| Literature DB >> 32582531 |
Anne Berberich1,2, Frederik Bartels1,2, Zili Tang1,3, Maximilian Knoll1,3, Sonja Pusch1,2, Nanina Hucke1,2, Tobias Kessler1,2, Zhen Dong4, Benedikt Wiestler5, Frank Winkler1,2, Michael Platten6,7, Wolfgang Wick1,2, Amir Abdollahi1,3, Dieter Lemke1,2.
Abstract
Background: Glioma therapy is challenged by the diffuse and invasive growth of glioma. Lysosomal protein transmembrane 5 (LAPTM5) was identified as an invasion inhibitor by an in vivo screen for invasion-associated genes. The aim of this study was to decipher the function of LAPTM5 in glioblastoma and its interaction with the CD40 receptor which is intensively evaluated as a target in the therapy of diverse cancers including glioma.Entities:
Keywords: CD40; LAPTM5; NFκB; glioblastoma; temozolomide
Year: 2020 PMID: 32582531 PMCID: PMC7289993 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.00747
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 6.244
Figure 1LAPTM5 acts as tumor suppressor gene in glioma. (A) LAPTM5 mRNA expression in glioblastoma cell lines (U87MG, LN229; T98G) and in primary glioma-initiating cells S24, T269, and T325 analyzed by quantitative real-time PCR and presented in relation to the average LAPTM5 expression in the tested cells. (B) LAPTM5 inhibits the invasion of U87MG cells. Representative image fields (×10 magnification) of migrated cells in Boyden Chamber invasion assay (upper figure) as well as total number of migrated cells (lower figure) of three independent experiments demonstrate a significantly reduced migration of LAPTM5 expressing (v-control) compared to LAPTM5 knockdown cells. (C) LAPTM5 inhibits the clonogenicity of U87MG cells. LAPTM5-knockdown U87MG cells show a significantly higher clonogenicity than the respective LAPTM5 expressing (v-control) cells. Figures represent the mean value of three independent experiments. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
Figure 2Tumor-suppressive functions of LAPTM5 were dependent on CD40 expression. (A) Flow cytometric analysis after CD40 surface staining illustrates that only U87MG v-control and shLAPTM5 cells are positive for CD40, whereas the other glioblastoma cell lines were negative for CD40 membrane expression and did not show a specific fluorescence index clearly >1 when dividing the mean fluorescence of the CD40 staining by the mean fluorescence of the respective isotype control. (B) Clonogenicity in the CD40-negative LN229 cells did not relevantly differ between v-control control and shLAPTM5 cells and was slightly higher in the CD40-negative T98G cells silenced for LAPTM5 compared to the respective v-control control cells. The graphs show the clonogenicity of shLAPTM5 normalized to the respective v-control control cells. (C) Knockdown of LAPTM5 led to a slightly reduced invasiveness of LN229 cells and did not relevantly alter the invasiveness in T98G cells compared to the respective LAPTM5-expressing (v-control) cells. The graphs visualize the invasiveness of shLAPTM5 cells normalized to the respective v-control control cells. (D,E) Graphs show the clonogenicity (D) and invasiveness (E) depending on CD40 expression status in relation to the respective v-control control cells. The dotted lines signify no change in relation to v-control control cells. The figures represent the mean value of three independent experiments. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01. In CD40-positive U87MG cells, silencing of CD40 results in an equalized clonogenicity and invasiveness of v-control and LAPTM5 knockdown cells and thereby mirrors the phenotypes of the CD40-negative LN229 and T98G v-control and shLAPTM5 cells (B,C). Exogenous overexpression of CD40 in the CD40-negative LN229 and T98G cells results in a significant higher clonogenicity and invasiveness of LAPTM5 knockdown in relation to the respective v-control control cells and thereby confirms the results observed in the CD40-positive U87MG cells (demonstrated in Figures 1B,C).
Figure 3LAPTM5-sensitized CD40-positive U87MG cells to temozolomide chemotherapy. (A) LAPTM5 sensitizes U87MG cells to temozolomide treatment, whereas LAPTM5 knockdown cells were significantly more resistant against temozolomide chemotherapy. Figures elucidate the differences in clonogenicity in relation to v-control control cells treated with DMSO control. The asterisk shows a significant effect of the treatment on the cell line (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01); the plus sign points out that the shLAPTM5 cells are more resistant to temozolomide compared with control cells as the difference in clonogenicity is more prominent after treatment as measured by ANOVA. (B) LAPTM5 relevantly delays the tumor growth of U87MG glioblastoma cells in vivo and sensitizes tumors to temozolomide treatment. The figure represents the changes in mean tumor volume of five mice per group over an observation time of 100 days.
Figure 4LAPTM5 conveys tumor-suppressive effects by inhibition of NFκB-pathway via CD40. (A) Gene set enrichment analysis revealed a significantly higher activation of TNF-α signaling via the NFκB pathway in LAPTM5 knockdown compared to v-control U87MG cells. (B) Immunoblot analysis confirmed the activation of NFκB pathway in shLAPTM5 cells as demonstrated by the higher phosphorylation of p-Iκa in LAPTM5 knockdown compared to the respective LAPTM5-expressing (v-control) U87MG cells. NFκB pathway activation could not be substantiated after additional knockdown of CD40 in shLAPTM5 and v-control U87MG cells. The figure demonstrates one representative immunoblot analysis (upper panel) and the quantification of immunoblot analysis performed with image J of three independent experiments (lower panel). The asterisk signifies that shLAPTM5 wild type has a significantly higher p-Iκa-level than v-control wild-type cells (*p < 0.05). (C) The functional relevance of NFκB activation in LAPTM5 knockdown cells was further substantiated by treatment with the NFκB inhibitor JSH-23, which specifically reduced the increased invasiveness of LAPTM5 knockdown cells, whereas it did not relevantly alter the invasiveness in v-control cells (*p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01). (D) The graphs demonstrate the effects of temozolomide treatment, NFκB inhibition with JSH-23, and the combination of both treatments depending on the CD40 expression status of the respective cell lines. For that, CD40 was silenced in the CD40-positive U87MG cells or exogenously overexpressed in the CD40-negative LN229 and LN308 cell lines, and clonogenicity was analyzed after the respective treatments. The clonogenicity of v-control (white columns) and shLAPTM5 (black columns) cells are demonstrated in relation to the v-control wild-type cells treated with DMSO control. The plus sign signifies that there was a significant therapy effect measured by ANOVA compared with DMSO (untreated) control (at least p < 0.05). The blue bars show the ratio of shLAPTM5 relative to v-control cells for every single treatment (black in relation to white column for each treatment) to compare and illustrate the efficacy of each therapy in shLAPTM5 and control cells; the asterisk points out that the shLAPTM5 cells react differently from v-control cells when compared to the ratio shLAPTM5/v-control in DMSO control treatment as measured by ANOVA (at least p < 0.05). The LAPTM5 knockdown led to a higher clonogenicity in CD40-positive glioblastoma cells and to a higher resistance against temozolomide treatment. The LAPTM5 knockdown cells were particularly sensitive to NFκB inhibition by JSH-23 in CD40-positive glioblastoma cells. In addition, NFκB inhibition re-sensitized the resistant LAPTM5 knockdown cells to treatment with temozolomide. In the CD40-negative glioblastoma cells, LN229 and LN308 as well as U87MG cells silenced for CD40; no differences were observed between the respective v-control and LAPTM5 knockdown cells, and JSH-23 had no effect on clonogenicity.
Figure 5The prognostic value of LAPTM5 is dependent on CD40 abundance. (A) Evaluated The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA)-glioblastoma multiforme methylome (450 k array) and RNASeq datasets. (B) Associations between CD40 expression and methylation array probes (linear model) with Bonferroni adjusted p < 0.05. (C) Patient similarity (Pearson correlation matrix) based on CpGs selected in (B) and used for CD40 cutoff identification in the complete TCGA methylome (450 k) cohort. (D) CD40 and expression in methylation derived clusters from (C). (E) Survival analysis of overlapping samples (parametric survival regression, Weibull distribution). (F) Cutoff selection of CD40 expression for the separation of clusters. (G) Kaplan–Meier survival curve for CD40 expression data with the applied cutoff from (F). (H) CIBERSORT estimated immune cell fractions for the RNASeq cohort (upper part, p-values: Wilcoxon test) and M2 fractions on CD40 high tumors (lower part). (I) Prognostic value of LAPTM5 in CD40 high samples (p-value: parametric survival regression).
Figure 6CD40–LAPTM5 crosstalk in glioblastoma invasion and temozolomide resistance. (A) LAPTM5 was found to be downregulated in the invasive front of U87MG cells in an in vivo screen for invasion-associated genes. A total of 47,400 transcripts by ~200,000 shRNA sequences were transduced in U87MG cells to identify new invasion-associated genes. In vitro experiments confirmed that LAPTM5-knockdown U87MG cells were significantly more invasive than the respective vector control cells. (B) Overview about CD40-dependent LAPTM5-mediated tumor-suppressive effects. LAPTM5 knockdown resulted in the activation of NFkB pathway in CD40-positive U87MG cells, leading to increased invasion, clonogenicity, tumorigenicity, and temozolomide resistance, which were no longer observed after additional knockdown of CD40 in these cells. Accordingly, the LAPTM5 knockdown cells had no different phenotype compared to the respective LAPTM5-expressing control cells in CD40-negative LN229, T98G, and LN308 cells. Overexpression of CD40 in primarily CD40-negative cells recreated the pro-tumorigenic phenotype and temozolomide resistance of LAPTM5 knockdown cells. (C) Graphic illustration of the CD40–LAPTM5 crosstalk and its effects in tumorigenicity and temozolomide resistance in glioblastoma. TMZ, temozolomide.