| Literature DB >> 33391539 |
Xingliang Tan1,2,3, Dong Chen1,2,3, Shengjie Guo1,2,3, Yanjun Wang1,2,3, Yuantao Zou1,2,3, Zhiming Wu1,2,3, Fangjian Zhou1,2,3, Zike Qin1,2,3, Zhuowei Liu1,2,3, Yun Cao2,3,4, Chunhua Lin5, Gangjun Yuan6, Kai Yao1,2,3.
Abstract
Background: Lymph node metastasis is the most unfavorable prognostic factor of penile squamous cell carcinoma (PSCC). However, patients with the same lymph node status have different outcomes, and molecular classifiers for precise prognostic assessments are lacking.Entities:
Keywords: AIM2; BCL2A1; comprehensive genomic profiling; molecular classifier; penile squamous cell carcinoma
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33391539 PMCID: PMC7738875 DOI: 10.7150/thno.51725
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Theranostics ISSN: 1838-7640 Impact factor: 11.556
Figure 1Gene expression pattern of eight invasive PSCC patients. (A) Venn diagram showing 369 and 672 overexpressed genes in the PCA group and LM group, respectively, and among the 108 co-upregulated genes, 57 were more highly expressed in the LM group and 51 were more highly expressed in the PCA group. Furthermore, 327 co-downregulated genes were identified in the two groups, of which 252 had lower expression in the LM group. (B) Gene expression heat map indicated that 22 target genes were overexpressed in the LM and PCA groups; these genes were subjected to subsequent HCPS analysis. (C) Differentially expressed genes (|FC|>2 and FDR<0.05) in the PCA and LM groups are shown as volcano plots in which 22 co-upregulated genes are labeled. PSCC, penile squamous cell carcinoma; FC, fold change; FDR, false discovery rate; N, adjacent normal; PCA, primary carcinoma; LM, metastatic lymph node.
Figure 2The HCPS results of 22 co-upregulated genes. (A-B) Cell proliferation curves of HCPS results. Compared with the shCtrl group, the FC values of the shBCL2A1, shAIM2 and shPC groups were 1.65, 1.73 and 5.38, respectively. HCPS, high-content proliferation screening; shPC, positive control; shCtrl, negative control.
Figure 3Expression levels of BCL2A1 and AIM2 in PSCC and their correlation with survival. (A, B) The BCL2A1 and AIM2 proteins were overexpressed in PSCC tumors and cell lines compared with the corresponding normal tissues and HaCaT cells. (C) The mRNA levels of BCL2A1 and AIM2 with positive expression were upregulated in 78 tumor tissues compared with 21 normal tissues. (D) The mRNA expression levels of BCL2A1 and AIM2 were higher in tumor tissues than in paired N tissues (n = 15). The mRNA expression levels are presented as the means ± SDs of three independent experiments. (E) The standard staining intensity score of BCL2A1 in the cytoplasm was 0 for no staining, 1 for weak staining, 2 for clear staining and 3 for strong staining. For AIM2, the standard was 1 for no staining in the tumor, 2 for faint staining in the tumor and weaker than in interstitial cells, 3 for clear and similar to that in interstitial cells, 4 for yellow-brown staining stronger than that in interstitial cells and 5 for extremely strong staining in the tumor (T, tumor cells; I, interstitial cells). (F) Kaplan‑Meier survival analysis indicated that overexpression of both BCL2A1 and AIM2 was associated with poor CSS in PSCC patients. (G-I) Patients with double-positive expression (BCL2A1+ AIM2+) had a shorter CSS rate than the single-positive group (BCL2A1- AIM2+ or BCL2A1+ AIM2-) and the double-negative group (BCL2A1- AIM2-) in the whole cohort as well as in the pN0 or pN+ subset. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. IHC, immunohistochemistry; HaCaT, human immortalized keratinocytes; PSCC, penile squamous cell carcinoma.
Relationship between BCL2A1 and AIM2 expression and clinicopathological features in 220 PSCC patients
| Variable | Total N | BCL2A1 staining N, % | AIM2 staining N, % | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low expression | High expression | Low expression | High expression | ||||
| 0.128 | 0.812 | ||||||
| <55 | 126 | 90 (40.9) | 36 (16.4) | 37 (16.8) | 89 (40.5) | ||
| ≥55 | 94 | 58 (26.4) | 36 (16.4) | 29 (13.2) | 65 (29.5) | ||
| 0.152b | |||||||
| ≤pT1c | 81 | 57 (25.9) | 24 (10.9) | 30 (13.6) | 51 (23.2) | ||
| pT2 | 32 | 23 (10.5) | 9 (4.1) | 14 (6.4) | 18 (8.2) | ||
| pT3 | 78 | 53 (24.1) | 25 (11.4) | 17 (7.7) | 61 (27.7) | ||
| pT4 | 10 | 3 (1.4) | 7 (3.2) | 0 | 10 (4.5) | ||
| Tx | 19 | 12 (5.5) | 7 (3.2) | 5 (2.3) | 14 (6.4) | ||
| N0 | 108 | 79 (17.7) | 29 (13.2) | 40 (18.2) | 68 (30.9) | ||
| N1 | 27 | 21 (9.5) | 6 (2.7) | 10 (4.5) | 17 (7.7) | ||
| N2 | 29 | 21 (9.5) | 8 (3.6) | 7 (3.2) | 22 (10.0) | ||
| N3 | 56 | 27 (12.3) | 29 (13.2) | 9 (4.1) | 47 (21.4) | ||
| 0.302b | 0.288b | ||||||
| M0 | 210 | 143 (65) | 67 (30.5) | 65 (29.5) | 145 (65.9) | ||
| M1 | 10 | 5 (2.3) | 5 (2.3) | 1 (0.5) | 9 (4.1) | ||
| Stage I | 57 | 40 (18.2) | 17 (7.7) | 22 (10) | 35 (15.9) | ||
| Stage II | 51 | 40 (18.2) | 11 (5.0) | 19 (8.6) | 32 (14.5) | ||
| Stage III | 48 | 37 (16.8) | 11 (5.0) | 15 (6.8) | 33 (15.0) | ||
| Stage IV | 64 | 31 (14.1) | 33 (15.0) | 10 (4.5) | 54 (24.5) | ||
| 0.085 | 0.166 | ||||||
| G1 | 122 | 89 (40.5) | 33 (15.0) | 43 (19.5) | 79 (35.9) | ||
| G2 | 68 | 43 (19.5) | 25 (11.4) | 16 (7.3) | 52 (23.6) | ||
| G3 | 30 | 16 (7.3) | 14 (6.4) | 7 (3.2) | 23 (10.5) | ||
| No | 175 | 126 (57.3) | 49 (22.3) | 58 (26.4) | 117 (53.2) | ||
| Yes | 45 | 22 (10.0) | 23 (10.5) | 8 (3.6) | 37 (16.8) | ||
aChi-square test; bFisher's exact test; cincluded Ta, Tis and T1; dclinical stage based on the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual and TNM Staging System for Penile Cancer (8th ed., 2017); ENE, extranodal extension; PSCC, penile squamous cell carcinoma.
Survival analysis of different expression patterns of BCL2A1 and AIM2 in 220 PSCC patients
| Variable | Total | Eventsa (%) | 5-years CSS rate (95% CI) | χ2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total cohort of patients with PSCC | 220 | 92 (41.8) | 0.635 (0.568-0.702) | ||
| Double-negative expression (BCL2A1- AIM2-) | 49 | 10 (20.4) | 0.805 (0.689-0.921) | Ref. | - |
| Single-positive expression (BCL2A1+ AIM2- or BCL2A1- AIM2+) | 116 | 41 (35.3) | 0.686 (0.598-0.774) | 3.128 | 0.077 |
| Double-positive expression (BCL2A1+ AIM2+)b | 55 | 41 (74.5) | 0.389 (0.258-0.520) | 25.444 | 0.000 |
| Single-positive BCL2A1+ expression | 17 | 8 (47.1) | 0.686 (0.457-0.915) | Ref. | - |
| Single-positive AIM2+ expression | 99 | 33 (33.3) | 0.684 (0.590-0.778) | 0.194 | 0.660 |
| Subset of patients with pN0 PSCC | 108 | 17 (15.7) | 0.906 (0.847-0.965) | ||
| Double-negative expression (BCL2A1- AIM2-) | 30 | 0 | 1.000 | Ref. | - |
| Single-positive expression (BCL2A1+ AIM2- or BCL2A1- AIM2+) | 59 | 6 (10.2) | 0.949 (0.892-1.000) | 3.151 | 0.076 |
| Double-positive expression (BCL2A1+ AIM2+)c | 19 | 11 (57.9) | 0.633 (0.392-0.874) | 23.332 | 0.000 |
| Single-positive BCL2A1+ expression | 10 | 4 (40.0) | 0.900 (0.714-1.000) | Ref. | - |
| Single-positive AIM2+ expression | 49 | 2 (4.1) | 0.959 (0.904-1.000) | 5.291 | 0.021 |
| Subset of patients with pN+ PSCCd | 93 | 58 (62.4) | 0.400 (0.296-0.504) | ||
| Double-negative expression (BCL2A1- AIM2-) | 14 | 6 (42.9) | 0.551 (0.279-0.823) | Ref. | - |
| Single-positive expression (BCL2A1+ AIM2- or BCL2A1- AIM2+) | 50 | 29 (58.0) | 0.457 (0.312-0.602) | 0.747 | 0.387 |
| Double-positive expression (BCL2A1+ AIM2+)e | 29 | 23 (79.3) | 0.241 (0.086-0.396) | 3.883 | 0.049 |
| Single-positive BCL2A1+ expression | 7 | 4 (57.1) | 0.286 (0.000-0.723) | Ref. | - |
| Single-positive AIM2+ expression | 43 | 25 (58.1) | 0.470 (0.315-0.625) | 0.003 | 0.956 |
aNumber of patients who died throughout the follow-up period. bLog-rank test indicated that the survival of PSCC patients with single-positive expression was better than that of patients with double-positive expression (χ2=20.563, p = 0.000). cIn the pN0 subset, a significant difference was also found between the single-positive and double-positive groups (χ2=20.700, p = 0.000). dNineteen Tx patients were excluded, and a total of 93 pN+ PSCC patients were analyzed in the subset. eNo significant difference between the single-positive and double-positive groups in the pN+ subset (χ2=2.569, p = 0.109). IHC, immunohistochemistry; Ref. reference.
Univariate and multivariate analyses of 220 PSCC patients with different clinical and pathological features
| Variable | Total | Univariate analysisa | Multivariate analysisb | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Events (%) | 5-year CSS rate (95% Cl) | Hazard ratio (95% Cl) | ||||
| 0.073 | ||||||
| <55 | 126 | 52 (41.3) | 0.582 (0.484-0.680) | |||
| ≥55 | 94 | 40 (42.6) | 0.681 (0.587-0.775) | |||
| 0.000 | 0.004 | |||||
| ≤pT1 | 81 | 13 (16.0) | 0.870 (0.796-0.944) | Reference | Reference | - |
| pT2 | 32 | 17 (53.1) | 0.553 (0.377-0.729) | 0.000 | 3.792 (1.728-8.321) | 0.001 |
| pT3 | 78 | 35 (44.9) | 0.627 (0.515-0.739) | 0.000 | 2.805 (1.419-5.544) | 0.003 |
| pT4 | 10 | 10 (100) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 3.721 (1.385-9.998) | 0.009 |
| 0.000 | 0.067 | |||||
| G1 | 122 | 35 (28.7) | 0.787 (0.713-0.861) | Reference | Reference | - |
| G2 | 68 | 33 (48.5) | 0.528 (0.401-0.655) | 0.001 | 1.338 (0.740-2.418) | 0.336 |
| G3 | 30 | 24 (80.0) | 0.254 (0.093-0.415) | 0.000 | 2.263 (1.129-4.536) | 0.021 |
| 0.000 | 0.000 | |||||
| N0 | 108 | 17 (15.7) | 0.906 (0.847-0.965) | Reference | Reference | - |
| N1 | 27 | 9 (33.3) | 0.741 (0.576-0.906) | 0.024 | 1.822 (0.734-4.525) | 0.196 |
| N2 | 29 | 17 (58.6) | 0.447 (0.257-0.637) | 0.000 | 3.559 (1.596-7.937) | 0.002 |
| N3 | 56 | 49 (87.5) | 0.115 (0.019-0.211) | 0.000 | 17.966 (6.251-51.641) | 0.000 |
| 0.000 | ||||||
| M0 | 210 | 82 (39.0) | 0.666 (0.599-0.733) | Reference | ||
| M1 | 10 | 10 (100) | 0.000 | 2.266 (0.954-5.385) | 0.064 | |
| 0.000 | Excludedf | |||||
| Stage I | 57 | 5 (8.8) | 0.943 (0.880-1.000) | Reference | ||
| Stage II | 51 | 10 (19.6) | 0.937 (0.868-1.000) | 0.051 | ||
| Stage III | 48 | 21 (43.7) | 0.634 (0.495-0.773) | 0.000 | ||
| Stage IV | 64 | 56 (87.5) | 0.102 (0.016-0.188) | 0.000 | ||
| 0.000 | Excludedf | |||||
| No | 175 | 54 (30.9) | 0.762 (0.697-0.827) | |||
| Yes | 45 | 38 (84.4) | 0.118 (0.004-0.232) | |||
| 0.000 | ||||||
| Low | 148 | 43 (29.1) | 0.724 (0.650-0.798) | Reference | ||
| High | 72 | 49 (68.1) | 0.458 (0.340-0.576) | 1.691 (1.014-2.820) | 0.044 | |
| 0.004 | ||||||
| Low | 66 | 18 (27.3) | 0.773 (0.667-0.879) | Reference | ||
| High | 154 | 74 (48.1) | 0.576 (0.496-0.656) | 1.346 (0.720-2.518) | 0.352 | |
aLog-rank test; bCox regression model (Tx patients excluded, n = 201); cTx patients were excluded (n = 201), and the stratified analysis revealed no significant difference between pT2/pT3 (χ2 = 0.317; p = 0.573); dStratified analysis indicated no significant differences between pN1/pN2 (χ2 = 2.927; p = 0.087); eStratified analysis indicated no significant differences between stages I/II (χ2 = 3.793; p = 0.051). fClinical stage and ENE were excluded from the Cox regression model because they could be represented by TNM stage. CSS, cancer-specific survival.
Figure 4BCL2A1 and AIM2 knockdown inhibited tumorigenesis (A) Knockdown efficiency of levels of the BCL2A1 and AIM2 proteins was detected using WB. The level of the BCL2A1 protein decreased significantly in cells transfected with the BCL2A1-sh1/-sh2 plasmids and AIM2 levels were reduced in cells transfected with the AIM2-sh1/-sh3 plasmids. (B-D) Penl2, 149rca and 156lm cells were transfected with equal proportions of BCL2A1-sh1 and -sh2 plasmids or AIM2-sh1 and -sh3 plasmids to knock down the expression of the corresponding gene. BCL2A1- and AIM2-silenced PSCC cells exhibited significantly reduced clone formation (B), wound healing (C) and numbers of migrating cells (D). (E) Knockdown of BCL2A1 and AIM2 inhibited PSCC cell proliferation. (F and G) Knockdown of BCL2A1 and AIM2 significantly inhibited tumor growth in vivo. IHC was performed to confirm the expression levels of BCL2A1 and AIM2 in each group. Statistics are presented as the means ± SDs of three independent experiments. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001.
Figure 5The AIM2/NF-κB/BCL2A1/MAPK/c-Myc signaling pathway was the potential molecular mechanism for tumor progression in PSCC. (A) The knockdown of AIM2 protein expression in Penl2 cells reduced the levels of phosphorylated p65 in the NF-κB pathway and the level of the BCL2A1 protein. (B) The knockdown of BCL2A1 protein expression in Penl2 cells reduced the levels of phosphorylated of MEK1/2 and Erk1/2 in the MAPK pathway and regulated the effect of c-Myc on cell proliferation. (C) The overexpression of shAIM2 in Penl2 cells by transfection with the BCL2A1 plasmid revealed that the NF-κB and MAPK pathways participate in cell proliferation, as evidenced by WB of recovery experiments. Statistics are presented as the means ± SDs of three independent experiments. ****p < 0.0001. NF-κB, nuclear factor kappa-B; MAPK, mitogen-activated protein kinase.