Research Article

Department of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science & Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, China

Department of Urology, First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Shihezi University, Shihezi, Xinjiang, 832008, China

Search for more papers by this author

Ji-Hong Liu

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9711-2428

Department of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science & Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430030, China

Search for more papers by this author

Qin-Zhang Wang

*Author for correspondence:

E-mail Address: wqz1969@sina.com.cn

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7202-3282

Department of Urology, First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Shihezi University, Shihezi, Xinjiang, 832008, China

Search for more papers by this author

Published Online:18 Dec 2020https://doi.org/10.2217/bmm-2020-0095

View article

Abstract

Aim: To study the expression patterns and prognostic value of the m⁶A-associated regulators in prostate adenocarcinoma (PRAD). Materials & methods: The mRNA expression and clinical data were downloaded from ‘The Cancer Genome Atlas database’. The m⁶A-associated variants were downloaded from m⁶AVar database, and combined with 14 common m⁶A regulators for subsequent analysis. One-way analysis of variance, univariate Cox regression analysis and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator algorithm were successively applied to obtain the ultimate regulators and prognostic model. Finally, consensus clustering, protein–protein interaction (PPI) and enrichment analysis were performed. Result: Nine regulators were obtained. PRAD patients could be classified into two risk groups and subclasses with significant survival differences by the prognostic model and consensus clustering, respectively. Conclusion: All these nine regulators were related to prognosis in PRAD, and could be used as clinical biomarkers.

Keywords:

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest

References

1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global Cancer Statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J. Clin. 68(6), 394–424 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
2. Nebbioso A, Tambaro FP, Dell'aversana C, Altucci L. Cancer epigenetics: moving forward. PLoS Genet. 14(6), e1007362 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
3. Pan Y, Ma P, Liu Y, Li W, Shu Y. Multiple functions of m(6)A RNA methylation in cancer. J. Hematol. Oncol. 11(1), 48 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
4. Wu Y, Sarkissyan M, Vadgama JV. Epigenetics in breast and prostate cancer. Methods Mol. Biol. 1238, 425–466 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
5. Zhao L, Duan YT, Lu P et al. Epigenetic targets and their inhibitors in cancer therapy. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 18(28), 2395–2419 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
6. Morena F, Argentati C, Bazzucchi M, Emiliani C, Martino S. Above the epitranscriptome: RNA modifications and stem cell identity. Genes (Basel) 9(7), 329 (2018).
Google Scholar
7. Dai D, Wang H, Zhu L, Jin H, Wang X. N⁶-methyladenosine links RNA metabolism to cancer progression. Cell Death Dis. 9(2), 124 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
8. Batista PJ. The RNA modification N(⁶)-methyladenosine and its implications in human disease. Genomics Proteomics Bioinformatics 15(3), 154–163 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
9. Meyer KD, Saletore Y, Zumbo P, Elemento O, Mason CE, Jaffrey SR. Comprehensive analysis of mRNA methylation reveals enrichment in 3′ UTRs and near stop codons. Cell 149(7), 1635–1646 (2012).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
10. Chai RC, Wu F, Wang QX et al. m(⁶)A RNA methylation regulators contribute to malignant progression and have clinical prognostic impact in gliomas. Aging (Albany NY) 11(4), 1204–1225 (2019). • Evaluates the relationship between m6A RNA methylation regulators and malignant progression clinical prognostic impact in gliomas.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
11. Lin S, Choe J, Du P, Triboulet R, Gregory RI. The m(⁶)A methyltransferase METTL3 promotes translation in human cancer cells. Mol. Cell 62(3), 335–345 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
12. Zhang C, Samanta D, Lu H et al. Hypoxia induces the breast cancer stem cell phenotype by HIF-dependent and ALKBH5-mediated m(⁶)A-demethylation of NANOG mRNA. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci USA 113(14), E2047–2056 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
13. Mounir M, Lucchetta M, Silva TC et al. New functionalities in the TCGAbiolinks package for the study and integration of cancer data from GDC and GTEx. PLoS Comput. Biol. 15(3), e1006701 (2019). • This package can able to access The National Cancer Institute (NCI) Genomic Data Commons (GDC) thorough its GDC Application Programming Interface (API) to search, download and prepare relevant data for analysis in R, including the ‘The Cancer Genome Atlas’ and ‘Genotype-Tissue Expression’ database.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
14. Zheng Y, Nie P, Peng D et al. m⁶AVar: a database of functional variants involved in m⁶A modification. Nucleic Acids Res. 46(D1), D139–D145 (2018). • The m6AVar database is specifically designed to collect functional variants that can significantly alter the status of m6A, including the m6A-associated cancer somatic mutations.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
15. Friedman J, Hastie T, Tibshirani R. Regularization paths for generalized linear models via coordinate descent. J. Stat. Softw. 33(1), 1–22 (2010). • This package fits least absolute shrinkage and selection operator and elastic-net model paths for regression, logistic and multinomial regression using coordinate descent.
MedlineGoogle Scholar
16. Uhlen M, Fagerberg L, Hallstrom BM et al. Proteomics. tissue-based map of the human proteome. Science 347(6220), 1260419 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
17. Wilkerson MD, Hayes DN. ConsensusClusterPlus: a class discovery tool with confidence assessments and item tracking. Bioinformatics 26(12), 1572–1573 (2010). • This package provides an algorithm for determining cluster count and membership by stability evidence in unsupervised analysis.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
18. Szklarczyk D, Gable AL, Lyon D et al. STRING v11: protein–protein association networks with increased coverage, supporting functional discovery in genome-wide experimental datasets. Nucleic Acids Res. 47(D1), D607–D613 (2019). • This package provides an algorithm for determining cluster count and membership by stability evidence in unsupervised analysis.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
19. Robinson MD, Mccarthy DJ, Smyth GK. edgeR: a bioconductor package for differential expression analysis of digital gene expression data. Bioinformatics 26(1), 139–140 (2010).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
20. Yu G, Wang LG, Han Y, He QY. clusterProfiler: an R package for comparing biological themes among gene clusters. OMICS 16(5), 284–287 (2012). • This R package implements methods to analyze and visualize functional profiles of gene and gene clusters.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
21. Roundtree IA, Evans ME, Pan T, He C. Dynamic RNA modifications in gene expression regulation. Cell 169(7), 1187–1200 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
22. Deng X, Su R, Feng X, Wei M, Chen J. Role of N(⁶)-methyladenosine modification in cancer. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 48, 1–7 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
23. Meyer KD, Jaffrey SR. The dynamic epitranscriptome: n⁶-methyladenosine and gene expression control. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 15(5), 313–326 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
24. Alarcón CR, Goodarzi H, Lee H, Liu X, Tavazoie S, Tavazoie SF. HNRNPA2B1 is a mediator of m(⁶)A-dependent nuclear RNA processing events. Cell 162(6), 1299–1308 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
25. Chen T, Hao Y-J, Zhang Y et al. m(⁶)A RNA methylation is regulated by microRNAs and promotes reprogramming to pluripotency. Cell Stem Cell 16(3), 289–301 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
26. Huarte M. The emerging role of lncRNAs in cancer. Nat. Med. 21(11), 1253–1261 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
27. Hayes J, Peruzzi PP, Lawler S. MicroRNAs in cancer: biomarkers, functions and therapy. Trends Mol. Med. 20(8), 460–469 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
28. Meng Y, Li S, Gu D et al. Genetic variants in m⁶A modification genes are associated with colorectal cancer risk. Carcinogenesis 41(1), 8–17 (2020). • Evaluates the relationship between genetic variants in m6A modification and predictors risk in colorectal cancer.
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
29. Li E, Wei B, Wang X, Kang R. METTL3 enhances cell adhesion through stabilizing integrin β1 mRNA via an m⁶A-HuR-dependent mechanism in prostatic carcinoma. Am. J. Cancer Res. 10(3), 1012–1025 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
30. Yuan Y, Du Y, Wang L, Liu X. The M⁶A methyltransferase METTL3 promotes the development and progression of prostate carcinoma via mediating MYC methylation. J. Cancer 11(12), 3588–3595 (2020).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
31. Ma X-X, Cao Z-G, Zhao S-L. m⁶A methyltransferase METTL3 promotes the progression of prostate cancer via m⁶A-modified LEF1. Eur. Rev. Med. Pharmacol. Sci. 24(7), 3565–3571 (2020).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
32. Barros-Silva D, Lobo J, Guimarães-Teixeira C et al. VIRMA-dependent N⁶-methyladenosine modifications regulate the expression of long non-coding RNAs CCAT1 and CCAT2 in prostate cancer. Cancers (Basel) 12(4), 771 (2020).
CASGoogle Scholar
33. Xiong G, Li L, Chen X et al. Up-regulation of CKAP2L expression promotes lung adenocarcinoma invasion and is associated with poor prognosis. Onco Targets Ther. 12, 1171–1180 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
34. Wang M, Xie T, Wu Y et al. Identification of RFC5 as a novel potential prognostic biomarker in lung cancer through bioinformatics analysis. Oncol. Lett. 16(4), 4201–4210 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
35. Levrier C, Rockstroh A, Gabrielli B et al. Discovery of thalicthuberine as a novel antimitotic agent from nature that disrupts microtubule dynamics and induces apoptosis in prostate cancer cells. Cell Cycle 17(5), 652–668 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
36. Mukhtar E, Adhami VM, Sechi M, Mukhtar H. Dietary flavonoid fisetin binds to beta-tubulin and disrupts microtubule dynamics in prostate cancer cells. Cancer Lett. 367(2), 173–183 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
37. Ho SM, Rao R, To S, Schoch E, Tarapore P. Bisphenol A and its analogues disrupt centrosome cycle and microtubule dynamics in prostate cancer. Endocr. Relat. Cancer 24(2), 83–96 (2017).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
38. Bochtler T, Kartal-Kaess M, Granzow M et al. Micronucleus formation in human cancer cells is biased by chromosome size. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 58(6), 392–395 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
39. Zhang BN, Bueno Venegas A, Hickson ID, Chu WK. DNA replication stress and its impact on chromosome segregation and tumorigenesis. Semin. Cancer Biol. 55, 61–69 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
40. Pan HW, Su HH, Hsu CW, Huang GJ, Wu TT. Targeted TPX2 increases chromosome missegregation and suppresses tumor cell growth in human prostate cancer. Onco Targets Ther. 10, 3531–3543 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
41. Wenzel ES, Singh ATK. Cell-cycle checkpoints and aneuploidy on the path to cancer. In Vivo 32(1), 1–5 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
42. Jacobberger JW, Sramkoski RM, Stefan T, Woost PG. Multiparameter cell cycle analysis. Methods Mol. Biol. 1678, 203–247 (2018).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
43. Nam RK, Benatar T, Wallis CJD et al. MicroRNA-139 is a predictor of prostate cancer recurrence and inhibits growth and migration of prostate cancer cells through cell cycle arrest and targeting IGF1R and AXL. Prostate 79(12), 1422–1438 (2019).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
44. Georgescu C, Corbin JM, Thibivilliers S et al. A TMEFF2-regulated cell cycle derived gene signature is prognostic of recurrence risk in prostate cancer. BMC Cancer 19(1), 423 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
45. Rubicz R, Zhao S, April C et al. Expression of cell cycle-regulated genes and prostate cancer prognosis in a population-based cohort. Prostate 75(13), 1354–1362 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
46. Wan J, Zhang J, Zhang J. Expression of p53 and its mechanism in prostate cancer. Oncol. Lett. 16(1), 378–382 (2018).
MedlineGoogle Scholar

Vol. 14, No. 18

Metrics

Downloaded 96 times

History

Received 22 February 2020

Accepted 4 September 2020

Published online 18 December 2020

Published in print December 2020

Information

Keywords

Author contributions

All authors contributed to study design and data acquisition, analysis or interpretation and drafting of this manuscript. All the authors had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and accuracy of data analysis.

Acknowledgments

The authors thanked the Department of Urology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology and Department of Urology, First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Shihezi University.

Financial & competing interests disclosure

This work was supported by the Key scientific and technological projects of Xinjiang production and Construction Corps (2018AB023). The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.

No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.

Ethical conduct of research

The authors state that they have obtained appropriate institutional review board approval or have followed the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki for all human or animal experimental investigations.

Data sharing statement

The data used to support the findings of this study are from the public database of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA, cancergenome.nih.gov), The Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx, www.gtexportal.org), m6AVar (m6avar.renlab.org) and Human Protein Atlas (HPA, www.proteinatlas.org).

PDF download

Expression patterns and a prognostic model of m6A-associated regulators in prostate adenocarcinoma

Abstract

References

Expression patterns and a prognostic model of m⁶A-associated regulators in prostate adenocarcinoma