| Literature DB >> 33391514 |
Phei Er Saw1, Xiaoding Xu1, Bo Ram Kang2,3, Jungsul Lee4, Yeo Song Lee2,3, Chungyeul Kim5, Hyungsin Kim6, Shin-Hyuk Kang6, Yoo Jin Na2,3, Hong Joo Moon3, Joo Han Kim3, Youn-Kwan Park3, Wonki Yoon3,7, Jong Hyun Kim3,7, Taek-Hyun Kwon3,7, Chulhee Choi4, Sangyong Jon8, Kyuha Chong2,3,7,9.
Abstract
Extra-domain B of fibronectin (EDB-FN) is an alternatively spliced form of fibronectin with high expression in the extracellular matrix of neovascularized tissues and malignant cancer cells. In this study, we evaluated the practicality of using EDB-FN as a biomarker and therapeutic target for malignant gliomas (MGs), representative intractable diseases involving brain tumors.Entities:
Keywords: Big Data; Biomarkers; EDB-Fibronectin; Glioma; Micelles
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33391514 PMCID: PMC7738868 DOI: 10.7150/thno.44948
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Theranostics ISSN: 1838-7640 Impact factor: 11.556
Figure 1Extra-domain B of fibronectin (EDB-FN) expression in human brain pathologies. Patient sample-based transcriptomic database 'Oncopression' analysis. (A) The 'cancer-to-normal' ratio of EDB-FN expression in the 17 major organs. Total of 18,850 cancer samples and 4,494 normal samples were analyzed. The Mann-Whitney test was used for statistical analysis. The data are presented as the means ± 95% confidence interval. (B) EDB-FN expression in various brain pathologies, including malignant glioma (MG). Total of 3,687 samples of brain pathologies were analyzed. Expression levels of the other brain pathologies and of the brain tumor grades were compared with the value of normal brain. The Mann-Whitney test was used for statistical analysis. The results are presented as Universal exPression Codes (UPC) value. (C) Relationship between EDB-FN expression and prognosis of GBM patients. Total of 1,615 samples from 21 glioblastoma multiforme datasets were analyzed. The negative Z-value indicates a worse prognosis. The integrated Z-value was obtained by using Lipták's method. The black circles indicate the Z-value of each dataset, and a Kaplan-Meier survival curve was generated from the representative PMID-18772890-TCGA dataset (empty circle in the graph), which had the largest sample number and a Z-value of -1.34. (D) Correlation between EDB-FN expression and survival in GBM patients. Twenty-one patients with GBM were analyzed. Survival analysis was performed by integrating the patient's clinical data and EDB-FN expression level. TMA scale bar = 2 mm. Kaplan-Meier survival curve was generated. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001, ns: not statistically significant. AD: Alzheimer's dementia; EDB-FN: extra-domain B of fibronectin; GBM: glioblastoma multiforme; IDH-1: isocitrate dehydrogenase-1; MDD: major depressive disorder; MGMT: O6-methylguanine-deoxyribonucleic acid methyltransferase promoter; PD: Parkinson's disease; UPC: Universal exPression Codes value.
'Cancer-to-normal' ratio of EDB-FN expression in carcinomas of various organs
| Organ | Number of cancer samples | Number of normal samples | 'cancer-to-normal' ratio (mean ± std. dev., A.U.) | Cancer vs normal,p value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brain | 2517 | 723 | 1.420 ± 0.229 | < 0.0001 |
| Head and Neck | 360 | 119 | 1.561 ± 0.358 | < 0.0001 |
| Oral | 309 | 167 | 1.296 ± 0.323 | < 0.0001 |
| Thyroid | 338 | 197 | 1.374 ± 0.305 | < 0.0001 |
| Lung | 2502 | 650 | 1.195 ± 0.279 | < 0.0001 |
| Breast | 5516 | 471 | 1.284 ± 0.253 | < 0.0001 |
| Gastric | 934 | 110 | 1.168 ± 0.152 | < 0.0001 |
| Liver | 524 | 322 | 1.077 ± 0.206 | < 0.0001 |
| Pancreatic | 240 | 98 | 1.325 ± 0.465 | < 0.0001 |
| Colon | 2449 | 500 | 1.109 ± 0.217 | < 0.0001 |
| Adrenal | 355 | 50 | 0.996 ± 0.171 | nonsignificant |
| Renal | 504 | 195 | 1.181 ± 0.196 | < 0.0001 |
| Ureter | 58 | 45 | 0.919 ± 1.058 | nonsignificant |
| Ovarian | 1146 | 92 | 1.265 ± 0.324 | < 0.0001 |
| Uterine | 387 | 192 | 1.103 ± 0.329 | < 0.05 |
| Prostate | 257 | 75 | 1.419 ± 0.528 | < 0.0001 |
| Skin | 454 | 488 | 1.042 ± 0.173 | < 0.0001 |
Statistical analysis: Mann-Whitney test. A.U: arbitrary unit; std. dev: standard deviation.
EDB-FN expression in normal brain and various brain pathologies
| Pathology | Number of samples | Mean | Standard deviation | Difference from normal (fold) | Difference from normal, p value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normal | 723 | 0.408 | 0.132 | - | - |
| AD | 227 | 0.329 | 0.171 | 0.808 | < 0.0001 |
| MDD | 134 | 0.454 | 0.048 | 1.114 | < 0.001 |
| Epilepsy | 43 | 0.440 | 0.120 | 1.079 | < 0.05 |
| PD | 51 | 0.429 | 0.088 | 1.054 | nonsignificant |
| Grade I | 88 | 0.534 | 0.124 | 1.311 | < 0.0001 |
| Grade II | 261 | 0.549 | 0.076 | 1.347 | < 0.0001 |
| Grade III | 310 | 0.573 | 0.069 | 1.406 | < 0.0001 |
| Grade IV | 274 | 0.627 | 0.099 | 1.539 | < 0.0001 |
| MGMT methylated | 44 | 0.608 | 0.038 | 1.492 | < 0.0001 |
| MGMT unmethylated | 34 | 0.610 | 0.031 | 1.497 | < 0.0001 |
| IDH-1 mutated | 136 | 0.547 | 0.060 | 1.341 | < 0.0001 |
| IDH-1 wild-type | 79 | 0.569 | 0.052 | 1.397 | < 0.0001 |
| Astrocytoma, | 74 | 0.535 | 0.127 | 1.312 | < 0.0001 |
| Astrocytoma, | 134 | 0.552 | 0.083 | 1.355 | < 0.0001 |
| Astrocytoma, | 132 | 0.586 | 0.070 | 1.439 | < 0.0001 |
| GBM, grade IV | 865 | 0.625 | 0.094 | 1.534 | < 0.0001 |
| GBM, MGMT methylated | 44 | 0.608 | 0.038 | 1.492 | < 0.0001 |
| GBM, MGMT unmethylated | 34 | 0.610 | 0.031 | 1.497 | < 0.0001 |
Statistical analysis: Mann-Whitney test, GBM: glioblastoma multiforme, MGMT: O6-methylguanine-deoxyribonucleic acid methyltransferase promoter, IDH-1: isocitrate dehydrogenase-1.
Figure 2Overexpression of EDB-FN in MG cells. To verify the expression level of EDB-FN. (A) EDB-FN expression pattern in 2D cultures of various cancer cell lines (scale bar = 100 µm). Green represents EDB-FN; Blue represents 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). (B) EDB-FN mRNA expression analysis using quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) after extracting total RNA from each 2D cultured cell line of various cancers. 2-∆∆Ct was used and glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase was set as the inner control. Confirmation of EDB-FN expression pattern through immunofluorescence staining in 3D culture (scale bar = 200 µm) (C) and subcutaneous transplanted cancer tissues (scale bar = 100 µm) (D) of MG cell lines. (E) qRT-PCR analysis using total RNA extracted from U373MG cells (2D monolayer culture) or U87MG cells (2D monolayer culture, 3D spheroid, and subcutaneous tumor tissue). Statistical analysis: Welch's t test. **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001, ns: not statistically significant. The results are presented as the means ± standard deviations of quadruplet determinations. EDB-FN: extra-domain B of fibronectin; MG: malignant glioma.
Figure 3Characteristic analysis of the synthesized APT The synthesis scheme of cysteinylated APTEDB with Mal-PEG2000-DSPE and a schematic representation of the formulation of the APTEDB-DSPE micellar nano-DDS encapsulating docetaxel (APTEDB-DSPE-DTX). (B) DLS size measurement of the PEG2000-DSPE micellar nano-DDS (APTEDB-unconjugated) vs. the APTEDB-DSPE micellar nano-DDSs (APTEDB-conjugated) showed that the sizes of both types of nanoparticles were less than 12 nm (3 replicates per group). (C) All nanoparticle formulations had a negative zeta potential. As the APTEDB-DSPE concentration increased, the negative zeta potential of the nano-DDS became even more negative. Statistical analysis: Welch's t test. *p < 0.05, ns: not statistically significant. The results are presented as the means ± standard deviations of quadruplet determinations. DMSO: dimethyl sulfoxide; PEG2000-DSPE: polyethylene glycol (2000)-1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphoethanolamine (ammonium salt); Rh-DSPE: DSPE-N-(lissamine rhodamine B sulfonyl) (ammonium salt).
Figure 4Cell uptake of rhodamine B fluorophore-labeled nano-DDSs according to the concentration of APTEDB-DSPE in MG (left). Red: nano-DDSs, Blue: DAPI, Scale bar = 100 µm. Quantification analysis of the APTEDB-DSPE micellar nano-DDS cellular uptake via ImageJ (right). Fluorescence intensity was normalized to the DAPI signal of each cell line (quadruplet determinations). (B) In vitro cytotoxicity of DSPE-DTX and APTEDB-DSPE-DTX to U251MG and U87MG cells. % cell viability on the Y-axis was calculated by dividing the O.D. value under nano-DDSs treatment by the O.D. value under PBS treatment (7 replicates for DSPE-DTX and 6 replicates for APTEDB-DSPE-DTX). (C) The IC50 values in U87MG and U251MG cells were calculated according to the types of nanoparticles used for treatment (7 replicates for DSPE-DTX and 6 replicates for APTEDB-DSPE-DTX). Statistical analysis: Welch's t test. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001, ns: not statistically significant. The results are presented as the means ± standard deviations. A.U: arbitrary unit. APTEDB-DSPE: APTEDB-conjugated PEG2000-DSPE; APTEDB-DSPE-DTX: DTX-loaded APTEDB-DSPE micellar nano-DDS; DSPE-DTX: DTX-loaded PEG2000-DSPE micellar nano-DDS; DTX: docetaxel; PEG2000-DSPE: polyethylene glycol (2000)-DSPE (ammonium salt).
Figure 5In U87MG subcutaneous xenograft mouse model, (A) IVIS rhodamine B real-time imaging of PEG2000-DSPE micellar nano-DDS vs. APTEDB-DSPE micellar nano-DDS uptake in a U87MG xenograft tumor-bearing rodent model (n = 3 mice per group). Scale bar = 10 mm. (B) U87MG xenograft tumor growth curves according to drug treatment. The tumor size in mice was measured every 3 days (n = 4 mice per group). The red arrow indicates the drug IV infusion schedule. (C) Anticancer effect of micelle nano-DDSs. Changes in tumor size according to treatment with DSPE-DTX, APTEDB-DSPE-DTX, or saline as the negative control were compared (n = 4 mice per group). (D) Representative images of excised tumors from the xenograft model. Drug-treated mice were sacrificed on day 7, 10, 14, and 17 respectively (n = 1 mouse per group). Scale bar = 10 mm. In U87MG orthotopic xenograft mouse model, (E) Experimental schedule for orthotopic model. (F) Inhibitory effect of micelle nano-DDSs on malignant brain tumor (n = 4 per group). Brain slices with the largest tumor volume in all subjects were selected and analyzed. (G) Representative image for comparison of brain tumor size. The mouse brain was sectioned to a thickness of 20 μm, and brain tumors were identified by H&E staining. Scale bar = 1 mm. Statistical analysis: Welch's t test. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001, ns: not statistically significant. The results are presented as the means ± standard deviations. APTEDB-DSPE-DTX: docetaxel-loaded APTEDB-DSPE micellar nano-DDS; DDS: drug delivery system; DSPE-DTX: docetaxel-loaded PEG2000-DSPE micellar nano-DDS; DTX: docetaxel; nano DDS Tx: nano drug delivery system treatment.
Figure 6Schematic illustration of the clinical significance of EDB-FN as a potential biomarker and the feasibility of using EDB-FN as a targeting ligand for MG.