) | 0.1 | 0.12 |
|
| |||
|
| |||
| HR (95% CI) |
| ||
| SLC7A5−SLC3A2− vs. SLC7A5+SLC3A2+ | 1.5 (1.0–2.4) | 0.2 | 0.25 |
| Tumour size | 1.5 (1.1–2.0) | 0.006 | 0.01 |
| Tumour grade | 1.4 (1.1–1.8) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Nodal stage | 1.6 (1.3–1.9) | 0.000008 | <0.0001 |
|
| |||
| HR (95% CI) |
| ||
| SLC7A5−SLC3A2− vs. SLC7A5+SLC3A2+ | 1.5 (1.0–2.3) | 0.03 | 0.037 |
| Tumour size | 1.6 (1.1–2.3) | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Tumour grade | 1.7 (1.3–2.3) | 0.00001 | <0.0001 |
| Nodal stage | 1.8 (1.4–2.2) | 3.5 × 10−7 | <0.0001 |
|
| |||
| HR (95% CI) |
| ||
| SLC7A5−SLC3A2− vs. SLC7A5+SLC3A2+ | 1.7 (1.0–2.7) | 0.02 | 0.03 |
| Tumour size | 1.3 (0.8–2.0) | 0.16 | 0.2 |
| Tumour grade | 2.3 (1.7–3.3) | 3.7 × 10−7 | <0.0001 |
| Nodal stage | 1.8 (1.3–2.3) | 0.00002 | 0.0001 |
p *: Adjusted p value.
Figure 3Kaplan–Meier of SLC7A5/SLC3A2 mRNA co-expression in patients with ER+/HER2− breast cancer who received endocrine treatment only using the METABRIC cohort: (A) recurrence, (B) distant metastasis and (C) breast-cancer-specific survival. Kaplan–Meier of SLC7A5/SLC3A2 protein co-expression in patients with ER+/HER2− breast cancer who received endocrine treatment only: (D) recurrence, (E) distant metastasis and (F) breast-cancer-specific survival. (G) IHC staining of SLC7A5 and SLC3A2 from two cases of patients who were subject to endocrine therapy alone. Cell viability assay in (H) MCF7 and (J) MDA-MB-175-VII cells transfected with siRNA control or siRNA targeting SLC7A5 and SLC3A2 (si-SLC7A5/SLC3A2). Cells were treated with different concentrations of 4-Hydroxytamoxifen (2, 5, 10 and 15 μM) for 72 h. Results shown are mean ± SE of at least two independent experiments performed in triplicate. Asterisks denote p-values as follows: * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.005. The efficiency of SLC7A5 and SLC3A2 knockdown in (I) MCF7 cells and (K) MDA-MB-175-VII was confirmed by Western blotting.
Multivariate cox analysis of associations between SLC7A5/SLC3A2 co-expression and clinicopathological parameters in the endocrine-treated cohort.
|
| |||
|
| |||
| HR (95% CI) |
| ||
| SLC7A5−SLC3A2− vs. SLC7A5+SLC3A2+ | 1.7 (1.0–2.8) | 0.02 | 0.03 |
| Tumour size | 1.3 (0.8–2.0) | 0.17 | 0.2 |
| Tumour grade | 2.1 (1.4–3.0) | 0.00004 | 0.0001 |
| Nodal stage | 1.9 (1.4–2.5) | 0.000003 | <0.0001 |
|
| |||
| HR (95% CI) |
| ||
| SLC7A5−SLC3A2− vs. SLC7A5+SLC3A2+ | 1.9 (1.1–3.2) | 0.008 | 0.01 |
| Tumour size | 1.2 (0.8–2.0) | 0.2 | 0.25 |
| Tumour grade | 2.6 (1.7–4.0) | 0.000002 | <0.0001 |
| Nodal stage | 2.1 (1.6–2.9) | 4.7 × 10−7 | <0.0001 |
|
| |||
| HR (95% CI) |
| ||
| SLC7A5−SLC3A2− vs. SLC7A5+SLC3A2+ | 2.0 (1.1–3.6) | 0.01 | 0.016 |
| Tumour size | 0.9 (0.5–1.6) | 0.8 | 1 |
| Tumour grade | 3.6 (2.1–6.2) | 0.000002 | <0.0001 |
| Nodal stage | 2.1 (1.5–3.0) | 0.00002 | 0.0001 |
|
| |||
|
| |||
| HR (95% CI) |
| ||
| SLC7A5−SLC3A2− vs. SLC7A5+SLC3A2+ | 1.7 (1.0–2.8) | 0.02 | 0.03 |
| Tumour size | 1.3 (0.8–2.0) | 0.17 | 0.2 |
| Tumour grade | 2.1 (1.4–3.0) | 0.00004 | 0.0001 |
| Nodal stage | 1.9 (1.4–2.5) | 0.000003 | <0.0001 |
|
| |||
| HR (95% CI) |
| ||
| SLC7A5−SLC3A2− vs. SLC7A5+SLC3A2+ | 1.9 (1.1–3.2) | 0.008 | 0.01 |
| Tumour size | 1.2 (0.8–2.0) | 0.2 | 0.25 |
| Tumour grade | 2.6 (1.7–4.0) | 0.000002 | <0.0001 |
| Nodal stage | 2.1 (1.6–2.9) | 4.7 × 10−7 | <0.0001 |
|
| |||
| HR (95% CI) |
| ||
| SLC7A5−SLC3A2− vs. SLC7A5+SLC3A2+ | 2.0 (1.1–3.6) | 0.01 | 0.016 |
| Tumour size | 0.9 (0.5–1.6) | 0.8 | 1 |
| Tumour grade | 3.6 (2.1–6.2) | 0.000002 | <0.0001 |
| Nodal stage | 2.1 (1.5–3.0) | 0.00002 | 0.0001 |
p *: Adjusted p value.
Clinicopathological characteristics of ER+/HER2− breast cancer cohorts.
| Parameters | METABRIC Cohort | Nottingham Cohort |
|---|---|---|
|
| Protein | |
| No. (%) | No. (%) | |
|
| ||
|
| 228 (15) | 370 (27.7) |
|
| 1278 (85) | 967 (72.3) |
|
| ||
|
| 475 (31.5) | 789 (59.1) |
|
| 1031 (68.5) | 547 (40.9) |
|
| ||
|
| 166 (11.5) | 110 (8.4) |
|
| 707 (49.1) | 493 (37.6) |
|
| 565 (38.4) | 707 (54.0) |
|
| ||
|
| 623 (41.3) | 565 (42.4) |
|
| 772 (51.2) | 606 (45.4) |
|
| 111 (7.5) | 163 (12.2) |
|
| ||
|
| 404 (36.2) | 854 (64.0) |
|
| 634 (56.8) | 387 (29.0) |
|
| 78 (7) | 93 (7.0) |
|
| ||
|
| 734 (56.1) | |
|
| N/A | 267 (20.4) |
|
| 307 (23.5) | |
|
| ||
|
| 115 (62.8) | 916 (68.5) |
|
| 68 (37.2) | 418 (31.2) |
|
| ||
|
| 234 (15.5) | 505 (37.7) |
|
| 384 (25.5) | 716 (53.5) |
| 888 (59) | 117 (8.8) | |
|
| ||
|
| 486 (23.2) | 308 (23.2) |
|
| 1020 (76.8) | 1021 (76.8) |
GPG: Good prognostic group; MPG: Moderate prognostic group; PPG: Poor prognostic group. * Include patients who received chemotherapy alone or combination of chemotherapy and endocrine therapy.