Ten-Eleven Translocation 1 Promotes Malignant Progression of Cholangiocarcinoma With Wild-Type Isocitrate Dehydrogenase 1.
Aged
Bile Duct Neoplasms
/ diagnosis
Blotting, Western
Cholangiocarcinoma
/ diagnosis
Disease Progression
Female
Humans
Isocitrate Dehydrogenase
/ genetics
Male
Middle Aged
Mixed Function Oxygenases
/ genetics
Prognosis
Proto-Oncogene Proteins
/ genetics
Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction
Translocation, Genetic
/ genetics
Up-Regulation
Journal
Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.)
ISSN: 1527-3350
Titre abrégé: Hepatology
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8302946
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2021
05 2021
Historique:
revised:
20
06
2020
received:
05
02
2020
accepted:
22
06
2020
pubmed:
3
8
2020
medline:
6
1
2022
entrez:
3
8
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a highly lethal disease without effective therapeutic approaches. The whole-genome sequencing data indicate that about 20% of patients with CCA have isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutations, which have been suggested to target 2-oxoglutarate (OG)-dependent dioxygenases in promoting CCA carcinogenesis. However, the clinical study indicates that patients with CCA and mutant IDH1 have better prognosis than those with wild-type IDH1, further complicating the roles of 2-OG-dependent enzymes. This study aimed to clarify if ten-eleven translocation 1 (TET1), which is one of the 2-OG-dependent enzymes functioning in regulating 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5hmC) formation, is involved in CCA progression. By analyzing The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data set, TET1 mRNA was found to be substantially up-regulated in patients with CCA when compared with noncancerous bile ducts. Additionally, TET1 protein expression was significantly elevated in human CCA tumors. CCA cells were challenged with α-ketoglutarate (α-KG) and dimethyl-α-KG (DM-α-KG), which are cosubstrates for TET1 dioxygenase. The treatments with α-KG and DM-α-KG promoted 5hmC formation and malignancy of CCA cells. Molecular and pharmacological approaches were used to inhibit TET1 activity, and these treatments substantially suppressed 5hmC and CCA carcinogenesis. Mechanistically, it was found that knockdown of TET1 may suppress CCA progression by targeting cell growth and apoptosis through epigenetic regulation. Consistently, targeting TET1 significantly inhibited CCA malignant progression in a liver orthotopic xenograft model by targeting cell growth and apoptosis. Our data suggest that expression of TET1 is highly associated with CCA carcinogenesis. It will be important to evaluate TET1 expression in CCA tumors before application of the IDH1 mutation inhibitor because the inhibitor suppresses 2-hydroxyglutarate expression, which may result in activation of TET, potentially leading to CCA malignancy.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a highly lethal disease without effective therapeutic approaches. The whole-genome sequencing data indicate that about 20% of patients with CCA have isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutations, which have been suggested to target 2-oxoglutarate (OG)-dependent dioxygenases in promoting CCA carcinogenesis. However, the clinical study indicates that patients with CCA and mutant IDH1 have better prognosis than those with wild-type IDH1, further complicating the roles of 2-OG-dependent enzymes.
APPROACH AND RESULTS
This study aimed to clarify if ten-eleven translocation 1 (TET1), which is one of the 2-OG-dependent enzymes functioning in regulating 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5hmC) formation, is involved in CCA progression. By analyzing The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data set, TET1 mRNA was found to be substantially up-regulated in patients with CCA when compared with noncancerous bile ducts. Additionally, TET1 protein expression was significantly elevated in human CCA tumors. CCA cells were challenged with α-ketoglutarate (α-KG) and dimethyl-α-KG (DM-α-KG), which are cosubstrates for TET1 dioxygenase. The treatments with α-KG and DM-α-KG promoted 5hmC formation and malignancy of CCA cells. Molecular and pharmacological approaches were used to inhibit TET1 activity, and these treatments substantially suppressed 5hmC and CCA carcinogenesis. Mechanistically, it was found that knockdown of TET1 may suppress CCA progression by targeting cell growth and apoptosis through epigenetic regulation. Consistently, targeting TET1 significantly inhibited CCA malignant progression in a liver orthotopic xenograft model by targeting cell growth and apoptosis.
CONCLUSIONS
Our data suggest that expression of TET1 is highly associated with CCA carcinogenesis. It will be important to evaluate TET1 expression in CCA tumors before application of the IDH1 mutation inhibitor because the inhibitor suppresses 2-hydroxyglutarate expression, which may result in activation of TET, potentially leading to CCA malignancy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32740973
doi: 10.1002/hep.31486
pmc: PMC7855500
mid: NIHMS1628027
doi:
Substances chimiques
Proto-Oncogene Proteins
0
Mixed Function Oxygenases
EC 1.-
TET1 protein, human
EC 1.-
Isocitrate Dehydrogenase
EC 1.1.1.41
IDH1 protein, human
EC 1.1.1.42.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1747-1763Subventions
Organisme : NIGMS NIH HHS
ID : P20 GM109035
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2021 by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.
Références
Cell Rep. 2018 Oct 23;25(4):1018-1026.e4
pubmed: 30355481
Oncogene. 2018 Apr;37(15):1949-1960
pubmed: 29367755
Nature. 2011 May 19;473(7347):389-93
pubmed: 21451524
Nature. 2013 Oct 24;502(7472):472-9
pubmed: 24153300
Cancer Res. 2017 Apr 1;77(7):1709-1718
pubmed: 28202508
Cell Death Differ. 2006 Aug;13(8):1351-9
pubmed: 16763616
Hepatology. 2015 Aug;62(2):466-80
pubmed: 25820676
Cancer Cell. 2016 Aug 8;30(2):337-348
pubmed: 27424808
Ann Neurol. 2011 Mar;69(3):455-63
pubmed: 21446021
N Engl J Med. 2009 Feb 19;360(8):765-73
pubmed: 19228619
PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e41036
pubmed: 22829908
Nat Genet. 2013 Dec;45(12):1474-8
pubmed: 24185513
Lancet. 2014 Jun 21;383(9935):2168-79
pubmed: 24581682
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Jan 28;111(4):1361-6
pubmed: 24474761
Cancer Discov. 2013 Jul;3(7):730-41
pubmed: 23796461
Nature. 2012 Feb 15;483(7390):484-8
pubmed: 22343896
Nat Genet. 2013 Dec;45(12):1470-1473
pubmed: 24185509
Cancer Res. 2016 May 15;76(10):3097-108
pubmed: 27197233
N Engl J Med. 2012 Mar 22;366(12):1079-89
pubmed: 22417203
Nature. 2009 Dec 10;462(7274):739-44
pubmed: 19935646
Nat Immunol. 2015 Jun;16(6):653-62
pubmed: 25867473
Science. 2013 May 3;340(6132):626-30
pubmed: 23558169
Nat Commun. 2015 Nov 26;6:10071
pubmed: 26607761
Cancer Res. 2018 Aug 1;78(15):4126-4137
pubmed: 29891505
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Jul 16;110(29):11994-9
pubmed: 23818607
Nat Commun. 2017 Dec 13;8(1):2099
pubmed: 29235481
Hepatology. 2014 Feb;59(2):544-54
pubmed: 24002901
Cancer Cell. 2011 Jul 12;20(1):11-24
pubmed: 21723200
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Oct 25;102(43):15545-50
pubmed: 16199517
Oncogene. 2013 Jun 20;32(25):3091-100
pubmed: 22824796
Hepatology. 2013 Apr;57(4):1550-63
pubmed: 23150236
JAMA Neurol. 2014 Oct;71(10):1319-25
pubmed: 25155243
Hepatology. 2015 Aug;62(2):496-504
pubmed: 25833413
Cancer Lett. 2018 Aug 10;429:1-10
pubmed: 29733964
Nature. 2012 Feb 15;483(7390):479-83
pubmed: 22343889
Cancer Cell. 2011 Jan 18;19(1):17-30
pubmed: 21251613
FASEB J. 2019 Feb;33(2):1824-1835
pubmed: 30188753
Nature. 2014 Sep 4;513(7516):110-4
pubmed: 25043045
Cell Rep. 2014 Dec 11;9(5):1827-1840
pubmed: 25466250
Science. 2013 May 3;340(6132):622-6
pubmed: 23558173
Cell Stem Cell. 2014 Oct 2;15(4):459-471
pubmed: 25280220
Cell Rep. 2014 Oct 9;9(1):48-60
pubmed: 25284789