| Literature DB >> 34922580 |
Zechen Zhao1,2,3, Weiming Chu1,4, Yang Zheng1,5, Chao Wang1,2,3, Yuemei Yang1,2,3, Teng Xu1,2,3, Xueming Yang1,6, Wei Zhang1,3, Xu Ding1,2,3, Gang Li7, Hongchuang Zhang8, Junbo Zhou9, Jinhai Ye1,2,3, Heming Wu1,2,3, Xiaomeng Song1,2,3, Yunong Wu10,11,12.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Eukaryotic translation initiation factor 6 (eIF6), also known as integrin β4 binding protein, is involved in ribosome formation and mRNA translation, acting as an anti-association factor. It is also essential for the growth and reproduction of cells, including tumor cells. Yet, its role in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) remains unclear.Entities:
Keywords: AKT; Cell invasion and migration; EMT; OSCC; eIF6
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34922580 PMCID: PMC8684100 DOI: 10.1186/s12964-021-00800-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cell Commun Signal ISSN: 1478-811X Impact factor: 5.712
Correlation between eIF6 and clinicopathologic characteristics in 184 OSCC cases
| Pathologic characteristics | n | Overexpression (number of cases) | Nonoverexpression (number of cases) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years | ||||
| ≥ 60 | 98 | 53 | 45 | 0.1951 |
| <60 | 86 | 46 | 40 | |
| Sex | ||||
| Male | 114 | 57 | 57 | 0.7918 |
| Female | 70 | 42 | 28 | |
| Smoking | ||||
| Yes | 76 | 42 | 34 | 0.2070 |
| No | 108 | 60 | 48 | |
| Drinking | ||||
| Yes | 90 | 49 | 41 | 0.2126 |
| No | 94 | 53 | 41 | |
| Location | ||||
| Palate | 10 | 4 | 6 | 0.7236 |
| Tongue | 63 | 33 | 30 | |
| Gingiva | 35 | 21 | 14 | |
| Buccal | 59 | 33 | 26 | |
| Mouth floor | 17 | 8 | 9 | |
| Tumor stage | ||||
| T1 | 83 | 35 | 48 | T1 vs T2 = 0.0123 |
| T2 | 74 | 46 | 28 | T1 vs T3–4 = 0.0013 |
| T3–T4 | 27 | 21 | 6 | |
| Lymph node status | ||||
| N0 | 99 | 39 | 60 | N0 vs N1 = 0.0187 |
| N1 | 39 | 24 | 15 | N0 vs N2–3 <0.0001 |
| N2–3 | 46 | 35 | 11 | |
| Clinical grade | ||||
| I | 49 | 20 | 29 | I vs II–III = 0.0005 |
| II–III | 67 | 49 | 18 | I vs IV <0.0001 |
| IV | 68 | 58 | 10 | |
| Pathological grade | ||||
| I | 107 | 58 | 49 | I vs II = 0.9052 |
| II | 58 | 32 | 26 | I vs III = 0.7406 |
| III | 18 | 9 | 9 |
The P values represent probabilities for eIF6 expression levels between variable subgroups determined by a χ2 test.
Fig. 1Cytoplasmic eIF6 is overexpressed in OSCC and is associated with poor prognosis. (A) Expression of eIF6 in HNSCC patients based on the TCGA database. (B) Pathological scores on eIF6 were assessed in tumor (T) and non-tumor (NT) tissues. (C) Low expression of nucleus eIF6 was associated with poor prognosis (n = 22, p < 0.005). (D) No prognostic difference was observed in the nucleus and cytoplasmic co-expression of EIF6 between the low- and high-expression group. (E) Representative IHC micrographs of tumor microarrays sections stained with eIF6. (a) non-tumor tissue; (b) tumor tissue with eIF6 nucleus staining; (c) tumor tissue with eIF6 nucleus and cytoplasmic co-expression; (d) The weak, (e) moderate and (f) strong level of eIF6 staining were demonstrated. (F) The expression of eIF6 in OSCC patients with different T stage, N stage, clinical stage and pathological stage. (G) The survival curve of cytoplasmic eIF6 expression on prognosis. (H) The expression level of eIF6 protein in six tumor and adjacent non-tumor OSCC tissues. Density analysis of eIF6 signal with β-actin as the internal control. (I) The eIF6 mRNA expression in eight tumor and adjacent non-tumor OSCC tissues. In OSCC, the protein or mRNA expression of eIF6 is significantly higher than that of non-tumor tissues. All error bar values represent the SD. Scale bar, 100 μm. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001
Fig. 2eIF6 enhances OSCC proliferation in vitro and in vivo. (A) Efficiency of eIF6 overexpression and knock-down was assessed by qRT-PCR and Western blotting analysis. (B) Colony formation assay in eIF6 over-expressed HN4 and HN6 cells. (C) Flow cytometry analysis in eIF6 over-expressed HN6 cells. (D) CCK8 assay of eIF6 overexpression was investigated. eIF6 greatly promoted cell proliferation. (E–F) eIF6 knockdown resulted in anti-proliferative effect in colony formation and flow cytometry analysis. (G) CCK-8 assays confirmed the anti-proliferative effect of eIF6 in OSCC cell lines. (H-I) eIF6 over-expression promoted tumor growth and depletion of eIF6 inhibited tumor progression in vivo. The tumors dissected from mice were presented. Tumor weight and tumor volume were demonstrated on the right respectively. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001
Fig. 3High expression of eIF6 can induce epithelial-mesenchymal transition, while knockdown of eIF6 reversed this process. (A) Transwell experiment was performed in HN4 and HN6 eIF6-transfected or NC-transfected cells (50 × magnification). eIF6 enhanced invasive capacity of OSCC cells. (B) The scratch assay was performed in HN4 and HN6 eIF6-transfected cells. (C) Transwell experiment was performed in HN4 and HN6 sh-eIF6-transfected or sh-NC-transfected cells (50 × magnification). (D) Wound healing experiment was demonstrated in sh-eIF6-transfected or sh-NC-transfected OSCC cells. (E) The relationship between high expression of eIF6 and EMT-related markers in HN4 and HN6 cells by western blot analysis. (F) Western blot analysis showed the effect of eIF6 knockdown on EMT in HN4 cells. All error bar values represent the SD. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001
Fig. 4eIF6 effect is related to the AKT signaling pathway. (A) mRNA changes in PIK3CA, PIK3CB, AKT and EGFR upon upregulation or downregulation of eIF6 in OSCC cells. (B) Western blot analysis of EGFR-AKT pathway-related markers after the increase of eIF6 in HN4 and HN6 cells. (C) Inhibition of eIF6 caused a visible reduction in p-EGFR, PI3K, and p-AKT protein expression. (D–F) LY294002 decreased the oncogenic phenotype of eIF6 by depressing proliferative (D), invasive (E) and migrative (F) ability. (G) Western blotting analysis in cells transfected with eIF6 or NC plasmids with or without the treatment of LY294002. All error bar values represent the SD. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001
Fig. 5eIF6 participates in the activation of AKT in the cytoplasm. (A) Confocal microscopy showed that eIF6 was mainly expressed in the cytoplasm upon eIF6 amplification compared with control. (eIF6, red; DAPI depicts nuclei, blue). (B,C) Increased immunostaining of AKT (B) and p-AKT (C) in the cytoplasm was shown upon ectopic expression of eIF6. (D) eIF6 augmentation resulted in the upregulation of cytoplasmic expression of eIF6, AKT and p-AKT, while nucleus expression of eIF6, AKT and p-AKT was reduced after transfection. (E) Cell-cycle related proteins were further analyzed in the subcellular fractions. All error bar values represent the SD. Scale bar, 20 μm. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001
Fig. 6eIF6 physically interacts with AKT. (A) Immunoprecipitation assay between endogenous eIF6 and AKT. (B) The protein levels of eIF6 and AKT were detected in cells treated with MG132 (10 μM). (C) The protein levels of eIF6 and AKT were detected in cells treated with CHX (20 μM). (D) Cells over-expressing eIF6 were treated with or without MG132, and the eIF6 and AKT protein levels were assessed by Western blotting. (E) CHX was utilized in cells transformed with eIF6 or NC plasmids, and the protein expression levels of eIF6 and AKT were displayed. (F) Co-IP experiment showed MG132 promoted the binding extent between eIF6 and AKT. The cells in eIF6 over-expression group were treated with or without MG132. Cell lysates were prepared and subjected to immunoprecipitation with anti-eIF6 antibody. The level of AKT was detected by western blotting analysis. (G) Graphical abstract demonstrated the regulation of eIF6/AKT axis in the cytoplasm