| Literature DB >> 34837690 |
Canhui Cao1,2, Ruidi Yu1,2, Wenjian Gong1,2, Dan Liu1,2, Xiaoxue Zhang1,2, Yong Fang1,2, Yu Xia1,2, Wei Zhang1,2, Qinglei Gao1,2.
Abstract
Although endometrioid carcinoma (EC) and endometrioid ovarian carcinoma (EnOC) display similar pathological features, their molecular characteristics remain to be determined. Somatic mutation data from 2777 EC, 423 EnOC, and 57 endometriosis patients from the Catalogue of Somatic Mutations in Cancer (COSMIC) dataset were analyzed and showed similar profiles with different mutation frequencies among them. By using 275 overlapping mutated genes, EC was clustered into two groups with different disease outcomes and different clinical characteristics. Although BRCA-associated mutation characteristics were identified in both EC and EnOC, the mutation frequencies of BRCA1 (P=0.0146), BRCA2 (P=0.0321), ATR (P=3.25E-11), RAD51 (P=3.95E-08), RAD1 (P=0.0003), TP53 (P=6.11E-33), and BRIP1 (P=2.90E-09) were higher in EnOC. Further analysis showed that EnOC cell lines with BRCA-associated mutation characteristics were more sensitive to poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors than EC cell lines, including olaparib, talazoparib, rucaparib, and veliparib. Moreover, based on BRCA-associated mutational and transcriptomic profiles, EC with BRCA-associated mutational burdens shows lower levels of immune cell infiltration, higher expression of immunosuppressive checkpoint molecules and worse prognosis than EC without BRCA mutation. Our study comprehensively analyzed the genome mutation features of EC and EnOC and provide insights into the molecular characteristics of EC and EnOC.Entities:
Keywords: BRCA; endometrioid carcinoma; endometrioid ovarian carcinoma; genome mutation; immune response
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34837690 PMCID: PMC8660599 DOI: 10.18632/aging.203710
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Aging (Albany NY) ISSN: 1945-4589 Impact factor: 5.682
Figure 1Genomic mutation features in EC, EnOC, and En. (A) Hematoxylin-Eosin staining of EC and EnOC and En samples. (B) Mutant genes of EC and EnOC and En. (C) Point mutation frequency of five common mutant genes (PTEN, KRAS, CTNNB1, PI3K3CA, and ARID1A) in EC, EnOC, and En, the left column was the observed point mutation frequency, and the right was the expected point mutation frequency. (D) Top 20 mutation genes in EC, which were rank ordered following the number of mutated samples. (E) Top 20 mutation genes in EnOC. (F) The mutation percentage of the 17791 genes in various organs.
Figure 2Gene enrichment analysis of 275 common mutation genes and their association with prognosis in EC. (A) Mutant genes of EC and EnOC. (B) Protein-protein interaction (PPI) network and enriched terms of the 275 overlapped mutant genes of EC and EnOC. (C) Pathway enrichment analysis of the 275 genes in EC. The genes marked in red belonged to the above-mentioned 275 genes, and the percentages indicated the proportion of mutations in this gene in EC. (D, E) Overall survival and disease-free survival analysis of the altered and unaltered group. Patients with these 275 gene mutations were classified as the altered group, and those without were classified as the unaltered group.
Figure 3Distinct BRCA-associated mutation characteristics and PARPi sensitivity in EC and EnOC. (A) The PPI network of eight BRCA-related genes. (B) GO enrichment analysis of the eight genes. (C) Point mutation frequency of these genes in EC and EnOC. (D) The mutant status of these eight genes and IC50 values in different cell lines derived from EC and EnOC. Orange square: with a mutation; gray square: without a mutation. (E) The IC50 values of various cell line to Olaparib, Talazoparib, Rucaparib and veliparib. Cell lines derived from EnOC were marked in blue and cell lines derived from EC were marked in red.
Figure 4BRCA-associated features identified two signatures with different mutation patterns and disease outcomes in EC. (A) Co-expression analysis of the altered group and unaltered group in EC. Altered group: patients with mutations in the above BRCA-related genes; unaltered group: patients without mutations in the above BRCA-related genes (B) Oncoprint visual summary of Signature 1 and Signature 2 in EC patients. (C) DFS, PFS, and OS analysis in EC patients with or without Signature 1 alterations. (D) DFS, PFS, and OS analysis in EC patients with or without Signature 2 alterations.
Figure 5BRCA-associated features identified two signatures with different immune-associated expression patterns in EC. (A) The expression of CD4, CD8A, CD8B, CD3D, CD3E, CD3G, CD138, CD163, CSF1R, CD11B, CD2, CD161, CD1C, CCR7, CD123 of EC patients clustered by Signature 1. (B) The expression of CD4, CD8A, CD8B, CD3D, CD3E, CD3G, CD138, CD163, CSF1R, CD11B, CD2, CD161, CD1C, CCR7, CD123 of EC patients clustered by Signature 2. (C) The expression of BTLA, CD47, HAVCR2, KIR3DL3, KIR3DL2, LAG3, PDCD1, TDO2, TIGIT of EC patients clustered by Signature 1. (D) The expression of BTLA, CD47, HAVCR2, KIR3DL3, KIR3DL2, LAG3, PDCD1, TDO2, TIGIT of EC patients clustered by Signature 2. (E) The expression of CD226, CD27, CD40LG, CD96, CEACAM1, TNFRSF18, TNFSF14 of EC patients clustered by Signature 1. (F) The expression of CD226, CD27, CD40LG, CD96, CEACAM1, TNFRSF18, TNFSF14 of EC patients clustered by Signature 2. * P<0.05; ** P<0.01; ***P<0.001; ****P<0.0001; ns indicated that there was no significant statistical difference.
Figure 6Evaluation of the effectiveness of olaparib in EC and EnOC (A) Cell viability curve. (B) The IC50 value of cell lines to Olaparib. (C, D) Cell migration evaluated with Transwell assay in A2780 and KLE. (E, F) Apoptosis assay with flow cytometry and the statistical chart. (G) Apoptosis analysis with TUNEL assay. (H, I) Cell cycle analysis and the statistical chart. * P<0.05; ** P<0.01; ***P<0.001; ****P<0.0001; ns indicated that there was no significant statistical difference.
Figure 7Olaparib promotes DNA damage in EC and EnOC and inhibits tumor growth (A) Western blot of cell lines treated with DMSO and Olaparib. (B–E) Immunofluorescence and quantification of r-H2AX in A2780, KLE and HEC-1. (F) Tumor volume and weight after treated with Olaparib and Vehicle. (G) Immunohistochemistry analysis of Ki67 and the statistical chart. * P<0.05; ** P<0.01; ***P<0.001; ****P<0.0001; ns indicated that there was no significant statistical difference.