Advertisement

TP53 inactivation and expression of methylation-associated proteins in gastric adenocarcinoma with enteroblastic differentiation

  • Noboru Yatagai
  • Tsuyoshi SaitoEmail author
  • Yoichi Akazawa
  • Takuo Hayashi
  • Yuka Yanai
  • Sho Tsuyama
  • Hiroya Ueyama
  • Takashi Murakami
  • Sumio Watanabe
  • Akihito Nagahara
  • Takashi Yao
Original Article
  • 49 Downloads

Abstract

Gastric adenocarcinoma with enteroblastic differentiation (GAED) is a rare variant of aggressive adenocarcinoma. We demonstrated previously that GAED is genetically characterized by frequent TP53 mutation. In this study, we aimed to further clarify the mechanism of inactivation of TP53 in GAED in the light of promoter methylation of TP53, and expression of methylation-associated proteins such as Ten-eleven translocation (TET) 1 and 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5-hmc) in addition to ATM mutations. We analyzed 51 cases of GAED. The ATM mutation was detected in only one case. Promoter methylation of TP53 was detected in 18% and frequency of loss of heterozygosity (LOH) at TP53 locus was 37.2%. Reduced TET1 expression was found in 29 cases (56.9%) and was significantly associated with advanced stage (p = 0.01), lymph node metastasis (p = 0.04), and macroscopic type (p = 0.01). Reduced 5-hmc expression was found in 28 cases (54.9%) and was significantly associated with advanced stage (p = 0.01), gender (p = 0.01), tumor location (p = 0.03), tumor size (p = 0.01), and lymph node metastasis (p = 0.01). Among 9 cases with TP53 promoter methylation, reduced expression of TET1 was observed in 6 cases, and reduced expression of 5-hmc was observed in 5 cases. Reduced expression of both TET1 and 5-hmc was significantly associated with adverse clinical outcomes. In summary, promoter methylation of TP53 is partly involved in loss of p53 expression. Aberrant methylation by reduced TET1 and 5-hmc may be involved in the development of aggressive GAED.

Keywords

Gastric adenocarcinoma Enteroblastic differentiation TP53 LOH Methylation TET1 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Isao Kurahayashi and Noriko Sasahara for their excellent technical assistances.

Author contribution

Noboru Yatagai, Tsuyoshi Saito, Yoichi Akazawa, Takuo Hayashi, Takashi Murakami, and Takashi Yao designed the research project and evaluated the histological and immunohistochemical findings. Noboru Yatagai, Takuo Hayashi, and Tsuyoshi Saito analyzed the obtained data and wrote the main part of the manuscript and Sumio Watanabe, Akihito Nagahara, and Takashi Yao reviewed the draft with critical comments and wrote the manuscript. Noboru Yatagai, Yuya Yanai, Sho Tsuyama, Hiroya Ueyama, and Takashi Murakami performed molecular pathological part of the experiments.

Funding

This work was financially supported in part by a Grant-in-Aid for General Scientific Research from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, and Culture (#17 K08704 to T. Yao), Tokyo, Japan.

Compliance with ethical standards

This study was reviewed and approved by the Juntendo University School of Medicine Institutional Review Board (#2016107).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Supplementary material

428_2018_2508_MOESM1_ESM.docx (29 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 28 kb)
428_2018_2508_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx (10 kb)
Supplementary Table 3 (XLSX 9 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Govender D, Ramdial PK, Clarke B, Chetty R (2004) Clear cell (glycogen-rich) gastric adenocarcinoma. Ann Diagn Pathol 8:69–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ghotli ZA, Serra S, Chetty R (2007) Clear cell (glycogen rich) gastric adenocarcinoma: a distinct tubulo-papillary variant with a predilection for the cardia/gastro-oesophageal region. Pathology 39:466–469.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00313020701569972 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Matsunou H, Konishi F, Jalal RE, Yamamichi N, Mukawa A (1994) Alpha-fetoprotein-producing gastric carcinoma with enteroblastic differentiation. Cancer 73:534–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Murakami T, Yao T, Mitomi H, Morimoto T, Ueyama H, Matsumoto K, Saito T, Osada T, Nagahara A, Watanabe S (2016) Clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical characteristics of gastric adenocarcinoma with enteroblastic differentiation: a study of 29 cases. Gastric Cancer 19:498–507.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-015-0497-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Matsumoto K, Ueyama H, Matsumoto K, Akazawa Y, Komori H, Takeda T, Murakami T, Asaoka D, Hojo M, Tomita N, Nagahara A, Kajiyama Y, Yao T, Watanabe S (2016) Clinicopathological features of alpha-fetoprotein producing early gastric cancer with enteroblastic differentiation. World J Gastroenterol 22:8203–8210.  https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v22.i36.8203 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kodama T, Kameya T, Hirota T, Shimosato Y, Ohkura H, Mukojima T, Kitaoka H (1981) Production of alpha-fetoprotein, normal serum proteins, and human chorionic gonadotropin in stomach cancer: histologic and immunohistochemical analyses of 35 cases. Cancer 48:1647–1655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kinjo T, Taniguchi H, Kushima R, Sekine S, Oda I, Saka M, Gotoda T, Kinjo F, Fujita J, Shimoda T (2012) Histologic and immunohistochemical analyses of alpha-fetoprotein--producing cancer of the stomach. Am J Surg Pathol 36:56–65.  https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e31823aafec CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ushiku T, Shinozaki A, Shibahara J, Iwasaki Y, Tateishi Y, Funata N, Fukayama M (2010) SALL4 represents fetal gut differentiation of gastric cancer, and is diagnostically useful in distinguishing hepatoid gastric carcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 34:533–540.  https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e3181d1dcdd CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ushiku T, Uozaki H, Shinozaki A, Ota S, Matsuzaka K, Nomura S, Kaminishi M, Aburatani H, Kodama T, Fukayama M (2009) Glypican 3-expressing gastric carcinoma: distinct subgroup unifying hepatoid, clear-cell, and alpha-fetoprotein-producing gastric carcinomas. Cancer Sci 100:626–632.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1349-7006.2009.01108.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Akazawa Y, Saito T, Hayashi T, Yanai Y, Tsuyama S, Akaike K, Suehara Y, Takahashi F, Takamochi K, Ueyama H, Murakami T, Watanabe S, Nagahara A, Yao T (2018) Next-generation sequencing analysis for gastric adenocarcinoma with enteroblastic differentiation: emphasis on the relationship with hepatoid adenocarcinoma. Hum Pathol.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2018.04.022
  11. 11.
    Savitsky K, Bar-Shira A, Gilad S, Rotman G, Ziv Y, Vanagaite L, Tagle DA, Smith S, Uziel T, Sfez S, Ashkenazi M, Pecker I, Frydman M, Harnik R, Patanjali SR, Simmons A, Clines GA, Sartiel A, Gatti RA, Chessa L, Sanal O, Lavin MF, Jaspers NG, Taylor AM, Arlett CF, Miki T, Weissman SM, Lovett M, Collins FS, Shiloh Y (1995) A single ataxia telangiectasia gene with a product similar to PI-3 kinase. Science 268:1749–1753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nakamura Y (1998) ATM: the p53 booster. Nat Med 4:1231–1232.  https://doi.org/10.1038/3207 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Li L, Li C, Mao H, Du Z, Chan WY, Murray P, Luo B, Chan AT, Mok TS, Chan FK, Ambinder RF, Tao Q (2016) Epigenetic inactivation of the CpG demethylase TET1 as a DNA methylation feedback loop in human cancers. Sci Rep 6:26591.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep26591 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chen Z, Shi X, Guo L, Li Y, Luo M, He J (2017) Decreased 5-hydroxymethylcytosine levels correlate with cancer progression and poor survival: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget 8:1944–1952.  https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.13719 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yang Q, Wu K, Ji M, Jin W, He N, Shi B, Hou P (2013) Decreased 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5-hmC) is an independent poor prognostic factor in gastric cancer patients. J Biomed Nanotechnol 9:1607–1616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Li BT, Yu C, Xu Y, Liu SB, Fan HY, Pan WW (2017) TET1 inhibits cell proliferation by inducing RASSF5 expression. Oncotarget 8:86395–86409.  https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.21189 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lima EM, Leal MF, Burbano RR, Khayat AS, Assumpcao PP, Bello MJ, Rey JA, Smith MA, Casartelli C (2008) Methylation status of ANAPC1, CDKN2A and TP53 promoter genes in individuals with gastric cancer. Braz J Med Biol Res 41:539–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hurt EM, Thomas SB, Peng B, Farrar WL (2006) Reversal of p53 epigenetic silencing in multiple myeloma permits apoptosis by a p53 activator. Cancer Biol Ther 5:1154–1160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gomes CC, Diniz MG, Orsine LA, Duarte AP, Fonseca-Silva T, Conn BI, De Marco L, Pereira CM, Gomez RS (2012) Assessment of TP53 mutations in benign and malignant salivary gland neoplasms. PLoS One 7:e41261.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0041261 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Okubo T, Saito T, Mitomi H, Takagi T, Torigoe T, Suehara Y, Kaneko K, Yao T (2013) p53 mutations may be involved in malignant transformation of giant cell tumor of bone through interaction with GPX1. Virchows Arch 463:67–77.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-013-1435-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cancer Genome Atlas Research N (2014) Comprehensive molecular characterization of gastric adenocarcinoma. Nature 513:202–209.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13480 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Siliciano JD, Canman CE, Taya Y, Sakaguchi K, Appella E, Kastan MB (1997) DNA damage induces phosphorylation of the amino terminus of p53. Genes Dev 11:3471–3481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Banin S, Moyal L, Shieh S, Taya Y, Anderson CW, Chessa L, Smorodinsky NI, Prives C, Reiss Y, Shiloh Y, Ziv Y (1998) Enhanced phosphorylation of p53 by ATM in response to DNA damage. Science 281:1674–1677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Maya R, Balass M, Kim ST, Shkedy D, Leal JF, Shifman O, Moas M, Buschmann T, Ronai Z, Shiloh Y, Kastan MB, Katzir E, Oren M (2001) ATM-dependent phosphorylation of Mdm2 on serine 395: role in p53 activation by DNA damage. Genes Dev 15:1067–1077.  https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.886901 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yemelyanova A, Vang R, Kshirsagar M, Lu D, Marks MA, Shih Ie M, Kurman RJ (2011) Immunohistochemical staining patterns of p53 can serve as a surrogate marker for TP53 mutations in ovarian carcinoma: an immunohistochemical and nucleotide sequencing analysis. Mod Pathol 24:1248–1253.  https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2011.85 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Liao Y, Gu J, Wu Y, Long X, Ge DI, Xu J, Ding J (2016) Low level of 5-hydroxymethylcytosine predicts poor prognosis in non-small cell lung cancer. Oncol Lett 11:3753–3760.  https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2016.4474 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zhang Y, Wu K, Shao Y, Sui F, Yang Q, Shi B, Hou P, Ji M (2016) Decreased 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5-hmC) predicts poor prognosis in early-stage laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Am J Cancer Res 6:1089–1098PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Saldanha G, Joshi K, Lawes K, Bamford M, Moosa F, Teo KW, Pringle JH (2017) 5-Hydroxymethylcytosine is an independent predictor of survival in malignant melanoma. Mod Pathol 30:60–68.  https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2016.159 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ciesielski P, Jozwiak P, Wojcik-Krowiranda K, Forma E, Cwonda L, Szczepaniec S, Bienkiewicz A, Brys M, Krzeslak A (2017) Differential expression of ten-eleven translocation genes in endometrial cancers. Tumour Biol 39:1010428317695017.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1010428317695017 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ichimura N, Shinjo K, An B, Shimizu Y, Yamao K, Ohka F, Katsushima K, Hatanaka A, Tojo M, Yamamoto E, Suzuki H, Ueda M, Kondo Y (2015) Aberrant TET1 methylation closely associated with CpG island methylator phenotype in colorectal cancer. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 8:702–711.  https://doi.org/10.1158/1940-6207.Capr-14-0306 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tian Y, Pan F, Sun X, Gan M, Lin A, Zhang D, Zhu Y, Lai M (2017) Association of TET1 expression with colorectal cancer progression. Scand J Gastroenterol 52:312–320.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00365521.2016.1253767 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Li Q, Yi B, Feng Z, Meng R, Tian C, Xu Q (2018) FAM20C could be targeted by TET1 to promote odontoblastic differentiation potential of human dental pulp cells. Cell Prolif 51:e12426.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cpr.12426 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Noboru Yatagai
    • 1
    • 2
  • Tsuyoshi Saito
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author return OK on get
  • Yoichi Akazawa
    • 1
    • 2
  • Takuo Hayashi
    • 1
  • Yuka Yanai
    • 1
  • Sho Tsuyama
    • 1
  • Hiroya Ueyama
    • 2
  • Takashi Murakami
    • 2
  • Sumio Watanabe
    • 2
  • Akihito Nagahara
    • 2
  • Takashi Yao
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Human Pathology, Graduate School of MedicineJuntendo UniversityTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of MedicineJuntendo UniversityTokyoJapan
  3. 3.Intractable Disease Research Center, Graduate School of MedicineJuntendo UniversityTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations