| Literature DB >> 34074348 |
Huang Kie Kyon1, Arnoud Boot2, Nisha Padmanabhan1, Kevin Lim1, Supriya Srivastava3, Shuwen Chen4, Zhiyuan Wu5, Hyung-Ok Lee6, Vineeth T Mukundan7, Charlene Chan7, Yarn Kit Chan1, Ong Xuewen1, Jason J Pitt7, Zul Fazreen Adam Isa1, Manjie Xing1, Ming Hui Lee1, Angie Lay Keng Tan1, Shamaine Ho Wei Ting1, Micah A Luftig8, Dennis Kappei7,9, Warren D Kruger6, Jinsong Bian5,10, Ying Swan Ho4, Ming Teh11, Steve George Rozen2, Patrick Tan12,13,14,15,16,17.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: CIMP (CpG island methylator phenotype) is an epigenetic molecular subtype, observed in multiple malignancies and associated with the epigenetic silencing of tumor suppressors. Currently, for most cancers including gastric cancer (GC), mechanisms underlying CIMP remain poorly understood. We sought to discover molecular contributors to CIMP in GC, by performing global DNA methylation, gene expression, and proteomics profiling across 14 gastric cell lines, followed by similar integrative analysis in 50 GC cell lines and 467 primary GCs.Entities:
Keywords: CBS; CIMP; Gastric cancer; Inflammation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34074348 PMCID: PMC8170989 DOI: 10.1186/s13059-021-02375-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genome Biol ISSN: 1474-7596 Impact factor: 13.583
Fig. 1Global analysis identifies CBS epimutation as highly conserved in CIMP-positive GC lines. a Overlap of genes that are promoter hypermethylated (P < 0.05; FDR ≤ 0.1), and downregulated at RNA and protein levels in CIMP vs. non-CIMP GC cell line panel (log2 FD ≤ 2, P < 0.05; FDR ≤ 0.05) (n = 14). b Percentage of CIMP-high [n = 14], CIMP-low [n = 23] and non-CIMP cell lines [n = 13] in the expanded GC cell line cohort with RPKM < 1 (gene silencing) for the 6-gene panel listed in a [left panel]; RPKM values for CBS in the expanded GC cell line cohort (*P < 0.001, Mann-Whitney test; CIMP-high vs. CIMP-low or non-CIMP) [right panel]. c Heat map representing promoter methylation β-values of CBS gene in the expanded GC cell line cohort [n = 50] (*P < 0.001, Mann-Whitney test; CIMP-high vs. CIMP-low or non-CIMP). d Heat map representing promoter methylation β-values of CBS gene [upper panel] and CBS protein levels in normal gastric, CIMP, and non-CIMP GC lines using Western blotting and densitometric normalized levels of CBS/ACTB [lower panel]. e CBS mRNA expression in GC CIMP lines can be re-instated by Azacytidine [n = 3] (P < 0.05, Student’s t test)
Fig. 2CBS epimutations associate with CIMP in primary GCs. a Overlap of genes that are promoter hypermethylated and downregulated at the RNA level in the discovery GC cell line panel, TCGA-stomach adenocarcinoma [STAD] and Singapore [SG] cohorts (β-value difference ≥ 0.3 and q-value < 0.05) [left panel]. Average promoter methylation β-values and gene expression of CBS gene in STAD according to CIMP subtypes (*P < 0.001, two-tailed Wilcoxon rank sum test, each CIMP group vs. non-CIMP group) [right panel]. b Immunohistochemistry of CBS in a normal human stomach with black arrow indicating cytoplasmic staining in epithelial cells. Control sections were not treated with the primary antibody. c Summary of CBS staining in 66 cases of matched normal and gastric adenocarcinomas (*P < 0.05, two-tailed Fisher’s exact test) [left panel] and an example of a matched normal vs. tumor case with a negative score [right panel]. d Summary of somatic and germline genetic alterations at CBS in STAD. PALP, pyridoxal-phosphate dependent enzyme domain; CBS, cystathionine beta-synthase domain; aa, amino acid
Fig. 3CBS epimutation associates with CIMP in multiple tumors and in gastric intestinal metaplasia. a Box plot showing CBS gene expression levels in CIMP, non-CIMP, and normal categories per cancer type (CIMP vs non-CIMP; *P < 0.05, two-sided Wilcoxon rank sum test). b Box plot showing mean promoter methylation β-values of CBS gene in CIMP, non-CIMP, and normal categories per cancer type (CIMP vs non-CIMP; *P < 0.05, two-sided Wilcoxon rank sum test). c Breakdown of GIM CIMP [upper panel] and GC CIMP [lower panel] signatures in CpG contexts island, shore, shelf, and open sea; *P < 0.001 according to binomial test; “Annotated” refers to the distribution of CpG probes on the Infinium methylation array. d Three-way Venn overlap of hypermethylated or hypomethylated CpG sites in GIM CIMP and GC CIMP subtypes at CGI level. e Average promoter methylation β-values of CBS gene in normal [chronic gastritis] and antrum GIM lesions based on CIMP (high), and non-CIMP (intermediate) (*P < 0.05 in pair-wise two-tailed Mann-Whitney test with mean β-value difference ≥ 0.2 compared to normal group). f Average promoter methylation β-values of CBS gene in GIM cases with or without regression at study-end point; cases in pink belong to CIMP subtype (*P < 0.05 in pair-wise two-tailed Mann-Whitney test)
Fig. 4Knocking out CBS alters the DNA methylation landscape in normal gastric epithelial cells. a Biochemical position of CBS in the transsulfuration and transmethylation cycles. b CBS protein levels in GES1 CRISPR control and CBS-deficient CRISPR clones. c Cluster dendogram of methylation data indicating branching of GES1 CBS-deficient clones from GES1 parental and CRISPR control cells. d Venn diagram of differential methylation analysis of GES1 CBS-deficient clone 1 and clone 2 compared to parental and CRISPR control cells. e Unsupervised clustering of conserved hypermethylated 9171 CpG sites in GES1 CBS-deficient clones [clone 1, C1; clone 2, C2] across passages. f Breakdown of the GES1 CBS-deficient conserved signature in CpG contexts island, shore, shelf, and open sea; *P < 0.001 according to binomial test; “Annotated” refers to the distribution of CpG probes on the Infinium methylation EPIC array, “Random” refers to the sum of all differentially methylated CpG probes in random pairing of samples. g Comparison of CBS-deficient conserved signatures in GES1 or HFE145 with the “GIM-GC common CIMP” and “GC common CIMP” signatures at CpG islands indicate a larger overlap for hypermethylated (33–38%) events compared to hypomethylation events (16–18%); P < 1 × 10−4, bootstrapping using 10,000 samples. h Graph showing fold difference of intracellular levels of metabolites in CBS-deficient cells (n = 4–5) compared to controls (n = 5) at 72 h, 1-methyl nicotinamide [MNA] (and related metabolites, nicotinamide mononucleotide [NMN], nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide [NAD], S-adenosyl methionine [SAM], S-adenosyl homocysteine [SAH], and methionine, *P < 0.05 (left panel). Graph showing peak area of extracellular levels of homocysteine, SAM, SAH, and methionine in CBS-deficient cells (n = 5) compared to controls (n = 7) at 24 h, *P < 0.05 (middle panel). Biochemical reaction showing conversion of nicotinamide [NAM] to MNA using a methyl group from SAM, catalyzed by nicotinamide N-methyltransferase [NNMT] (right panel). CBS, cystathionine beta-synthase; CTH, cystathionine gamma-lyase; MTR, 5-methyltetrahydrofolate-homocysteine methyltransferase; MAT, Methionine adenosyltransferase; MTs, Methyl transferases
Fig. 5Loss of CBS is also associated with an inflammatory response. a Overlap of upregulated MSigDB hallmark pathways in GES1 and HFE145 CBS-deficient clones and the list of shared pathways; “k” is the number of genes in the intersection of the MSigDB hallmark query set (q-value < 0.01). b Relative H2S levels in GES1 CBS-deficient clone 1 [28%] and clone 2 [54%] compared to CRISPR control cells [n = 3] (*P < 0.05). c NF-κB luminescence reporter assay in GES1 CBS-deficient cells, and in d HFE145 CBS-deficient cells, at 48 h [n = 3] and in 0.5 mM GYY 4137-treated cells at 24 h [1 = 3]. Control represents data pooled from parental and CRISPR control cells (*P < 0.05). e Upregulated MSigDB hallmark pathways (q-value < 0.01) in genes negatively correlated to CBS gene expression in gastric TCGA (q-value < 0.05) and in f CCLE (q-value < 0.05). g Upregulated MSigDB hallmark pathways (q-value < 0.01) in mouse CBS-deficient stomachs (FD (≥ 1.5))
| Analyte | Precursor ion mass (m/z) | Fragment ion mass (m/z) | Dwell time (s) | Cone voltage (V) | Collision energy (V) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Homocysteine | 136.0 | 90.1 | 0.025 | 15 | 16 |
| SAM | 399.2 | 136.2 | 0.025 | 62 | 42 |
| SAH | 385.1 | 134.0 | 0.025 | 66 | 33 |
| Methionine | 150.1 | 104.7 | 0.025 | 40 | 15 |