| Literature DB >> 32436609 |
Xiaowei Xue1, Shaowei Xue2, Wenbo Wan2, Junlai Li1, Huaiyin Shi3.
Abstract
Breast cancer was the most frequent and the second most deadly cancer in women in 2018 in China; thus, early diagnosis of breast cancer is important. Studies have reported that tissue stiffness promotes cancer progression through increased collagen or fibrosis. Shear wave elastography (SWE) is a technique for measuring tissue stiffness. However, the mechanisms underlying cancer tissue stiffness or fibrosis are not entirely clear. Hypoxia-inducible factor 1 (HIF-1α) is expressed in response to hypoxia and contributes to tumor progression and metastasis. Kindlin-2 is an important co-activator of integrin. We have reported that Kindlin-2 influences breast cancer stiffness and metastasis. In this study, SWE was used to determine the maximum elasticity (Emax ) of patients before operation or core needle biopsy. The specimens were used for staining. Knockdown, overexpression, co-immunoprecipitation, and immunofluorescence assays were used to explore the relationship between HIF-1α and Kindlin-2. We found that HIF-1α and Kindlin-2 were highly expressed in invasive breast cancer and that the expression levels of HIF-1α and Kindlin-2 were correlated with Emax . HIF-1α interacts with Kindlin-2. Besides, HIF-1α and Kindlin-2 influence the expression of P4HA1, an important protein in collagen biogenesis through the integrin/FAK pathway. Our study first identified a new mechanism of invasive breast cancer stiffness by linking HIF-1α and Kindlin-2 to collagen biogenesis. Therefore, based on SWE, Emax could be a physical biomarker of invasive breast cancer for early, noninvasive diagnosis, and HIF-1α and Kindlin-2 could be pathological markers for early diagnosis and targeted therapy.Entities:
Keywords: Breast cancer; Emax; HIF-1α; Kindlin-2; Shear wave elastography
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32436609 PMCID: PMC7367621 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.3130
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Med ISSN: 2045-7634 Impact factor: 4.452
Characteristics of patients and breast nodules
| Parameter | Benign | Malignant |
|---|---|---|
| Patients (n = 66) | Fibroadenoma (n = 30) | Invasive breast cancer (n = 36) |
| Age (y) | 38.21 ± 9.71 | 45.35 ± 9.62 |
| Sex | Female | Female |
| Size(cm) | 1.35 ± 0.63 | 1.79 ± 0.58 |
Figure 1HIF‐1α and Kindlin‐2 are highly expressed in breast cancer and are correlated with breast cancer stiffness. (A) Representative images from immunohistochemical (×200) staining show expression of HIF‐1α and Kindlin‐2 in benign and malignant breast nodules, respectively. (B) Quantitative analysis shows that the average expression levels of HIF‐1α and Kindlin‐2 in breast cancer were significantly higher than those in benign breast nodules. (C) Representative SWE images of benign and malignant breast nodules. (D) The Emax of breast cancer is significantly higher than that of benign breast nodules. (E) The correlation between HIF‐1α expression and Emax of invasive breast cancer (r = .3751). (F) The correlation between Kindlin‐2 expression and Emax of invasive breast cancer (r = .3307). (G) HIF‐1α expression correlated with Kindlin‐2 expression in invasive breast cancer (r = .3553). *P < .05, **P < .01
Expression of HIF‐1α and Kindlin‐2 and Emax of benign and malignant breast nodules
| Benign | Malignant |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Emax (kPa) | 52.02 ± 1.309 | 144.6 ± 17.76 |
|
| HIF‐1α | 5802 ± 580.7 | 43 682 ± 2039 |
|
| Kindlin‐2 | 899.6 ± 77.39 | 8018 ± 679.5 |
|
There were significant differences between benign and malignant breast nodules.
P < .01.
Figure 2HIF‐1α and Kindlin‐2 are upregulated and interacts with one another in hypoxic conditions. (A) Western blot of extracts of MCF7 cells showing that HIF‐1α and Kindlin‐2 are upregulated in hypoxia. (B) Relative protein levels of HIF‐1α and Kindlin‐2 are higher in hypoxia than in normoxia. (C) Co‐immunoprecipitation assay was performed using lysates from MCF‐7 cells in normoxia and hypoxia with anti–HIF‐1α antibody, followed by immunoblotting with indicated antibodies; the results show that HIF‐1α interacts with Kindlin‐2. (D) Co‐localization of endogenous HIF‐1α with Kindlin‐2. Endogenous HIF‐1α (red) and Kindlin‐2 (green) are stained with specific Abs in normoxia or hypoxia. Nuclei are stained with DAPI (blue) and subsequently visualized by microscopy. Scale bars: 40 μm. (E) Tissue double immunofluorescence assay performed with anti–HIF‐1α (green) and anti–Kindlin‐2 (red) in benign and malignant breast nodules. Nuclei are stained with DAPI (blue) and subsequently visualized by microscopy. Scale bars: 100 μm. *P < .05, **P < .01
Figure 3HIF‐1α interacts with Kindlin‐2 and influences collagen biogenesis by targeting P4HA1 and FAK. (A‐C) HIF‐1α was overexpressed with HIF‐1α plasmid or knocked down with HIF‐1α siRNA (A), HIF‐1α mRNA expression level was analyzed by real‐time PCR (B), cell lysates were analyzed by western blot with the indicated antibodies. The expression levels of Kindlin‐2, p‐FAK, and P4HA1 were consistent with HIF‐1α expression (C). (D‐F) Kindlin‐2 was overexpressed with Kindlin‐2 plasmid or knocked down with Kindlin‐2 siRNA (D), Kindlin‐2 mRNA expression level was analyzed by real‐time PCR (E), and cell lysates were analyzed by Western blot with the indicated antibodies. The expression levels of HIF‐1α, p‐FAK, and P4HA1 were consistent with Kindlin‐2 expression (F)