Dataset Information

LASS2 mediates Nrf2-driven progestin resistance in endometrial cancer.

ABSTRACT: Progestin administration serves as the optimal conservative treatment method for women with endometrial cancer or precancer lesions who want to preserve fertility. However, there are still at least 30% of patients in which progestin resistance occurs. LASS2 (Ceramide Synthase 2) has been reported to be involved in chemotherapy resistance, whether it also plays a role in progestin resistance is not clear. Here, we explored the detailed mechanism by which Nrf2/LASS2 contributes to progestin resistance and disease progression.

Methods

IHC assays were performed to estimate the expression pattern of Nrf2 and LASS2. Moreover, it bears three antioxidant response elements (ARE) in the promoter region of LASS2 gene, therefore, Luciferase assays were performed to determine if Nrf2 regulates LASS2 by binding with these ARE sequence. Western Blot assays were used to determine the expression of Nrf2 and LASS2 protein among various endometrial cell lines. Relative mRNA expression levels were detected by RT-PCR. Cellular growth was monitored with CCK-8 tests. Apoptosis was determined with Annexin V-PI staining and flow cytometry analysis. siRNA knockdown was performed to investigate the effects of Nrf2 on cell proliferation.

Result

Nrf2/LASS2 is highly expressed in endometrial cancer tissue, as compared to expression levels in normal endometrial tissue. Proliferation assays demonstrated that overexpression of Nrf2/LASS2 resulted in progestin resistance. Conversely, knockdown of LASS2 increased apoptosis and decreased cell viability. In addition, metformin overcame progestin resistance by down-regulating Nrf2/LASS2 expression.

Conclusion

Our findings provide new insight into the mechanism of progestin resistance in type I endometrial cancer. Nrf2/LASS2 may not only be a possible marker for predicting the prognosis of endometrial cancer but also serve as a potential therapeutic target.

SUBMITTER: Yang B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8014362 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Purpose:Progestin resistance is a critical obstacle for endometrial conservative therapy. Therefore, studies to acquire a more comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms are urgent. However, the pivotal molecules are still unexplored. Materials and Methods:We downloaded GSE121367 from the GEO database. The "limma" R language package was applied to identify differentially expressed genes (DEGs). We conducted Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA) and Gene Set Variation Analysis (GSVA). Protein-protein interaction was constructed by STRING and visualized in Cytoscape. The tumor immune microenvironment was explored by the TISIDB database. Methylation validation and overall survival analysis were conducted by the TCGA database. In addition, the upstream modulators of hub genes were predicted by miRTarBase and Network Analyst databases. The expression levels of candidate genes were validated by quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR), Western blot, and immunohistochemical assay (IHC). Cell growth, clone formation, migration, invasion, and wound healing assays were studied to explore the role of MSX1 in progestin resistance in vitro. Results:A total of 3,282 DEGs were identified and they were mostly enriched in the cell adhesion pathway. We screened out ten hub genes whose genomic alteration rates were low based on the current endometrial carcinoma sample sets. Has-miR-335-5p, has-miR-124-3p, MAZ, and TFDP1 were the most prominent upstream regulators. The methylation status of CDH1, JAG1, EPCAM, and MSX1 was decreased, corresponding to their high protein expression, which also predicted better overall survival. The homeobox protein of MSX1 showed significant tissue specificity and better prognostic value and its knockdown inhibited epithelial-mesenchymal transitions (EMT) and enhanced progesterone efficacy. Conclusion:Our study identified that the gene of MSX1 promised to be the specific indicator and therapeutic target for progestin resistance. This would shed new light on the underlying biological mechanism to overcome progestin resistance of endometrial cancer.

Project description:ObjectiveProgestin based therapy is the preferred option for fertility-sparing treatment of reproductive-age women with preserved fertility in endometrial hyperplasia (EH) or early endometrial cancer (EEC). Our objective was to investigate whether metformin could enhance the efficacy of progestin-based therapies by meta-analysis.MethodsWe conducted a meta-analysis of randomized or non-randomized controlled trials by searching of PubMed, Embase, Web of science, and Cochrane database from inception to November 8, 2022. The results of enrolled studies were pooled using meta-analysis to estimate the effect of progestin plus metformin on remission, recurrence, pregnancy rate and live birth rate.ResultsIn the analysis of progestin administered systemically or locally, complete response (CR) was significantly higher in progestin plus metformin versus progestin alone in the EH group (pooled OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.29 to 3.34, P=0.003), in the EEC group (pooled OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.13 to 3.05, P=0.01), but not in EEC and EH group (pooled OR 1.46, 95% CI 0.97 to 2.21, P=0.07). In the analysis of progestin administered systemically, complete response was improved in progestin plus metformin versus progestin alone, in the EH group (pooled OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.45 to 4.21, P=0.0009), in the EEC group (pooled OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.18 to 3.71, P=0.01), and in the EEC and EH group (pooled OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.16 to 3.54, P=0.01). The relapse rates of patients with EEC and EH were not different (pooled OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.20, P=0.13). For obstetric outcomes, the addition of metformin improved pregnancy rate (pooled OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.42, P=0.05), but not live birth rate (pooled OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.45 to 2.01, P=0.89).ConclusionFor fertility-sparing management, compared to progestin alone, the outcomes of patients with endometrial hyperplasia and early endometrial cancer were more improved with progestin plus metformin because progestin plus metformin increases the rate of remission and pregnancy.

Project description:ObjectivesThis review examines how response rates to progestin treatment of low-grade endometrial cancer can be improved. In addition to providing a brief overview of the pathogenesis of low-grade endometrial cancer, we discuss limitations in the current classification of endometrial cancer and how stratification may be refined using molecular markers to reproducibly identify 'low-risk' cancers which may represent the best candidates for progestin therapy. We also discuss constraints in current approaches to progestin treatment of low-grade endometrial cancer and perform a systematic review of predictive biomarkers.MethodsPubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies reporting pre-treatment biomarkers associated with outcome in women with low-grade endometrial cancer or endometrial hyperplasia with an intact uterus who received progestin treatment. Studies of fewer than 50 women were excluded. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (ID 152374). A descriptive synthesis of pre-treatment predictive biomarkers reported in the included studies was conducted.ResultsOf 1908 records reviewed, 19 studies were included. Clinical features such as age or body mass index cannot predict progestin response. Lesions defined as 'low-risk' by FIGO criteria (stage 1A, grade 1) can respond well; however, the reproducibility and prognostic ability of the current histopathological classification system is suboptimal. Molecular markers can be reproducibly assessed, have been validated as prognostic biomarkers, and may inform patient selection for progestin treatment. DNA polymerase epsilon (POLE)-ultramutated tumors and a subset of p53 wild-type or DNA mismatch repair (MMR)-deficient tumors with 'low-risk' features (eg, progesterone and estrogen receptor-positive) may have improved response rates, though this needs to be validated.DiscussionMolecular markers can identify cases which may be candidates for progestin treatment. More work is needed to validate these biomarkers and potentially identify new ones. Predictive biomarkers are anticipated to inform future research into progestin treatment of low-grade endometrial cancer and ultimately improve patient outcomes.