Literature DB >> 32344180

Genome-Scale Analysis Identifies Novel Transcript-Variants in Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

B P D Purkayastha1, E R Chan2, D Ravillah1, L Ravi1, R Gupta3, M I Canto4, J S Wang5, N J Shaheen6, J E Willis7, A Chak3, V Varadan1, K Guda8.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32344180      PMCID: PMC7474160          DOI: 10.1016/j.jcmgh.2020.04.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cell Mol Gastroenterol Hepatol        ISSN: 2352-345X


× No keyword cloud information.
Cancer-associated gene isoforms, arising from aberrant RNA splicing and/or processing, can play a functional role in tumor pathogenesis and are attractive as biomarkers and targets for cancer therapy. To date, the prevalence and significance of such alternative transcript isoforms in esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), an increasingly prevalent and lethal malignancy, remain unknown. Here, using an agnostic genome-scale approach, we sought to identify and characterize aberrant cancer-associated transcript-variants in EAC. Whole transcriptome sequencing (RNAseq) was performed on a discovery sample set of 49 treatment-naive EAC and 40 normal/premalignant fresh-frozen biopsy tissues (Supplementary Table 1 and Supplementary Methods), followed by de novo transcriptome analysis to specifically identify novel/unannotated gene transcript-variants primarily induced in EACs but not in normal/premalignant tissues. Following stringent and orthogonal evaluation using transcript-variant specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in respective primary EAC tumors, we identified 7 novel candidate EAC-associated transcript-variants (Supplementary Figure 1, Supplementary Table 2). Together, the 7 candidate transcript-variants accounted for 71% of EACs tested, with each of the transcript-variants being induced in 10%–30% of EACs in the RNAseq discovery cohort.
Supplementary Table 1

Discovery and Validation Sample Cohorts

Discovery RNAseq samplesNumber of samplesMedian age at diagnosis, y (range)Gender distributionCancer stage distribution
EACa4965 (36 - 88)89% (male) 11% (female)Stage I (17.9%), Stage II (19.6%), Stage III (46.4%), Stage IV (16.1%)
Nondysplastic stable Barrett's esophagusb1856 (18-84)94% (male) 6% (female)NA
Normal esophageal squamous (SQ)c1164 (45-83)90% (male) 10% (female)NA
Normal gastric (GAST)1163 (36-82)82% (male) 18% (female)NA
Total89

11% of EACs were gastroesophageal junctional adenocarcinomas.

Median surveillance of 9 years, ranging from 6 to 22 years.

Each of the 11 normal SQ samples was obtained from respective EAC patients included in the RNA sequencing.

13% of EACs were gastroesophageal junctional adenocarcinomas.

Clinical follow-up information unavailable (progression status unknown) for these patients.

Supplementary Figure 1

Full-length structure of novel transcript-variants identified in EACs. Shown are the complete mRNA sequences (5′ to 3′) of the respective candidate transcript-variants discovered in EACs. For each of the 7 candidates, variant-specific sequences are highlighted in blue font. Shown below each of the sequences are positions of individual exons and coding sequence. For each of the variants and their corresponding canonical genes, exon-intron structures along with their relative sizes-distances are illustrated on the right.

Supplementary Table 2

Candidate Novel Transcript-Variants

Transcript_variantCHRTranscript_variant Genomic START (hg19)Transcript_variant Genomic END (hg19)Transcript_variant STRANDTranscript_variant EXON NUMBERTranscript_variant EXON SIZE (bp)Transcript_variant LENGTH (bp)Transcript_variant PREDICTED CDS START-STOP (bp) aTranscript_variant PREDICTED PROTEIN LENGTH (AA)aTranscript_variant– specific Forward_primer (5' to 3')Transcript_variant-specific Reverse_primer (5' to 3')PCR_product_size (bp)Canonical_Gene symbolCanonical_Gene IDCanonical_Transcript NUCLEOTIDE IDCanonical_Transcript LENGTH (bp)Canonical_Transcript CDS_START-STOP (bp)Canonical_Transcript PROTEIN IDCanonical_Transcript PROTEIN LENGTH (AA)
chr611644008611644312433038AGCAGCCAACAACAAGCATAGTGGACCAGGAGTACCTTGC252
COL10A1Var1chr611644650211644667021683442252..2294680COL10A11300NM_000493330296..2138NP_000484680
chr61164797771164800131236
chr6390638203907355239732CATCCTCCTTCCCACTACCATGCCATCATTACATGCACCT2241
SAYSD1Var1chr6390770903908149624406145234788..5138116SAYSD155776NM_00130479364254706..5056NP_001291722116
chr639082659390830441385
chr56846268868463110+1422AGAGGCAGACCACGTGAGAGGCTTAGGAGTTCTGTGGGACA1431
chr56846373568463905+2170
chr56846400068464170+3170
CCNB1Var1chr56846709768467279+41821643403..1512369CCNB1891NM_0319662029114..1415NP_114172433
chr56847007868470236+5158
chr56847070468470940+6236
chr56847122468471529+7305
chr2733005107330285252342TTGGCTCTTCAGAGTCAGCAGGTAGTACTTGGCCGACTGG778
chr273303121733033104189
RAB11FIP5Var1chr27330677973308473316945700144..35661140RAB11FIP526056NM_0154704272172..2133NP_056285653
chr273315178733158772699
chr273316007733167831776
chr187788976477890260+1496CCATCAAAACTTGCTGAGAGCGGCCACAACAGTATGGCTTT288
ADNP2Var1chr187789098677891075+2895369765..37851006ADNP222850NM_0149135157225..3620NP_0557281131
chr187789349577898279+34784
chr16469893354698953410199GGATGCCGCAGTATCGTAATTTGTGGGGAAGTAACCTTGG503
chr1646990919469911329213
chr1646992915469930428127
chr1646993187469933317144
DNAJA2Var1chr16469985234699871961961857407..1645412DNAJA210294NM_0058803008103..1341NP_005871412
chr1647001425470015585133
chr164700199647002076480
chr1647005261470054843223
chr164700580847005867259
chr1647007406470078891483
chr14549412025494487733675TCCCCAGGTGTTGGTAAATGGTCTTCGGTATTTCTTATTTCAA250
GMFBVar1chr1454946504549465772733996270..39541GMFB2764NM_004124408554..482NP_004115142
chr1454947592549478401248

Putative candidate transcript–variant coding regions were predicted using NCBI ORF finder. Listed are only those predicted ORFs for transcript–variants that are in the same reading frame as respective canonical transcripts.

We subsequently prioritized a novel transcript-variant of the collagen X alpha 1 chain precursor (COL10A1) gene for further studies, on the basis of the recognized pro-tumorigenic role of COL10A1 pathway network in other tumor contexts.3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Using bidirectional rapid amplification of cDNA ends (RACE) analysis, we first characterized the full-length transcript structure of this novel COL10A1-variant, hereafter referred to as COL10A1 (deposited in GenBank: MN308081). COL10A1 is a 3-exon transcript (3444 base pairs [bp]), containing a longer and distinct 5′ exon compared with the canonical (NM_000493.4) transcript (Figure 1A, Supplementary Figure 1). In silico analyses (NCBI ORFfinder) predicted COL10A1 to encode for a ∼66 kDa (680 aa) protein, identical in size to the secreted canonical COL10A1 protein, which we confirmed by using orthogonal immunoprecipitation and Western blot analyses upon transfecting HEK293T cells with full-length COL10A1 transcript (3444 bp), or the coding sequence of canonical COL10A1 transcript (Figure 1B).
Figure 1

Characterization of . (A) Shown are the 5′ to 3′ exon (Ex)-introns (thin line) structures of COL10A1 and canonical COL10A1. UTR, untranslated region. (B) Western blot analyses depicting COL10A1Var1 and COL10A1 proteins. IB, immunoblotting; IP, immunoprecipitation. CEMIP1 was used as positive control for secreted protein and Empty vector as a negative control. (C) Pie charts demonstrating the proportion (%) of samples positive for COL10A1 transcript (top, red color) or canonical COL10A1 (bottom, blue color) in respective SQ, GAST, BM, HGD, and malignant (EAC) tissue biopsies. ∗∗∗P< .0001 indicates significant difference in the proportion COL10A1 positivity between malignant (EAC) vs any of the respective non-EAC tissue groups, estimated by using a one-tailed Fisher exact test.

Characterization of . (A) Shown are the 5′ to 3′ exon (Ex)-introns (thin line) structures of COL10A1 and canonical COL10A1. UTR, untranslated region. (B) Western blot analyses depicting COL10A1Var1 and COL10A1 proteins. IB, immunoblotting; IP, immunoprecipitation. CEMIP1 was used as positive control for secreted protein and Empty vector as a negative control. (C) Pie charts demonstrating the proportion (%) of samples positive for COL10A1 transcript (top, red color) or canonical COL10A1 (bottom, blue color) in respective SQ, GAST, BM, HGD, and malignant (EAC) tissue biopsies. ∗∗∗P< .0001 indicates significant difference in the proportion COL10A1 positivity between malignant (EAC) vs any of the respective non-EAC tissue groups, estimated by using a one-tailed Fisher exact test. Using a robust quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) assay that specifically detects COL10A1 but not the canonical transcript, we next evaluated the generality and frequency of COL10A1 expression in a validation cohort (N = 832) consisting of treatment-naive EAC (N = 170), Barrett’s metaplasia (BM) (N = 123), Barrett’s with high grade dysplasia (HGD) (N = 60), normal esophageal squamous (SQ) (N = 465), and normal gastric (GAST) (N = 14) biopsy tissues (Supplementary Table 1). Our orthogonal analysis demonstrated COL10A1 to be robustly induced in the majority (∼60%) of EACs (Figure 1C, Supplementary Table 3). In striking contrast to EAC, only a minority of BM, HGD, SQ, and GAST samples tested positive for COL10A1 (Fisher exact test, P < .0001; Figure 1C, Supplementary Table 3). We also note that COL10A1 is a more frequently detected isoform in EACs, as compared with the canonical COL10A1 transcript that was detected in approximately one-fourth of EAC samples with no marked differences between EAC and normal/premalignant tissues (Figure 1C, Supplementary Table 3). Taken together, these findings strongly point to COL10A1 as a recurrently induced transcript-variant in advanced stages of EAC development.
Supplementary Table 3

Expression Status of COL10A1Var1 and Canonical COL10A1 Across Lesions

EAC (N = 219)a
Canonical COL10A1-positiveCanonical COL10A1-negative
COL10A1Var1-positive53 (24.2%)79 (36.07%)
COL10A1Var1-negative1 (0.46%)86 (39.27%)

NDBE, nondysplastic Barrett’s esophagus.

Number of samples combined from both Discovery and Validation cohorts.

Because fibrillary protein networks (collagen, elastin) and glycoproteins (fibronectin) play a vital role in facilitating migration and invasion of cancer cells, we next evaluated the impact of COL10A1 knockdown on the migratory potential of EAC cells in a durotaxis assay. We note that the EAC cell lines positive for COL10A1 also expressed canonical COL10A1 transcript (Figure 2A), and repeated attempts to specifically knockdown COL10A1 with custom short hairpin RNAs (shRNAs) proved technically unsuccessful. Nonetheless, because both COL10A1 and canonical COL10A1 transcripts code for identical protein (Figure 1B) and consequently may exhibit similar function, as an alternative approach we used well-characterized COL10A1 shRNAs that also target COL10A1 for subsequent studies. OE19 EAC cells (Figure 2A), stably expressing control or COL10A1 shRNAs under the control of doxycycline (Figure 2B), were seeded onto one-half of a glass coverslip coated with fibronectin alone (representing soft surface). Migration (durotaxis) of cells from the soft surface to an adjacent fibronectin-coated hydrogel (stiffer, 12 kPa) surface was monitored over time in the presence of doxycycline. Loss of COL10A1/COL10A1 indeed significantly impeded the durotactic ability of EAC cells (P < .004) (Figure 2C), suggesting COL10A1 isoforms as potential regulators of mechanosensing ability of EAC cells.
Figure 2

Impact of on durotaxis of EAC cells. (A) PCR-based analysis showing COL10A1 and canonical COL10A1 expression in normal esophageal squamous (Epc2), non-dysplastic BE (CP-A), dysplastic BE (CP-B, CP-C, CP-D), and EAC (OE19, OE33, FLO-1, EsoAd1, SKGT4) cell lines. B2M was used as the internal RNA control. BE, Barrett’s esophagus. (B) Representative images (left) demonstrating shRNA induction on doxycycline (Dox) treatment in stable OE19 cells, carrying either non-targeting control shRNA or shRNAs targeting both COL10A1 and canonical COL10A1 transcripts (depicted as COL10A1/). Note the specific induction of TurboRFP, a red fluorescent reporter of shRNA induction, on doxycyline treatment in these cells. PCR analysis (right) demonstrating knockdown of COL10A1/ RNA on doxycycline treatment of the stable OE19 cells. B2M was used as an internal RNA control. (C) Representative images of durotaxis assay in stable OE19 cells. Quantitative analysis of cell migration (bar graph), measured as total fluorescence units (TFU, Y-axis) of TurboRFP-positive cells in the stiffer surface. All data are plotted as mean ± standard error of the mean, obtained from 3 replicate experiments. ∗∗P < .004 indicates significant differences in COL10A1/ knockdown vs control shRNA cells, estimated by using a Student t test assuming unequal variances.

Impact of on durotaxis of EAC cells. (A) PCR-based analysis showing COL10A1 and canonical COL10A1 expression in normal esophageal squamous (Epc2), non-dysplastic BE (CP-A), dysplastic BE (CP-B, CP-C, CP-D), and EAC (OE19, OE33, FLO-1, EsoAd1, SKGT4) cell lines. B2M was used as the internal RNA control. BE, Barrett’s esophagus. (B) Representative images (left) demonstrating shRNA induction on doxycycline (Dox) treatment in stable OE19 cells, carrying either non-targeting control shRNA or shRNAs targeting both COL10A1 and canonical COL10A1 transcripts (depicted as COL10A1/). Note the specific induction of TurboRFP, a red fluorescent reporter of shRNA induction, on doxycyline treatment in these cells. PCR analysis (right) demonstrating knockdown of COL10A1/ RNA on doxycycline treatment of the stable OE19 cells. B2M was used as an internal RNA control. (C) Representative images of durotaxis assay in stable OE19 cells. Quantitative analysis of cell migration (bar graph), measured as total fluorescence units (TFU, Y-axis) of TurboRFP-positive cells in the stiffer surface. All data are plotted as mean ± standard error of the mean, obtained from 3 replicate experiments. ∗∗P < .004 indicates significant differences in COL10A1/ knockdown vs control shRNA cells, estimated by using a Student t test assuming unequal variances. Taken in toto, we identify COL10A1 as a novel and recurrent EAC-associated transcript-variant with a potential pro-tumorigenic function. On a broader scale, our study represents the first genome-wide analysis identifying novel transcript-variants induced in EAC. Further comprehensive studies are warranted to decipher the biologic role of the identified candidates and to evaluate their utility as biomarkers and therapeutic targets in this increasingly prevalent and lethal malignancy.
  13 in total

1.  Systems Biology Analyses Show Hyperactivation of Transforming Growth Factor-β and JNK Signaling Pathways in Esophageal Cancer.

Authors:  Andrew E Blum; Srividya Venkitachalam; Durgadevi Ravillah; Aruna K Chelluboyina; Ann Marie Kieber-Emmons; Lakshmeswari Ravi; Adam Kresak; Apoorva K Chandar; Sanford D Markowitz; Marcia I Canto; Jean S Wang; Nicholas J Shaheen; Yan Guo; Yu Shyr; Joseph E Willis; Amitabh Chak; Vinay Varadan; Kishore Guda
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2019-02-12       Impact factor: 22.682

2.  Vascular smooth muscle cell durotaxis depends on extracellular matrix composition.

Authors:  Christopher D Hartman; Brett C Isenberg; Samantha G Chua; Joyce Y Wong
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-09-19       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  RNA Sequencing Identifies Transcriptionally Viable Gene Fusions in Esophageal Adenocarcinomas.

Authors:  Andrew E Blum; Srividya Venkitachalam; Yan Guo; Ann Marie Kieber-Emmons; Lakshmeswari Ravi; Apoorva K Chandar; Prasad G Iyer; Marcia I Canto; Jean S Wang; Nicholas J Shaheen; Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan; Sanford D Markowitz; Joseph E Willis; Yu Shyr; Amitabh Chak; Vinay Varadan; Kishore Guda
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2016-08-08       Impact factor: 12.701

4.  Induction of KIAA1199/CEMIP is associated with colon cancer phenotype and poor patient survival.

Authors:  Stephen P Fink; Lois L Myeroff; Revital Kariv; Petra Platzer; Baozhong Xin; Debra Mikkola; Earl Lawrence; Nathan Morris; Arman Nosrati; James K V Willson; Joseph Willis; Martina Veigl; Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan; Zhenghe Wang; Sanford D Markowitz
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2015-10-13

5.  High expression of COL10A1 is associated with poor prognosis in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Haipeng Huang; Tingting Li; Gengtai Ye; Liying Zhao; Zhenzhan Zhang; Debin Mo; Yiming Wang; Ce Zhang; Haijun Deng; Guoxin Li; Hao Liu
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2018-03-20       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  A core matrisome gene signature predicts cancer outcome.

Authors:  Arseniy E Yuzhalin; Tomas Urbonas; Michael A Silva; Ruth J Muschel; Alex N Gordon-Weeks
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2018-01-23       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 7.  The extracellular matrix: not just pretty fibrils.

Authors:  Richard O Hynes
Journal:  Science       Date:  2009-11-27       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Interplay of matrix stiffness and protein tethering in stem cell differentiation.

Authors:  Jessica H Wen; Ludovic G Vincent; Alexander Fuhrmann; Yu Suk Choi; Kolin C Hribar; Hermes Taylor-Weiner; Shaochen Chen; Adam J Engler
Journal:  Nat Mater       Date:  2014-08-10       Impact factor: 43.841

9.  Extracellular matrix signatures of human primary metastatic colon cancers and their metastases to liver.

Authors:  Alexandra Naba; Karl R Clauser; Charles A Whittaker; Steven A Carr; Kenneth K Tanabe; Richard O Hynes
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2014-07-18       Impact factor: 4.430

10.  Identification of stromal ColXα1 and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes as putative predictive markers of neoadjuvant therapy in estrogen receptor-positive/HER2-positive breast cancer.

Authors:  Alexander S Brodsky; Jinjun Xiong; Dongfang Yang; Christoph Schorl; Mary Anne Fenton; Theresa A Graves; William M Sikov; Murray B Resnick; Yihong Wang
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2016-04-18       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.