| Literature DB >> 35847440 |
Nobuhiro Nakazawa1, Makoto Sohda1, Takehiko Yokobori2, Navchaa Gombodorj2, Akihiko Sano1, Makoto Sakai1, Tetsunari Oyama3, Hiroyuki Kuwano1, Ken Shirabe1, Hiroshi Saeki1.
Abstract
Background: Connexin is a basic molecule that forms gap junctions and undergoes localization changes to the cytoplasm in association with carcinogenesis. We aimed to investigate and clarify the significance of cytoplasmic Cx26 expression in gastric cancer.Entities:
Keywords: connexin 26; gap junctions; second messengers; β‐catenin
Year: 2022 PMID: 35847440 PMCID: PMC9271025 DOI: 10.1002/ags3.12552
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Gastroenterol Surg ISSN: 2475-0328
FIGURE 1Representative images of immunohistochemical staining of Cx26, β‐catenin, and Wnt3a in gastric cancer. 200‐fold magnification. A: Cx26 expression in noncancerous regions; B: low cytoplasmic Cx26 expression in cancerous regions; C: high cytoplasmic Cx26 expression in cancerous regions; D: low nuclear β‐catenin expression in cancerous regions; E: high nuclear β‐catenin expression in cancerous regions; F: low nuclear Wnt3a expression in cancerous regions; G: high Wnt3a expression in cancerous regions
Evaluation of cytoplasmic Cx26 expression and clinicopathological factors in both intestinal‐ and mix‐type and diffuse type gastric cancer
| Lauren classification | Intestinal and mix type | Diffuse type | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Factors | Cx26 | Cx26 | ||||
| Low expression | High expression |
| Low expression | High expression |
| |
| n = 50 | n = 37 | n = 75 | n = 36 | |||
| Age | ||||||
| Years | 67 | 66 | .72 | 62 | 64 | .64 |
| Gender | ||||||
| Male | 41 | 27 | .32 | 47 | 23 | .90 |
| Female | 9 | 10 | 28 | 13 | ||
| Tumor size | ||||||
| mm | 58.3 ± 3.8 | 55.6 ± 4.4 | .64 | 72.6 ± 4.6 | 65.8 ± 6.6 | .40 |
| Depth | ||||||
| M,SM,MP | 13 | 15 | .15 | 14 | 8 | .66 |
| SS,SE,SI | 37 | 22 | 61 | 28 | ||
| Differentiation | ||||||
| tub1,tub2,pap | 39 | 35 | .41 | 0 | 1 | .13 |
| por,sig | 9 | 2 | 75 | 35 | ||
| Lymph node metastasis | ||||||
| Absent | 17 | 14 | .71 | 21 | 11 | .78 |
| Present | 33 | 23 | 54 | 25 | ||
| Lymphatic invasion | ||||||
| Absent | 7 | 4 | .66 | 5 | 3 | .75 |
| Present | 43 | 33 | 70 | 33 | ||
| Venous invasion | ||||||
| Absent | 35 | 26 | .98 | 56 | 27 | .78 |
| Present | 15 | 11 | 19 | 8 | ||
| Stage | ||||||
| I,II | 27 | 24 | .31 | 29 | 16 | .56 |
| III,IV | 23 | 13 | 46 | 20 | ||
| Postoperative chemotherapy | ||||||
| Absent | 32 | 21 | .49 | 41 | 19 | .85 |
| Present | 18 | 16 | 34 | 17 | ||
| HER2 score | ||||||
| 0 | 34 | 20 | .16 | 65 | 22 | .07 |
| 1,2,3 | 12 | 14 | 4 | 5 | ||
| Recurrence | ||||||
| Absent | 28 | 30 | .017* | 40 | 23 | .20 |
| Present | 17 | 5 | 33 | 11 | ||
| βcatenin (nuclear) | ||||||
| Negative | 34 | 33 | .035* | 51 | 27 | .45 |
| Positive | 14 | 4 | 24 | 9 | ||
| Wnt3a | ||||||
| Low expression | 30 | 10 | .0020* | 36 | 5 | .0003* |
| High expression | 20 | 27 | 39 | 31 | ||
* P < .05.
FIGURE 2Kaplan–Meier analysis of 5‐y overall survival. (A) Prognosis based on cytoplasmic Cx26 expression in intestinal and mix‐type gastric cancer. (B) Prognosis based on cytoplasmic Cx26 expression in diffuse type gastric cancer. (C) Prognosis based on cytoplasmic Cx26 expression when Wnt3a expression is low. (D) Prognosis based on cytoplasmic Cx26 expression when Wnt3a expression is high
Univariate/multivariate analyses of overall survival in intestinal‐ and mix‐type gastric cancer
| Clinicopathological variables | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RR | 95% Cl |
| RR | 95% Cl |
| |
| Age (<65 vs ≧65) | 1.48 | 0.75–3.14 | .27 | |||
| Gender (male vs female) | 1.64 | 0.73–4.36 | .25 | |||
| Depth (M,SM,MP vs SS,SE,SI) | 3.43 | 1.53–9.14 | .0019* | 2.07 | 0.87–5.73 | .10 |
| Lymph node metastasis (absent vs present) | 3.92 | 1.75–10.5 | .0005* | 3.08 | 1.28–8.80 | .011* |
| Vascular invasion (absent vs present) | 2.15 | 1.09–4.15 | .029* | 1.26 | 0.60–2.61 | .54 |
| Cx26 expression (high vs low) | 2.09 | 1.05–4.42 | .035* | 2.08 | 1.04–4.44 | .037* |
Abbreviations: Cl, confidence interval; RR, relative risk.
* P < .05.
FIGURE 3Investigation of the relationship between cytoplasmic Cx26 and β‐catenin (A,B) and PLA results for MKN7/MKN45. Red dots represent the binding of Cx26 to β‐catenin. (C) Co‐immunoprecipitation results for MKN7/MKN45/MKN74
FIGURE 4Changes in cell proliferation capacity upon forced expression of Cx26. (A) MKN7 (B) MKN74, cytoplasmic Cx26, and nuclear β‐catenin expressions examined by western blotting. (A) MKN7 (B) MKN74
FIGURE 5Cage analysis: changes in downstream genes and signaling pathways when expression of Cx26 is forced in the MKN74 cell line (A) Enrichment analysis. Changes in Wnt/β‐catenin downstream genes (B) KEGG pathway analysis focusing on the Wnt/β‐catenin pathway. *Reduced expression when Cx26 is highly expressed