Top

Clinical and Translational Oncology

Published in:

01-11-2018 | Research Article

Prognostic and microRNA profile analysis for CD44 positive expression pediatric posterior fossa ependymoma

Authors: C. Shu, Q. Wang, X. Yan, J. Wang

Published in: Clinical and Translational Oncology | Issue 11/2018

Abstract

Background

Ependymoma is the third most common pediatric brain tumor and occurs most frequently in the posterior fossa. However, the lack of immortalized cell lines, xenografts, or animal models has significantly hindered the study of pediatric posterior fossa ependymoma (P-PF-EPN) pathogenesis. This prompted us to use clinical big data to study this rare disease.

Methods

Application of the robust rank aggregation method revealed CD44 as a reliable biomarker in P-PF-EPN. 120 P-PF-EPN samples after surgical resection were selected for Kaplan–Merier and Cox proportion hazard regression survival analysis. Immunohistochemical analysis was performed to assess CD44 expression in the tumor samples. The miRNA profile was determined using a whole-genome miRNA microarray. The expression patterns of related mRNAs, miRNAs and proteins were validated by qRT-PCR or Western blotting.

Results

CD44 was found to be an independent predictor of prognosis in survival analysis. It improved the accuracy of using LAMA2/NELL2 for classifying P-PF-EPN molecular subgroups. Fourteen miRNAs were underexpressed, and one miRNA was overexpressed in CD44-positive P-PF-EPNs. miR-543, miR-495-3p, miR-299-3p, miR-139-5p and miR-128-3p were identified to have CD44 positively co-regulated potential target oncogenes. Two PI3K-Akt signaling pathway related potential target oncogenes (VEGFA, CSF1) for miR-299-3p and miR-495-3p were validated overexpression in CD44 positive P-PF-EPNs. Abnormal activation of the PI3K-Akt pathway was confirmed in CD44-positive cases.

Conclusions

CD44 is of great clinical significance as a prognostic biomarker. The survival difference between CD44 positive and negative P-PF-EPN is determined by a complex functional miRNA-mRNA-signaling pathway regulatory network.

Available only for authorised users

de Bont JM, den Boer ML, Kros JM, Passier MM, Reddingius RE, Smitt PA, et al. Identification of novel biomarkers in pediatric primitive neuroectodermal tumors and ependymomas by proteome-wide analysis. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol. 2007;66(6):505–16. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.jnen.0000240475.35414.c3.CrossRefPubMed

Khatua S, Ramaswamy V, Bouffet E. Current therapy and the evolving molecular landscape of paediatric ependymoma. Eur J Cancer. 2017;70:34–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2016.10.013.CrossRefPubMed

Yao Y, Mack SC, Taylor MD. Molecular genetics of ependymoma. Chin J Cancer. 2011;30(10):669–81. https://doi.org/10.5732/cjc.011.10129.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Mack SC, Pajtler KW, Chavez L, Okonechnikov K, Bertrand KC, Wang X, et al. Therapeutic targeting of ependymoma as informed by oncogenic enhancer profiling. Nature. 2018;553(7686):101–5. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25169.CrossRefPubMed

Korshunov A, Golanov A, Sycheva R, Timirgaz V. The histologic grade is a main prognostic factor for patients with intracranial ependymomas treated in the microneurosurgical era: an analysis of 258 patients. Cancer. 2004;100(6):1230–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.20075.CrossRefPubMed

Tihan T, Zhou T, Holmes E, Burger PC, Ozuysal S, Rushing EJ. The prognostic value of histological grading of posterior fossa ependymomas in children: a Children’s Oncology Group study and a review of prognostic factors. Mod Pathol. 2008;21(2):165–77. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.3800999.CrossRefPubMed

Ellison DW, Kocak M, Figarella-Branger D, Felice G, Catherine G, Pietsch T, et al. Histopathological grading of pediatric ependymoma: reproducibility and clinical relevance in European trial cohorts. J Negat Results Biomed. 2011;10:7. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-5751-10-7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Witt H, Mack SC, Ryzhova M, Bender S, Sill M, Isserlin R, et al. Delineation of two clinically and molecularly distinct subgroups of posterior fossa ependymoma. Cancer Cell. 2011;20(2):143–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccr.2011.07.007.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hagel C, Treszl A, Fehlert J, Harder J, von Haxthausen F, Kern M, et al. Supra- and infratentorial pediatric ependymomas differ significantly in NeuN, p75 and GFAP expression. J Neurooncol. 2013;112(2):191–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-013-1062-1.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Rogers HA, Mayne C, Chapman RJ, Kilday JP, Coyle B, Grundy RG. PI3K pathway activation provides a novel therapeutic target for pediatric ependymoma and is an independent marker of progression-free survival. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19(23):6450–60. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-0222.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Bartel DP. MicroRNAs: genomics, biogenesis, mechanism, and function. Cell. 2004;116(2):281–97.CrossRef

12.

Calin GA, Croce CM. MicroRNA signatures in human cancers. Nat Rev Cancer. 2006;6(11):857–66. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc1997.CrossRef

13.

Kolde R, Laur S, Adler P, Vilo J. Robust rank aggregation for gene list integration and meta-analysis. Bioinformatics. 2012;28(4):573–80. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btr709.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Zhang C, Zhang J, Hao J, Shi Z, Wang Y, Han L, et al. High level of miR-221/222 confers increased cell invasion and poor prognosis in glioma. J Transl Med. 2012;10:119. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5876-10-119.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Wang X, Sun S, Tong X, Ma Q, Di H, Fu T, et al. MiRNA-154-5p inhibits cell proliferation and metastasis by targeting PIWIL1 in glioblastoma. Brain Res. 2017;1676:69–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2017.08.014.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Wang L, Zhang B, Xu X, Zhang S, Yan X, Kong F, et al. Clinical significance of FOXP3 expression in human gliomas. Clin Transl Oncol. 2014;16(1):36–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-013-1037-x.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Milde T, Hielscher T, Witt H, Kool M, Mack SC, Deubzer HE, et al. Nestin expression identifies ependymoma patients with poor outcome. Brain Pathol. 2012;22(6):848–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-3639.2012.00600.x.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Pajtler KW, Witt H, Sill M, Jones DT, Hovestadt V, Kratochwil F, et al. Molecular classification of ependymal tumors across all CNS compartments, histopathological grades, and age groups. Cancer Cell. 2015;27(5):728–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccell.2015.04.002.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Ramaswamy V, Hielscher T, Mack SC, Lassaletta A, Lin T, Pajtler KW, et al. Therapeutic impact of cytoreductive surgery and irradiation of posterior fossa ependymoma in the molecular era: a retrospective multicohort analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(21):2468–77. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2015.65.7825.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Rupaimoole R, Slack FJ. MicroRNA therapeutics: towards a new era for the management of cancer and other diseases. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2017;16(3):203–22. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrd.2016.246.CrossRef

21.

Green RM, Cloughesy TF, Stupp R, DeAngelis LM, Woyshner EA, Ney DE, et al. Bevacizumab for recurrent ependymoma. Neurology. 2009;73(20):1677–80. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181c1df34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Becher OJ, Gilheeney SW, Khakoo Y, Lyden DC, Haque S, De Braganca KC, et al. A phase I study of perifosine with temsirolimus for recurrent pediatric solid tumors. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1002/pbc.26409.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Becher OJ, Millard NE, Modak S, Kushner BH, Haque S, Spasojevic I, et al. A phase I study of single-agent perifosine for recurrent or refractory pediatric CNS and solid tumors. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(6):e0178593. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178593.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Prognostic and microRNA profile analysis for CD44 positive expression pediatric posterior fossa ependymoma
Authors: C. Shu
Q. Wang
X. Yan
J. Wang
Publication date: 01-11-2018
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Published in: Clinical and Translational Oncology / Issue 11/2018
Print ISSN: 1699-048X
Electronic ISSN: 1699-3055
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-018-1876-6

Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras

Prof. Fabrice Barlesi

Developed by: Springer Medicine

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 11/2018

Cutaneous toxicities of new treatments for melanoma

Evaluation of thyroid gland as an organ at risk after breast cancer radiotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Molecular subtypes in early colorectal cancer associated with clinical features and patient prognosis

Concurrent chemoradiation for locally advanced stage III non-small cell lung cancer with cisplatin, vinorelbine, and thoracic radiotherapy: a phase II study from the Galician Lung Cancer Group

Laparoscopic paraaortic surgical staging in locally advanced cervical cancer: a single-center experience

Pre-surgical trial of the AKT inhibitor MK-2206 in patients with operable invasive breast cancer: a New York Cancer Consortium trial

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer