| Literature DB >> 34736492 |
Lu Zhang1,2, Ruiting Fu3, Ping Liu1, Lijun Wang1, Weihua Liang1, Hong Zou1, Wei Jia4, Lin Tao5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: ETS transcription factors are known to act as either positive or negative regulators of the expression of genes involved in various biological processes. It was reported that ETS variant transcription factor 5 (ETV5), a key member of the ETS family, mainly plays a role as an potential oncogene in various malignant tumors. However, the role and mechanism of ETV5 in high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) have not been elucidated.Entities:
Keywords: Biomarker; Carcinogenesis; ETV5; High-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC); Prognosis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34736492 PMCID: PMC8570011 DOI: 10.1186/s13048-021-00899-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Ovarian Res ISSN: 1757-2215 Impact factor: 4.234
qRT-PCR relatively primer sequences
| Genes | forward primer(5′-3′) | reverse primer(5′-3′) |
|---|---|---|
| ETV5 | CAGCACACGGGTTCCAGTCAC | TGGCAGTTAGGCACTTCTGAATCG |
| GAPDH | GAGTCAACGGATTTGGTCGT | TTGATTTTGGAGGGATCTCG |
Fig. 1ETV5 was highly expressed in HGSOC tissues and cell lines. (A) Overall, 64 differentially expressed genes between ovarian carcinoma and normal tissues were screened from 3 datasets. (B) In GEPIA, ETV5 was highly expressed in ovarian carcinoma compared to that in normal tissues (p < 0.05). (C) ETV5 was significantly overexpressed in HGSOC tissues compared to that in normal fallopian tube tissues (p < 0.05). (D) ETV5 was relatively high expressed in HGSOC cell lines. Three ETV5-knockdown plasmids were transfected in SKOV3 (E) and A2780 (F) cell lines to screen out the plasmid with the best knockdown efficiency-sh-ETV5–2. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001
ETV5 expression and clinicopathological parameters
| Characteristies | n | ETV5 expression | χ2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 87 | Over expression (%) | Low expression (%) | |||
| Age | |||||
| < 55 | 44 | 20(45.5) | 24(54.5) | 4.587 | |
| ≥55 | 43 | 32(74.4) | 11(25.6) | ||
| FIGO stage | |||||
| I-II | 21 | 12(57.1) | 9(42.9) | 4.212 | |
| III-IV | 66 | 40(60.6) | 26(39.4) | ||
| Chemotherapy response | |||||
| sensitive | 26 | 10(38.5) | 16(61.5) | 6.502 | |
| partial | 24 | 16(66.7) | 8(33.3) | ||
| unknown | 37 | ||||
| Recurrence | |||||
| No | 27 | 14(51.9) | 13(48.1) | 0.979 | 0.322 |
| Yes | 10 | 7(70.0) | 3(30.0) | ||
| unknown | 50 | ||||
| Ascites | |||||
| No | 26 | 15(57.7) | 11(42.3) | 0.201 | 0.654 |
| Yes | 61 | 32(52.5) | 29(47.5) | ||
Fig. 2ETV5 is associated with a poor prognosis of HGSOC patients. In comparison to patients with low ETV5 expression, those with high expression has significantly lower (A) overall survival (OS) (p < 0.05) and (B) disease-free survival (DFS) (p < 0.05)
COX regression analysis of risk factors in patients with high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95%CI) | HR (95%CI) | |||
| ETV5 expression (low- vs over-expression) | 2.108(1.190–3.736) | 1.427(0.485–4.192) | 0.518 | |
| Age (<55 vs ≥ 55) | 0.534(0.322–0.885) | 0.713(0.379–1.340) | 0.293 | |
| FIGO stage (I-IIvsIII-IV) | 9.626(3.722–24.899) | 5.301(1.564–1.973) | ||
| Recurrence (no vs yes) | 2.542(1.178–5.482) | 2.670(1.140–6.253) | ||
| Chemotherapy response (sensitive vs partial) | 0.967(0.520–1.798) | 0.915 | ||
| Ascites (no vs yes) | 1.192(0.562–2.527) | 0.647 | ||
Fig. 3ETV5 promotes HGSOC cell proliferation, invasion, and migration in vitro. Cell proliferation is determined using the CCK8 assay after SKOV3 (A) and A2780 (B) cells are transfected with sh-ETV5–2 plasmid and OV2008 (C) cells are transfected with ETV5 plasmid. Clonality is detected using the colony formation assay after SKOV3 (D) and A2780 (E) cells are transfected with sh-ETV5–2 plasmid and OV2008 (I) cells. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001