| Literature DB >> 35681505 |
Yan Li1, Ai Qi Lee1, Zhiyuan Lu1,2, Yuxi Sun1,3, Jeng-Wei Lu1, Ziheng Ren1, Na Zhang1,3, Dong Liu3, Zhiyuan Gong1.
Abstract
The crosstalk between tumors and their local microenvironment has been well studied, whereas the effect of tumors on distant tissues remains understudied. Studying how tumors affect other tissues is important for understanding the systemic effect of tumors and for improving the overall health of cancer patients. In this study, we focused on the changes in the intestine during liver tumor progression, using a previously established liver tumor model through inducible expression of the oncogene xmrk in zebrafish. Progressive disruption of intestinal structure was found in the tumor fish, displaying villus damage, thinning of bowel wall, increase in goblet cell number, decrease in goblet cell size and infiltration of eosinophils, most of which were observed phenotypes of an inflammatory intestine. Intestinal epithelial cell renewal was also disrupted, with decreased cell proliferation and increased cell death. Analysis of intestinal gene expression through RNA-seq suggested deregulation of genes related to intestinal function, epithelial barrier and homeostasis and activation of pathways in inflammation, epithelial mesenchymal transition, extracellular matrix organization, as well as hemostasis. Gene set enrichment analysis showed common gene signatures between the intestine of liver tumor fish and human inflammatory bowel disease, the association of which with cancer has been recently noticed. Overall, this study represented the first systematic characterization of the disruption of intestine under the liver tumor condition and suggested targeting intestinal inflammation as a potential approach for managing cancer cachexia.Entities:
Keywords: HCC; cancer cachexia; gut–liver axis; intestine; liver tumor; zebrafish
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35681505 PMCID: PMC9180660 DOI: 10.3390/cells11111810
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cells ISSN: 2073-4409 Impact factor: 7.666
Figure 1Disruption of intestine morphology after 6 weeks of HCC induction. (A) Representative H&E images showing the normal liver in wild-type (wt) fish and the HCC liver in xmrk fish. It was found that 100% of xmrk livers progressed into HCC after 6 weeks of doxycycline treatment. White arrows indicate example tumor cells with large irregular nuclei and prominent nucleoli. (B) Dissected intestine showing the folding of intestine into three segments (left panel). Intestine samples were sectioned transversely in order to view all three segments of the intestine concurrently on the same section. The yellow dashed line showed the approximate position of section. Representative H&E images taken at 50× magnification showing all three intestine segments and the surrounding liver and pancreas on the same section for wt and xmrk fish, respectively (middle and right panels). (C) Representative H&E images of the intestine taken at 200× magnification. All three segments in each wt and xmrk intestine sample were assigned a grade based on phenotype severity, with grade 1 being the least severe and grade 4 being the most severe. (D) Quantification of intestine grading percentage in wt vs. xmrk. Grade numbers are indicated in the legend according to examples in C. Scale bar in red 20 μm, black 200 μm. IB: Intestinal bulb; MI: Mid-intestine; CI: Caudal intestine. * p < 0.05.
Figure 2Characterization of intestine phenotype after 6 weeks of HCC induction through Alcian blue-periodic acid-Schiff (AB-PAS) stain. (A) Representative images of AB-PAS staining in all three intestine segments. Scale bar in red 50 μm. (B–E) Quantification of eosinophil counts (B), goblet cell counts (C), goblet cell size (D) and bowel wall thickness (E) in wt vs. xmrk intestine. Bowel wall was measured from the trough between two villi to the outer edge of the intestine (shown as a yellow line in the top left representative image). Black arrowheads indicate fuchsia-colored eosinophils, and white arrowheads indicate bluish-purple goblet cells. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, **** p < 0.0001.
Figure 3Cell proliferation and cell death in the intestine after 6 weeks of HCC induction. (A) Representative images of immunofluorescent staining for PCNA in the three intestine segments. (B) Quantification of cell proliferation in the intestine. Percentage of PCNA+ cell counts compared to DAPI+ cell counts is presented. (C) Representative images of TUNEL staining, classified into four different patterns. (D) Quantification of cell death pattern in the intestine based on frequency. Scale bar in red 50 μm. IB: intestinal bulb; MI: mid-intestine; CI: caudal intestine. * p < 0.05, **** p < 0.0001.
Figure 4Progressive disruption of intestine structure upon HCC induction. (A–H) Quantification of intestinal severity grading (A), eosinophil counts (B), goblet cell counts (C), goblet cell size (D), bowel wall thickness (E), cell proliferation (F), cell death (G) and cell death pattern (H) in 4-week HCC (xmrk 4 wpi) vs. 6-week HCC (xmrk 6 wpi). wpi: weeks post-oncogene induction; IB: intestinal bulb; MI: mid-intestine; CI: caudal intestine. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, **** p < 0.0001.
Figure 5Overview of RNA─seq data. (A) Principal component analysis (PCA) plot of wt and xmrk intestine datasets. (B) Hierarchical clustering of wt and xmrk intestine datasets and heatmap using differentially expressed genes (DEGs) with average TPM > 10. Values were row scaled using z─scores to show relative expression. Blue and red indicated low and high expression, respectively.
Significantly enriched and deregulated Reactome pathways from GSEA analysis.
| Category | Pathway Name | NES | FDR |
|---|---|---|---|
| Extracellular Matrix Organization | EXTRACELLULAR_MATRIX_ORGANIZATION | 2.78 | 0 |
| ECM_PROTEOGLYCANS | 2.62 | 0 | |
| ELASTIC_FIBRE_FORMATION | 2.54 | 1.94 × 10–4 | |
| MOLECULES_ASSOCIATED_WITH_ELASTIC_FIBRES | 2.39 | 4.60 × 10–4 | |
| COLLAGEN_FORMATION | 1.92 | 3.33 × 10–2 | |
| ASSEMBLY_OF_COLLAGEN_FIBRILS_AND_OTHER_MULTIMERIC_STRUCTURES | 2.02 | 2.12 × 10–2 | |
| NON_INTEGRIN_MEMBRANE_ECM_INTERACTIONS | 2.46 | 2.33 × 10–4 | |
| SYNDECAN_INTERACTIONS | 2.01 | 2.21 × 10–2 | |
| ACTIVATION_OF_MATRIX_METALLOPROTEINASES | 2.43 | 2.04 × 10–4 | |
| DEGRADATION_OF_THE_EXTRACELLULAR_MATRIX | 2.37 | 5.83 × 10–4 | |
| LAMININ_INTERACTIONS | 2.29 | 1.59 × 10–3 | |
| INTEGRIN_CELL_SURFACE_INTERACTIONS | 2.28 | 1.78 × 10–3 | |
| Hemostasis | PLATELET_AGGREGATION_PLUG_FORMATION | 2.53 | 1.55 × 10–4 |
| RESPONSE_TO_ELEVATED_PLATELET_CYTOSOLIC_CA2 | 1.98 | 2.53 × 10–2 | |
| CELL_SURFACE_INTERACTIONS_AT_THE_VASCULAR_WALL | 1.96 | 2.91 × 10–2 | |
| FORMATION_OF_FIBRIN_CLOT_CLOTTING_CASCADE | 1.92 | 3.41 × 10–2 | |
| Cell Cycle | CELL_CYCLE_CHECKPOINTS | –1.98 | 1.11 × 10–3 |
| STABILIZATION_OF_P53 | –2.42 | 0 | |
| G1_S_DNA_DAMAGE_CHECKPOINTS | –2.38 | 0 | |
| G2_M_CHECKPOINTS | –2.30 | 4.83 × 10–5 | |
| CELL_CYCLE_MITOTIC | –1.90 | 3.43 × 10–3 | |
| MITOTIC_G1_PHASE_AND_G1_S_TRANSITION | –2.31 | 5.31 × 10–5 | |
| S_PHASE | –2.28 | 4.25 × 10–5 | |
| MITOTIC_G2_G2_M_PHASES | –1.83 | 6.75 × 10–3 | |
| M_PHASE | –1.73 | 1.83 × 10–2 | |
| MITOTIC_METAPHASE_AND_ANAPHASE | –1.76 | 1.42 × 10–2 | |
| CHROMOSOME_MAINTENANCE | –1.96 | 1.32 × 10–3 | |
| TELOMERE_MAINTENANCE | –1.91 | 2.70 × 10–3 | |
| DNA Replication | DNA_REPLICATION | –2.33 | 5.90 × 10–5 |
| DNA_REPLICATION_PRE_INITIATION | –2.39 | 0 | |
| SYNTHESIS_OF_DNA | –2.37 | 0 | |
| DNA_STRAND_ELONGATION | –2.20 | 3.03 × 10–5 | |
| SWITCHING_OF_ORIGINS_TO_A_POST_REPLICATIVE_STATE | –2.11 | 1.94 × 10–4 | |
| DNA Repair | DNA_REPAIR | –1.69 | 2.78 × 10–2 |
| TRANSCRIPTION_COUPLED_NUCLEOTIDE_EXCISION_REPAIR_TC_NER | –1.67 | 3.13 × 10–2 | |
| BASE_EXCISION_REPAIR | –1.80 | 9.68 × 10–3 | |
| DNA_DOUBLE_STRAND_BREAK_REPAIR | –1.77 | 1.30 × 10–2 | |
| HOMOLOGY_DIRECTED_REPAIR | –1.74 | 1.63 × 10–2 | |
| DNA_DAMAGE_BYPASS | –1.80 | 9.04 × 10–3 | |
| Transcription | RNA_POLYMERASE_II_TRANSCRIPTION_TERMINATION | –1.74 | 1.64 × 10–2 |
| REGULATION_OF_RUNX2_EXPRESSION_AND_ACTIVITY | –2.18 | 2.79 × 10–5 | |
| REGULATION_OF_RUNX3_EXPRESSION_AND_ACTIVITY | –2.30 | 5.06 × 10–5 | |
| RUNX1_REGULATES_TRANSCRIPTION_OF_GENES_INVOLVED_IN_DIFFERENTIATION_OF_HSCS | –2.04 | 5.20 × 10–4 | |
| TP53_REGULATES_TRANSCRIPTION_OF_CELL_DEATH_GENES | –1.76 | 1.48 × 10–2 | |
| GENE_SILENCING_BY_RNA | –1.66 | 3.18 × 10–2 | |
| Metabolism of RNA | REGULATION_OF_MRNA_STABILITY_BY_PROTEINS_THAT_BIND_AU_RICH_ELEMENTS | –2.10 | 2.31 × 10–4 |
| PROCESSING_OF_CAPPED_INTRON_CONTAINING_PRE_MRNA | –1.97 | 1.27 × 10–3 | |
| MRNA_SPLICING | –1.93 | 2.04 × 10–3 | |
| TRANSPORT_OF_MATURE_TRANSCRIPT_TO_CYTOPLASM | –1.83 | 6.69 × 10–3 | |
| SNRNP_ASSEMBLY | –1.67 | 3.01 × 10–2 | |
| Metabolism of Proteins | TRANSLATION | –1.84 | 6.77 × 10–3 |
| MITOCHONDRIAL_TRANSLATION | –2.41 | 0 | |
| DEUBIQUITINATION | –1.83 | 6.67 × 10–3 | |
| NEDDYLATION | –1.75 | 1.64 × 10–2 | |
| ASPARAGINE_N_LINKED_GLYCOSYLATION | –1.61 | 4.66 × 10–2 | |
| Immune System | COMPLEMENT_CASCADE | 1.96 | 2.87 × 10–2 |
| INITIAL_TRIGGERING_OF_COMPLEMENT | 2.02 | 2.15 × 10–2 | |
| TNFR2_NON_CANONICAL_NF_KB_PATHWAY | –2.29 | 4.42 × 10–5 | |
| INTERLEUKIN_1_SIGNALING | –2.22 | 3.32 × 10–5 | |
| INTERLEUKIN_12_FAMILY_SIGNALING | –1.72 | 2.10 × 10–2 | |
| C_TYPE_LECTIN_RECEPTORS_CLRS | –2.08 | 2.55 × 10–4 | |
| FC_EPSILON_RECEPTOR_FCERI_SIGNALING | –2.12 | 1.98 × 10–4 | |
| DDX58_IFIH1_MEDIATED_INDUCTION_OF_INTERFERON_ALPHA_BETA | –1.67 | 3.15 × 10–2 | |
| ROS_AND_RNS_PRODUCTION_IN_PHAGOCYTES | –1.66 | 3.30 × 10–2 | |
| SIGNALING_BY_THE_B_CELL_RECEPTOR_BCR | –2.23 | 3.43 × 10–5 | |
| CLASS_I_MHC_MEDIATED_ANTIGEN_PROCESSING_PRESENTATION | –1.66 | 3.31 × 10–2 | |
| Metabolism | CHOLESTEROL_BIOSYNTHESIS | 2.56 | 2.59 × 10–4 |
| BIOLOGICAL_OXIDATIONS | 1.90 | 3.71 × 10–2 | |
| METABOLISM_OF_POLYAMINES | –2.28 | 4.08 × 10–5 | |
| METABOLISM_OF_COFACTORS | –1.84 | 6.70 × 10–3 | |
| THE_CITRIC_ACID_TCA_CYCLE_AND_RESPIRATORY_ELECTRON_TRANSPORT | –1.72 | 2.12 × 10–2 | |
| RESPIRATORY_ELECTRON_TRANSPORT | –1.95 | 1.75 × 10–3 | |
| COMPLEX_I_BIOGENESIS | –1.78 | 1.15 × 10–2 | |
| CITRIC_ACID_CYCLE_TCA_CYCLE | –1.62 | 4.30 × 10–2 | |
| Protein Localization, Transport of Small Molecules | PROTEIN_LOCALIZATION | –1.81 | 8.57 × 10–3 |
| MITOCHONDRIAL_PROTEIN_IMPORT | –2.08 | 2.64 × 10–4 | |
| ABC_FAMILY_PROTEINS_MEDIATED_TRANSPORT | –2.12 | 2.02 × 10–4 | |
| PLASMA_LIPOPROTEIN_CLEARANCE | –1.63 | 4.09 × 10–2 | |
| Cellular Responses to Stimuli | CELLULAR_RESPONSE_TO_HYPOXIA | –2.48 | 0 |
| HSP90_CHAPERONE_CYCLE_FOR_STEROID_HORMONE_RECEPTORS_SHR_IN_THE_PRESENCE_OF_LIGAND | –1.86 | 4.85 × 10–3 | |
| CELLULAR_RESPONSE_TO_CHEMICAL_STRESS | –1.83 | 7.10 × 10–3 | |
| HSF1_ACTIVATION | –1.68 | 2.93 × 10–2 | |
| ATTENUATION_PHASE | –1.60 | 4.95 × 10–2 | |
| Signal Transduction | GPCR_LIGAND_BINDING | 2.35 | 8.28 × 10–4 |
| CLASS_A_1_RHODOPSIN_LIKE_RECEPTORS | 2.48 | 2.72 × 10–4 | |
| PEPTIDE_LIGAND_BINDING_RECEPTORS | 2.28 | 1.80 × 10–3 | |
| MET_PROMOTES_CELL_MOTILITY | 2.26 | 2.11 × 10–3 | |
| INTEGRIN_SIGNALING | 2.25 | 2.18 × 10–3 | |
| DEGRADATION_OF_AXIN | –2.40 | 0 | |
| BETA_CATENIN_INDEPENDENT_WNT_SIGNALING | –2.03 | 5.47 × 10–4 | |
| DEGRADATION_OF_BETA_CATENIN_BY_THE_DESTRUCTION_COMPLEX | –2.16 | 1.08 × 10–4 | |
| DEGRADATION_OF_DVL | –2.39 | 0 | |
| SIGNALING_BY_HEDGEHOG | –1.91 | 2.82 × 10–3 | |
| HEDGEHOG_LIGAND_BIOGENESIS | –2.39 | 0 | |
| SIGNALING_BY_NOTCH4 | –2.07 | 3.58 × 10–4 | |
| MAPK6_MAPK4_SIGNALING | –2.14 | 1.29 × 10–4 | |
| REGULATION_OF_RAS_BY_GAPS | –2.27 | 3.79 × 10–5 | |
| REGULATION_OF_PTEN_STABILITY_AND_ACTIVITY | –2.22 | 3.22 × 10–5 |
Figure 6Gene set enrichment analysis of hallmark gene sets epithelial mesenchymal transition and inflammatory response. (A) GSEA summary plot of epithelial mesenchymal transition gene set comparing xmrk intestine to wt intestine. The gene set was highly enriched and upregulated: normalized enrichment score (NES) = 2.80, FDR q─value < 0.0001. (B) Heatmap of leading edge subset genes within the epithelial mesenchymal transition gene set (red: high expression; blue: low expression). (C) GSEA summary plot of inflammatory response gene set comparing xmrk intestine to wt intestine. The gene set was enriched and upregulated: NES = 1.63, FDR q─value = 0.0464. (D) Heatmap of leading edge subset genes within the inflammatory response gene set (red: high expression; blue: low expression).
GSEA identification of similar gene signatures between xmrk fish intestine and human intestinal disease datasets.
| GEO/TCGA Acession | Human Intestine Dataset | Enriched Genes in | |
|---|---|---|---|
| NES | FDR | ||
| GSE165512 | Ulcerative colitis, colon | 2.2856 | <0.001 |
| GSE165512 | Crohn’s disease, colon | 2.2315 | <0.001 |
| GSE165512 | Crohn’s disease, ileum | 0.6574 | 0.644 |
| TCGA-COAD | Colon adenocarcinoma | –1.4089 | <0.001 |
Figure 7Differential expression profiles of genes related to neutrophils and intestine function. (A–D) Heatmap showing expression profile of neutrophil─related genes (A), digestion─ and absorption─related genes (B), intestinal epithelial barrier─related genes (C) and intestinal homeostasis─related genes (D). Heatmaps were generated with log─transformed TPM values, which were row scaled using z─scores, using the Heatmap module (v0.2.4) on the Hiplot platform (https://hiplot.com.cn, accessed on 4 April 2022).