| Literature DB >> 32514251 |
Shuhang Qin1, Yuandong Liao1, Qiqiao Du1, Wei Wang1, Jiaming Huang1, Pan Liu1, Chunliang Shang2, Tianyu Liu1, Meng Xia1, Shuzhong Yao1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The pathogenesis and developmental mechanism of early-stage (FIGO 2009 IA2-IIA2) cervical cancer (CC) remain unclear. Seeking novel molecular biomarkers based on The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) will facilitate the understanding of CC pathogenesis and help evaluate early-stage CC prognosis.Entities:
Keywords: Desmoglein-2; Early-stage cervical cancer; Pelvic lymph node metastasis; Prognosis
Year: 2020 PMID: 32514251 PMCID: PMC7268232 DOI: 10.1186/s12935-020-01292-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Cell Int ISSN: 1475-2867 Impact factor: 5.722
Fig. 1The identification of DSG2 by bioinformatics. a Workflow for screening DSG2. b GO terms identified in the GO analysis for correlated coding genes in the biological process categories with 5 minimum P-adjusted values. Biological pathways from KEGG analysis with 5 minimum P-adjusted values. Each dot represents a specific term, with the count number and the corresponding P-adjusted value indicated by the size and the color of the dot, respectively. c Volcano plot of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between early-stage CC tissue and adjacent noncancerous tissue (ANT). The genes included in the analysis are prognosis-related genes. d Heatmap of the top 15 up- and downregulated DEGs according to the false discover rate (FDR). Red represents high expression, and blue represents low expression
The up-regulated genes in early-stage CC tissue compared with ANT, correlated with unfavorable prognosis
| Gene | Description |
|---|---|
| DSG2 | Desmoglein-2 |
| MMP1 | Matrix metallopeptidase 1 |
| CA9 | Carbonic anhydrase IX |
| HOXA1 | Homeobox A1 |
| SERPINB3 | Serine protease inhibitor B3 |
Fig. 2The potential functions of DSG2 in CC and other cancers. a Box plots of DSG2 expression based on Oncomine datasets. DSG2 was significantly overexpressed in cancer in the Scotto Cervix 2, Zhai Cervix, Pyeon Multi-cancer and Biewenga Cervix datasets. b Kaplan–Meier survival curves of DSG2 showing the overall survival outcomes by relatively high DSG2 expression and low DSG2 expression in patients with cancers except CC. c Kaplan–Meier survival curves of DSG2 showing the overall survival outcomes in the overall cohort and early-stage cohort by relatively high DSG2 expression and low DSG2 expression in CC patients. d The correlation between DSG2 and two genes regulating lymphangiogenesis. e GO terms identified in the GO biological process analysis for positively coexpressed genes in categories with 20 minimum P-adjusted values. Oncogenic signature for positively coexpressed genes with 20 minimum P-adjusted values
Fig. 3The expression of DSG2 in patient samples was determined by IHC, qRT-PCR and western blotting. a IHC was performed on six pairs of matched CC samples and adjacent nontumor cervical tissue (ANT) samples. Original magnifications: ×200. b Representative results of the IHC of DSG2 in normal samples and early-stage CC samples with and without PLNM. Bar graph shows the percentage of high/low expression of DSG2 in normal samples and early-stage cohort samples. c The mRNA expression of DSG2 was determined by qRT-PCR in 20 NCTs and 20 CC samples (left). The protein expression of DSG2 was determined by western blotting in 3 NCTs and 3 CC samples (right). d The mRNA expression of DSG2 was determined by qRT-PCR in 20 CC samples without PLNM and 20 cervical cancer samples with PLNM (left). The protein expression of DSG2 was determined by western blotting in 3 CC samples without PLNM and 3 CC samples with PLNM (right). e Kaplan–Meier curve for DSG2 and PLNM in early-stage cohort CC patients. DSG2 (−): low expression of DSG2; DSG2 (+): high expression of DSG2. PLNM (−): without PLNM; PLNM (+): with PLNM. f Representative results of the IHC of lymphatic vessel density in CC with high/low expression of DSG2. Original magnifications: 100×
Correlation between DSG2 expression and clinicopathological features of early-stage CC
| Variables | Total | DSG2 expression | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low | High | |||
| Age (years) | ||||
| ≤ 42 | 65 | 42 | 23 | 0.313 |
| > 42 | 85 | 48 | 37 | |
| FIGO stageb | ||||
| I | 132 | 87 | 45 | 0.187 |
| II | 18 | 9 | 9 | |
| Tumor size (cm) | ||||
| ≤ 4 | 125 | 85 | 40 | |
| > 4 | 25 | 11 | 14 | |
| Pathologic types | ||||
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 128 | 82 | 46 | 0.205a |
| Adenocarcinoma | 18 | 13 | 5 | |
| Adenosquamous carcinoma | 4 | 1 | 3 | |
| Differentiation grade | ||||
| Well | 5 | 4 | 1 | 0.502a |
| Moderate | 69 | 45 | 24 | |
| Poor | 69 | 43 | 26 | |
| Stromal invasion | ||||
| < 1/2 | 87 | 58 | 29 | 0.424 |
| ≥ 1/2 | 63 | 38 | 25 | |
| Lymphovascular space invasion | ||||
| No | 134 | 89 | 45 | 0.074 |
| Yes | 16 | 7 | 9 | |
| Pelvic lymph node metastasis | ||||
| No | 120 | 89 | 31 | < |
| Yes | 30 | 7 | 23 | |
| Vaginal involvement | ||||
| No | 148 | 94 | 54 | 0.408 |
| Yes | 2 | 2 | 0 | |
| Parametrial infiltration | ||||
| No | 149 | 95 | 54 | 0.64 |
| Yes | 1 | 1 | 0 | |
| Recurrence | ||||
| No | 126 | 89 | 37 | < |
| Yes | 24 | 7 | 17 | |
| Vital status in 5 years | ||||
| Alive | 129 | 92 | 37 | < |
| Dead | 21 | 4 | 17 | |
aP value from Fisher’s exact test; The italic number inside the table reflected P < 0.05
bFIGO 2009 was used
Univariate Cox analysis of factors associated with overall survival in early-stage cohort
| Variables | HR (95% CI)a | |
|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 1.007 (0.960–1.056) | 0.774 |
| Tumor size (cm) | ||
| ≤ 4 (reference) | 1 | |
| > 4 | 2.750 (1.110–6.814) | |
| FIGO stageb | ||
| I (reference) | 1 | |
| II | 0.812 (0.239–2.757) | 0.739 |
| Pathologic types | ||
| Squamous cell carcinoma (reference) | 1 | |
| Adenocarcinoma | 2.605 (0.946–7.171) | 0.064 |
| Adenosquamous carcinoma | 2.583 (0.341–19.558) | 0.358 |
| Differentiation grade | ||
| Well (reference) | 1 | |
| Moderate | 6009.923 (–) | 0.94 |
| Poor | 12,458.308 (–) | 0.935 |
| Stromal invasion | ||
| <1/2 (reference) | 1 | |
| ≥1/2 | 0.681 (0.275–1.687) | 0.406 |
| Lymphovascular space invasion | ||
| No (reference) | 1 | |
| Yes | 3.622 (1.403–9.349) | |
| Pelvic lymph node metastasis | ||
| No (reference) | 1 | |
| Yes | 8.297 (3.428–20.078) | < |
| Vaginal involvement | ||
| No (reference) | 1 | |
| Yes | 0.049 (0–483,831.748) | 0.713 |
| Parametrial infiltration | ||
| No (reference) | 1 | |
| Yes | 0.049 (0–368,184,919.781) | 0.795 |
| DSG2 | ||
| Low (reference) | 1 | |
| High | 8.679 (2.917–25.822) | < |
a95% CI, 95% confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio
bFIGO 2009 was used
Multivariate Cox analysis of factors associated with overall survival in early-stage cohort
| Variables | HR (95% CI)a | |
|---|---|---|
| Tumor size (cm) | ||
| ≤ 4 (reference) | 1 | |
| > 4 | 1.704 (0.646–4.498) | 0.282 |
| Lymphovascular space invasion | ||
| No (reference) | 1 | |
| Yes | 2.595 (0.946–7.123) | 0.064 |
| Pelvic lymph node metastasis | ||
| No (reference) | 1 | |
| Yes | 3.935 (1.480–10.465) | |
| DSG2 | ||
| Low (reference) | 1 | |
| High | 4.234 (1.275–14.063) | |
a 95% CI, 95% confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio
Correlation between DSG2 expression and lymphatic vessel density of early-stage CC
| DSG2 expression | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Low | High | ||
| Lymphatic vessel density | 6.2 ± 3.4 | 13.4 ± 2.8 | |
Fig. 4The effect of DSG2 knockdown on the viability and migration of CC cells. a Analysis of the expression of DSG2 in six CC cell lines and NCTs by qRT-PCR (left) and western blotting (right). b The effect of siRNA on the viability of CC cells detected by CCK-8 assays. c The effect of siRNA on the migration abilities of CC cells detected by migration assay. Original magnification: ×100. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001; ****P < 0.0001