Research Article

Protein–protein interactions of HPV–Chlamydia trachomatis–human and their potential in cervical cancer

*Author for correspondence:

Department of Pharmaceutics, College of Pharmacy, PO Box 2457, King Saud University, Riyadh, 11451, Saudi Arabia

^‡Both first author

Department of Basic Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al Kharj, Saudi Arabia

^‡Both first author

Search for more papers by this author

Mohd Tashfeen Ashraf

School of Biotechnology, Gautam Buddha University, Gautam Budh Nagar, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, 201312, India

Search for more papers by this author

Zakir Khan

Department of Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, 8700 Baverly Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA

Search for more papers by this author

Published Online:1 Jun 2020https://doi.org/10.2217/fmb-2019-0242

View article

Abstract

Aim: HPV is an important cause of cervical cancer, but Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) is suspiciously involved in this disease ranging from direct to its involvement as a cofactor with HPV. We performed this study to understand the interaction of HPV and C. trachomatis with humans and its contribution to cervical cancer. Materials & methods: Host–pathogen and pathogen–pathogen protein–protein interaction maps of HPV/CT/human were prepared and compared to analyze interactions during single/coinfection of C. trachomatis and HPV. The interacting human proteins were detected by their involvement in cervical cancer. Results:C. trachomatis may interact with several cancer associated proteins while HPV and C. trachomatis largely interact with different human proteins, suggesting different pathogenesis. Conclusion:C. trachomatis coinfection with HPV may modulate cervical cancer development.

Keywords:

References

1. Vos T, Flaxman AD, Naghavi M et al. Years lived with disability (YLDs) for 1160 sequelae of 289 diseases and injuries 1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 380(9859), 2163–2196 (2012).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
2. Paavonen J. Chlamydia trachomatis and cancer. Sex. Transm. Infect. 77(3), 154–156 (2001).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
3. Anttila T, Saikku P, Koskela P et al. Serotypes of Chlamydia trachomatis and risk for development of cervical squamous cell carcinoma. JAMA 285(1), 47–51 (2001).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
4. WHO. Human papillomavirus (HPV) and cervical cancer. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs380/en/
Google Scholar
5. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer Statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J. Clin. 67(1), 7–30 (2017).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
6. Silva J, Cerqueira F, Medeiros R. Chlamydia trachomatis infection: implications for HPV status and cervical cancer. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 289(4), 715–723 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
7. Seraceni S, De Seta F, Colli C et al. High prevalence of HPV multiple genotypes in women with persistent Chlamydia trachomatis infection. Infect. Agent Cancer 9, 30 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
8. Madeleine MM, Anttila T, Schwartz SM et al. Risk of cervical cancer associated with Chlamydia trachomatis antibodies by histology, HPV type and HPV cofactors. Int. J. Cancer 120(3), 650–655 (2007).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
9. Smith JS, Bosetti C, Munoz N et al. Chlamydia trachomatis and invasive cervical cancer: a pooled analysis of the IARC multicentric case-control study. Int. J. Cancer 111(3), 431–439 (2004).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
10. Contini C, Seraceni S, Carradori S, Cultrera R, Perri P, Lanza F. Identification of Chlamydia trachomatis in a patient with ocular lymphoma. Am. J. Hematol. 84(9), 597–599 (2009).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
11. Naucler P, Chen HC, Persson K et al. Seroprevalence of human papillomaviruses and Chlamydia trachomatis and cervical cancer risk: nested case-control study. J. Gen. Virol. 88(Pt 3), 814–822 (2007).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
12. Tungsrithong N, Kasinpila C, Maneenin C et al. Lack of significant effects of Chlamydia trachomatis infection on cervical cancer risk in a nested case-control study in north-east Thailand. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 15(3), 1497–1500 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
13. Bhatla N, Puri K, Joseph E, Kriplani A, Iyer VK, Sreenivas V. Association of Chlamydia trachomatis infection with human papillomavirus (HPV) and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia – a pilot study. Indian J. Med. Res. 137(3), 533–539 (2013).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
14. Schweppe DK, Harding C, Chavez JD et al. Host–microbe protein interactions during bacterial infection. Chem. Biol. 22(11), 1521–1530 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
15. Pais SV, Key CE, Borges V et al. CteG is a Chlamydia trachomatis effector protein that associates with the Golgi complex of infected host cells. Sci. Rep. 9(1), 6133 (2019).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
16. Olive AJ, Haff MG, Emanuele MJ et al. Chlamydia trachomatis-induced alterations in the host cell proteome are required for intracellular growth. Cell Host Microb. 15(1), 113–124 (2014).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
17. Harris SR, Clarke IN, Seth-Smith HM et al. Whole-genome analysis of diverse Chlamydia trachomatis strains identifies phylogenetic relationships masked by current clinical typing. Nat. Genet. 44(4), 413–419 S411 (2012).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
18. Josefson D. Chlamydia increases risk of cervical cancer. BMJ 322(7278), 71 (2001).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
19. Consortium TU. Activities at the Universal Protein Resource (UniProt). Nucleic Acids Res. 42, D191–D198 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
20. Garcia-Garcia J, Schleker S, Klein-Seetharaman J, Oliva B. BIPS: BIANA interolog prediction server. A tool for protein–protein interaction inference. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, W147–W151 (2012).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
21. Garcia-Garcia J, Guney E, Aragues R, Planas-Iglesias J, Oliva B. Biana: a software framework for compiling biological interactions and analyzing networks. BMC Bioinformatics 11, 56 (2010).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
22. Ammari MG, Gresham CR, Mccarthy FM, Nanduri B. HPIDB 2.0: a curated database for host-pathogen interactions. Database (Oxford) 2016, baw103 (2016).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
23. Finn RD, Coggill P, Eberhardt RY et al. The Pfam protein families database: towards a more sustainable future. Nucleic Acids Res. 44(D1), D279–D285 (2016).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
24. Yellaboina S, Tasneem A, Zaykin DV, Raghavachari B, Jothi R. DOMINE: a comprehensive collection of known and predicted domain–domain interactions. Nucleic Acids Res. 39, D730–D735 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
25. DOMPRINT: domain-domain interaction prediction server. http://crdd.osdd.net/raghava/domprint/index.html
Google Scholar
26. Durmus Tekir S, Cakir T, Ardic E et al. PHISTO: pathogen-host interaction search tool. Bioinformatics 29(10), 1357–1358 (2013).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
27. Shannon P, Markiel A, Ozier O et al. Cytoscape: a software environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks. Genome Res. 13(11), 2498–2504 (2003).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
28. Uhlen M, Fagerberg L, Hallstrom BM et al. Proteomics. Tissue-based map of the human proteome. Science 347(6220), 1260419 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
29. Agarwal SM, Raghav D, Singh H, Raghava GP. CCDB: a curated database of genes involved in cervix cancer. Nucleic Acids Res. 39, D975–D979 (2011).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
30. Mori S, Kusumoto-Matsuo R, Ishii Y, Takeuchi T, Kukimoto I. Replication interference between human papillomavirus types 16 and 18 mediated by heterologous E1 helicases. Virol. J. 11, 11 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
31. Kleba B, Stephens RS. Chlamydial effector proteins localized to the host cell cytoplasmic compartment. Infect. Immun. 76(11), 4842–4850 (2008).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
32. Murakami Y, Mizuguchi K. Homology-based prediction of interactions between proteins using averaged one-dependence estimators. BMC Bioinfo. 15, 213 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
33. Ramakrishnan G, Srinivasan N, Padmapriya P, Natarajan V. Homology-based prediction of potential protein-protein interactions between human erythrocytes and Plasmodium falciparum. Bioinform. Biol. Insights. 9, 195–206 (2015).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
34. Matthews LR, Vaglio P, Reboul J et al. Identification of potential interaction networks using sequence-based searches for conserved protein-protein interactions or ‘interologs’. Genome Res. 11(12), 2120–2126 (2001).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
35. Huo T, Liu W, Guo Y, Yang C, Lin J, Rao Z. Prediction of host–pathogen protein interactions between Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Homo sapiens using sequence motifs. BMC Bioinformatics 16, 100 (2015).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
36. Espadaler J, Romero-Isart O, Jackson RM, Oliva B. Prediction of protein-protein interactions using distant conservation of sequence patterns and structure relationships. Bioinformatics 21(16), 3360–3368 (2005).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
37. Deng M, Mehta S, Sun F, Chen T. Inferring domain-domain interactions from protein–protein interactions. Genome Res. 12(10), 1540–1548 (2002).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
38. Rejman Lipinski A, Heymann J, Meissner C et al. Rab6 and Rab11 regulate Chlamydia trachomatis development and golgin-84-dependent Golgi fragmentation. PLoS Pathog. 5(10), e1000615 (2009).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
39. Chen F, Cheng W, Zhang S, Zhong G, Yu P. Induction of IL-8 by Chlamydia trachomatis through MAPK pathway rather than NF-kappaB pathway. Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban 35(4), 307–313 (2010) (article in Chinese).
Medline CASGoogle Scholar
40. Khan AA, Khan Z, Kalam MA. Inter-kingdom prediction certainty evaluation of protein subcellular localization tools: microbial pathogenesis approach for deciphering host microbe interaction. Brief. Bioinform. 19(1), 12–22 (2016).
Google Scholar
41. Denks K, Spaeth EL, Joers K et al. Coinfection of Chlamydia trachomatis, Ureaplasma urealyticum and human papillomavirus among patients attending STD clinics in Estonia. Scand. J. Infect. Dis. 39(8), 714–718 (2007).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
42. Cai T, Wagenlehner FM, Mondaini N et al. Effect of human papillomavirus and Chlamydia trachomatis coinfection on sperm quality in young heterosexual men with chronic prostatitis-related symptoms. BJU Int. 113(2), 281–287 (2014).
MedlineGoogle Scholar
43. Igansi CN, Dos Santos VK, DR M et al. HPV and Chlamydia trachomatis genital infection among nonsymptomatic women: prevalence, associated factors and relationship with cervical lesions. Cad. Saude. Colet. 20(3), 287–296 (2012).
Google Scholar

Vol. 15, No. 7

Supplemental Materials

Metrics

Downloaded 237 times

History

Received 25 August 2019

Accepted 3 March 2020

Published online 1 June 2020

Published in print May 2020

Information

Keywords

Supplementary data

To view the supplementary data that accompany this paper please visit the journal website at: www.futuremedicine.com/doi/suppl/10.2217/fmb-2019-0242

Availability of data & materials

The datasets supporting the findings of this study are included within the article and supplementary material.

Author contributions

AA Khan: designed and performed the study, data interpretation and analysis, wrote manuscript, approval of final version of article; AA Abuderman: performed the study, edited manuscript, approval of final version of manuscript; MT Ashraf: data interpretation and manuscript editing, approval of final manuscript; Z Khan: designed and performed the study, data interpretation and analysis, editing and approval of final manuscript.

Financial & competing interests disclosure

The authors have no 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. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

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

PDF download