DNA聚合酶θ在子宫内膜癌中的表达及其临床意义

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8115.2021.09.011

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的·探究和验证DNA聚合酶θ（DNA polymerase θ，POLQ）在子宫内膜癌和正常子宫内膜组织中的差异表达，分析其与子宫内膜癌患者临床特征的关系及对预后判断的价值。方法·应用基因表达数据动态分析（Gene Expression Profiling Interactive Analysis，GEPIA）网站检索POLQ基因在人体各部位癌组织和正常组织的表达情况。从癌症基因组图谱（The Cancer Genome Atlas，TCGA）数据库中下载POLQ基因表达谱及临床数据，经Strawberry Perl软件整理后获得基因表达矩阵，使用R软件比较癌和癌旁组织POLQ表达差异及其表达与临床特征的关系，利用基因探针富集分析（Gene Set Enrichment Analysis，GSEA）揭示POLQ在子宫内膜癌中参与的信号通路。收集127例2011年3月—2014年12月在重庆医科大学第一附属医院接受手术且组织病理学诊断为子宫内膜癌的患者的临床信息，分析不同临床特征患者间POLQ表达的差异；取这些患者的肿瘤组织石蜡切片行免疫组织化学染色，判断肿瘤组织中POLQ表达情况，并以22例子宫肌瘤患者的正常子宫内膜组织作为对照。利用Kaplan-Meier法及多因素Cox回归模型分析POLQ表达与子宫内膜癌患者预后的相关性。结果·通过GEPIA网站检索到POLQ除了在睾丸癌中相对低表达，在多数癌症中表达均升高。TCGA数据库中POLQ在子宫内膜癌组织的表达水平显著高于癌旁组织（P=0.000）；POLQ在60岁及以上和高分级患者中的表达水平更高（均P<0.05），且POLQ高表达患者总生存期较短（P=0.000）。GSEA结果显示，POLQ基因主要富集在碱基切除修复通路、同源重组通路、P53通路等。POLQ在正常子宫内膜石蜡切片免疫组织化学染色评分≥1分与≥5分的比例均显著低于子宫内膜癌组织（均P<0.05）；≥5分的比例在不同肿瘤分期、淋巴结转移情况的患者间差异有统计学意义（均P=0.038）；且POLQ高表达患者无病生存期和总生存期均显著短于POLQ低表达组（均P<0.05）。多因素Cox分析提示POLQ评分可作为子宫内膜癌的独立预后因素。结论·相较于正常子宫内膜，POLQ在子宫内膜癌组织中表达显著升高，尤其在晚期、有淋巴结转移的患者中表达水平更高，且POLQ高表达是子宫内膜癌患者预后差的独立预测因素。

关键词: 子宫内膜癌, DNA聚合酶θ, 生物信息学, 癌症基因组图谱, 预后

Abstract:

Objective·To explore and verify the differential expression of DNA polymerase θ (POLQ) in endometrial cancer (EC) and normal endometrial tissues, and analyze its relationship with clinical characteristics of EC patients and its value in prognostic judgement.

Methods·Gene Expression Profiling Interactive Analysis (GEPIA) website was used to retrieve the expression of POLQ in cancer tissues and normal tissues in various parts of the human body. The POLQ gene expression profile and the clinical data were downloaded from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database. The gene expression matrix was obtained by Strawberry Perl software. The differences in the POLQ expression between EC and paracancerous tissues and the relationship between the POLQ expression and the clinical characteristics were analyzed by R software. Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA) was used to reveal the signaling pathways in which POLQ participated in EC. The clinical information of 127 patients diagnosed as having EC by histopathology, who underwent surgery in the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University from March 2011 to December 2014, were collected to analyze the differences in the POLQ expression among patients with different clinical characteristics. Immunohistochemical staining was performed on paraffin sections of tumor tissues from these patients to determine the expression of POLQ in the tumor tissues, and normal endometrium tissues from 22 patients with uterine fibroids were used as controls. Kaplan?Meier method and multivariate Cox regression model were used to analyze the correlation between POLQ expression and prognosis.

Results·It was found that POLQ expression was relatively lower in testicular germ cell tumor, but increased in most cancers through GEPIA website. The expression of POLQ in EC tissues was significantly higher than that in paracancerous tissues in the TCGA database (P=0.000), and POLQ was more expressed in the patients with the age of 60 years and above and in the highly graded patients (both P<0.05). Overall survival of the patients with high expression of POLQ was shorter (P=0.000). The results of GSEA showed that POLQ gene was mainly enriched in the base resection repair pathway, homologous recombination pathway, P53 pathway, etc. The proportions of POLQ scores ≥1 and ≥5 in the normal endometrial paraffin sections were significantly lower than those in the EC tissues (both P<0.05). The proportion of POLQ score ≥5 showed statistically significant difference among the patients with different tumor stages or different conditions of lymph node metastasis (both P=0.038). The disease-free survival and overall survival of the patients with high POLQ expression were significantly shorter than those of the patients with low POLQ expression (both P<0.05). Multivariate Cox analysis showed that POLQ score could be used as an independent prognostic indicator.

Conclusion·Compared with normal endometrium, the expression of POLQ significantly increase in EC tissues, especially in patients with advanced stage and lymph node metastasis, and high expression of POLQ is an independent predictor of poor prognosis in EC patients.

Key words: endometrial cancer (EC), DNA polymerase θ (POLQ), bioinformatics, The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), prognosis

中图分类号:

R737.33

宣贝贝, 龚赛楠, 刘佳丽, 全权, 孟雨, 牟晓玲. DNA聚合酶θ在子宫内膜癌中的表达及其临床意义[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(9): 1207-1214.

Bei-bei XUAN, Sai-nan GONG, Jia-li LIU, Quan QUAN, Yu MENG, Xiao-ling MU. Expression and clinical significance of DNA polymerase θ in endometrial cancer[J]. JOURNAL OF SHANGHAI JIAOTONG UNIVERSITY (MEDICAL SCIENCE), 2021, 41(9): 1207-1214.

图/表 10

图1 POLQ在人体各系统肿瘤和正常组织中的表达情况Note： ACC—adrenocortical carcinoma; BLCA—bladder urothelial carcinoma; BRCA—breast invasive carcinoma; CESC—cervical squamous cell carcinoma and endocervical adenocarcinoma; CHOL—cholangiocarcinoma; COAD—colon adenocarcinoma; DLBC—diffuse large B-cell lymphoma; ESCA—esophageal carcinoma; GBM—glioblastoma multiforme; HNSC—head and neck squamous cell carcinoma; KICH—kidney chromophobe; KIRC—kidney renal clear cell carcinoma; KIRP—kidney renal papillary cell carcinoma; LAML—acute myeloid leukemia; LGG—brain lower grade glioma; LIHC—liver hepatocellular carcinoma; LUAD—lung adenocarcinoma; LUSC—lung squamous cell carcinoma; OV—ovarian serous cystadenocarcinoma; PAAD—pancreatic adenocarcinoma; PCPG—pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma; PRAD—prostate adenocarcinoma; READ—rectum adenocarcinoma; SARC—sarcoma; SKCM—skin cutaneous melanoma; STAD—stomach adenocarcinoma; THCA—thyroid carcinoma; THYM—thymoma; UCEC—uterine corpus endometrial carcinoma; UCS—uterine carcinosarcoma.

Fig 1 Expression of POLQ in human tumors and normal tissues

图2 TCGA-UCEC数据库中POLQ在EC组织和癌旁组织的差异表达Note： A. POLQ expression in the paracancerous and tumor tissues. B. POLQ expression in the 35 pairs of tumor and paracancerous tissues. ①P=0.000.

Fig 2 Differential expression of POLQ in the EC and paracancerous tissues in the TCGA-UCEC

图3 TCGA-UCEC数据库中POLQ表达与患者年龄、分级以及预后的关系

Fig 3 Relationship of the POLQ expression with age， grade and prognosis of the patients in the TCGA-UCECNote:A. Comparison of POLQ expression between different ages of patients. B. Comparison of POLQ expression among different grades of patients. C. Overall survival curves of the POLQ-high expression group and -low expression group. ①P=0.003, ②P=0.000.

图4 EC中POLQ基因通路富集图

Fig 4 Enrichment analysis of POLQ gene pathway in EC

表1 POLQ在正常子宫内膜与EC组织的表达情况

Tab 1 Expression of POLQ in the normal endometrium and EC tissues

Group	Total/n	Expression of POLQ/n				≥1 score/%	≥5 score/%
Group	Total/n	-	+	++	+++	≥1 score/%	≥5 score/%
EC	127	9	54	38	26	92.9	50.4
Normal endometrium	22	8	11	3	0	63.6	13.6
P value	‒	‒	‒	‒	‒	0.000	0.001

图5 正常子宫内膜和EC组织石蜡切片POLQ免疫组化染色（×200）

Fig 5 Immunohistochemical staining of POLQ in the paraffin sections of normal endometrium and EC tissues （×200）Note:A/B. Negative or weakly positive in normal endometrium. C/D. Strongly positive in EC.

表2 不同临床特征患者POLQ蛋白在EC组织中的表达情况

Tab 2 Expression of POLQ protein in the EC tissues of patients with different clinical characteristics

Characteristic	≥5 score/n（%）	P value
Age/year		0.246
≥60（n=50）	22 （44.0）
<60（n=77）	42 （54.5）
Type		0.742
Ⅰ（n=89）	44 （49.4）
Ⅱ（n=38）	20 （52.6）
Stage		0.038
Ⅰ（n=83）	35 （42.2）
Ⅱ（n=28）	18 （64.3）
Ⅲ（n=16）	11 （68.8）
Grade		0.533
1（n=23）	14 （60.9）
2（n=72）	35 （48.6）
3（n=32）	15 （46.9）
Myometrial invasion		0.954
Superficial（n=89）	45 （50.6）
Deep（n=38）	19 （50.0）
Lymph node metastasis		0.038
Negative（n=121）	49 （40.5）
Positive（n=6）	5 （83.3）
Tumor size/cm		0.154
≥2（n=90）	49 （54.4）
<2（n=37）	15 （40.5）
ER^①		0.478
Negative（n=19）	11 （57.9）
Positive（n=104）	51 （49.0）
PR^①		0.790
Negative（n=27）	13 （48.1）
Positive（n=96）	49 （51.0）

图6 POLQ表达水平在不同分期及淋巴结转移情况患者间的比较

Fig 6 Comparison of POLQ expression in the patients with different stages and lymph node metastasis conditionsNote:A. Expression of POLQ in different stages of EC tissues. B. Expression of POLQ in the patients with and without lymph node metastasis. ①P=0.008, ②P=0.023.

图7 不同POLQ表达水平EC患者的DFS（A）和OS（B）的Kaplan-Meier曲线

Fig 7 Kaplan-Meier curves of DFS (A) and OS (B) for the EC patients with different POLQ expression levels

表3 EC患者DFS和OS的多因素Cox分析

Tab 3 Multivariate Cox analysis of DFS and OS in the EC patients

Variable	DFS		OS
Variable	HR（95%CI）	P value	HR（95%CI）	P value
Age/year	‒	‒	‒	0.021
<60	‒	‒	1	‒
≥60	‒	‒	3.624 （1.219‒10.744）	‒
Stage	‒	0.000	‒	‒
Ⅰ‒Ⅱ	1	‒	‒	‒
Ⅲ	4.695 （2.179‒10.119）	‒	‒	‒
Grade	‒	‒	‒	0.047
1‒2	‒	‒	1	‒
3	‒	‒	3.114 （1.013‒9.573）	‒
POLQ score/score	‒	0.000	‒	0.011
0‒4	1	‒	1	‒
5‒12	8.750 （3.062‒25.006）	‒	5.286 （1.453‒19.224）	‒

参考文献 29

1	Lewin SN. Revised FIGO staging system for endometrial cancer[J]. Clin Obstet Gynecol, 2011, 54(2): 215-218.
2	Lortet-Tieulent J, Ferlay J, Bray F, et al. International patterns and trends in endometrial cancer incidence, 1978‒2013[J]. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2018, 110(4): 354-361.
3	魏丽惠. 重视子宫内膜癌的筛查[J]. 中华妇产科杂志, 2013, 48(12): 881-883.
4	Salvesen HB, Haldorsen IS, Trovik J. Markers for individualised therapy in endometrial carcinoma[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2012, 13(8): e353-e361.
5	Morice P, Leary A, Creutzberg C, et al. Endometrial cancer[J]. Lancet, 2016, 387(10023): 1094-1108.
6	Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2015[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2015, 65(1): 5-29.
7	Ashour ME, Mosammaparast N. Mechanisms of damage tolerance and repair during DNA replication[J]. Nucleic Acids Res, 2021, 49(6): 3033-3047.
8	Ranjha L, Howard SM, Cejka P. Main steps in DNA double-strand break repair: an introduction to homologous recombination and related processes[J]. Chromosoma, 2018, 127(2): 187-214.
9	Chang HHY, Pannunzio NR, Adachi N, et al. Non-homologous DNA end joining and alternative pathways to double-strand break repair[J]. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol, 2017, 18(8): 495-506.
10	Koole W, van Schendel R, Karambelas AE, et al. A polymerase theta-dependent repair pathway suppresses extensive genomic instability at endogenous G4 DNA sites[J]. Nat Commun, 2014, 5: 3216.
11	Yousefzadeh MJ, Wyatt DW, Takata K, et al. Mechanism of suppression of chromosomal instability by DNA polymerase POLQ[J]. PLoS Genet, 2014, 10(10): e1004654.
12	Kamp JA, van Schendel R, Dilweg IW, et al. BRCA1-associated structural variations are a consequence of polymerase theta-mediated end-joining[J]. Nat Commun, 2020, 11(1): 3615.
13	Lemée F, Bergoglio V, Fernandez-Vidal A, et al. DNA polymerase theta up-regulation is associated with poor survival in breast cancer, perturbs DNA replication, and promotes genetic instability[J]. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2010, 107(30): 13390-13395.
14	李学孝, 吴爱国, 胡斌, 等. DNA聚合酶θ对乳腺癌细胞株MCF-7放射敏感性的影响[J]. 中华实验外科杂志, 2012, 29(5): 801-804.
15	Shima N, Munroe RJ, Schimenti JC. The mouse genomic instability mutation chaos1 is an allele of Polq that exhibits genetic interaction with Atm[J]. Mol Cell Biol, 2004, 24(23): 10381-10389.
16	Seki M, Marini F, Wood RD. POLQ (Pol θ), a DNA polymerase and DNA-dependent ATPase in human cells[J]. Nucleic Acids Res, 2003, 31(21): 6117-6126.
17	Kawamura K, Bahar R, Seimiya M, et al. DNA polymerase θ is preferentially expressed in lymphoid tissues and upregulated in human cancers[J]. Int J Cancer, 2004, 109(1): 9-16.
18	Leoncini E, Ricciardi W, Cadoni G, et al. Adult height and head and neck cancer: a pooled analysis within the INHANCE Consortium[J]. Eur J Epidemiol, 2014, 29(1): 35-48.
19	Allera-Moreau C, Rouquette I, Lepage B, et al. DNA replication stress response involving PLK1, CDC6, POLQ, RAD51 and CLASPIN upregulation prognoses the outcome of early/mid-stage non-small cell lung cancer patients[J]. Oncogenesis, 2012, 1(10): e30.
20	Pillaire MJ, Selves J, Gordien K, et al. A 'DNA replication' signature of progression and negative outcome in colorectal cancer[J]. Oncogene, 2010, 29(6): 876-887.
21	Higgins GS, Harris AL, Prevo R, et al. Overexpression of POLQ confers a poor prognosis in early breast cancer patients[J]. Oncotarget, 2010, 1(3): 175-184.
22	Wood RD, Doublié S. DNA polymerase θ (POLQ), double-strand break repair, and cancer[J]. DNA Repair (Amst), 2016, 44: 22-32.
23	van Schendel R, van Heteren J, Welten R, et al. Genomic scars generated by polymerase θ reveal the versatile mechanism of alternative end-joining[J]. PLoS Genet, 2016, 12(10): e1006368.
24	Ahrabi S, Sarkar S, Pfister SX, et al. A role for human homologous recombination factors in suppressing microhomology-mediated end joining[J]. Nucleic Acids Res, 2016, 44(12): 5743-5757.
25	Goullet de Rugy T, Bashkurov M, Datti A, et al. Excess Polθ functions in response to replicative stress in homologous recombination-proficient cancer cells[J]. Biol Open, 2016, 5(10): 1485-1492.
26	Ceccaldi R, Liu JC, Amunugama R, et al. Homologous-recombination-deficient tumours are dependent on Polθ-mediated repair[J]. Nature, 2015, 518(7538): 258-262.
27	Nik-Zainal S, Davies H, Staaf J, et al. Landscape of somatic mutations in 560 breast cancer whole-genome sequences[J]. Nature, 2016, 534(7605): 47-54.
28	Alexandrov LB, Nik-Zainal S, Wedge DC, et al. Signatures of mutational processes in human cancer[J]. Nature, 2013, 500(7463): 415-421.
29	Carvajal-Garcia J, Cho JE, Carvajal-Garcia P, et al. Mechanistic basis for microhomology identification and genome scarring by polymerase θ[J]. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2020, 117(15): 8476-8485.

[1]	刘俐, 耿子龙, 陈嘉焕, 张沙沙, 张冰. 血管内皮生长因子A调控人脐静脉内皮细胞miRNA的全基因表达谱分析[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(9): 1183-1189.
[2]	徐莹, 褚以忞, 杨大明, 李吉, 张海芹, 彭海霞. 基于差异表达基因组合构建高度微卫星不稳定结直肠癌转移预测模型[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(9): 1197-1206.
[3]	熊雷, 易茜, 许明芳, 陈健. MRPL12在肺腺癌中的表达和预后分析[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(8): 1033-1040.
[4]	周珺珺, 赵洁, 汤静燕, 蒋马伟, 马秀梅, 白永瑞. Ⅲ~Ⅳ期神经母细胞瘤患儿放射治疗预后因素分析[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(8): 1051-1055.
[5]	陈盛, 严志龙, 吴晔明, 徐敏, 顾松, 马靖. HIF-1α/SHH信号通路在神经母细胞瘤中的表达及临床意义[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(8): 1056-1061.
[6]	刘青, 张娜, 邵静波, 李红, 陈凯, 杜成坎, 王真, 蒋慧. MLL基因重排阳性的儿童急性白血病患者的临床特点及预后分析[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(7): 903-909.
[7]	刘音, 杨涛, 谢裕赛, 王玉柱. 基于GEO数据库筛选狼疮性肾炎的关键基因和信号通路[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(6): 749-755.
[8]	程盛, 赵益, 王永琛, 黄平. BRAF基因突变对肝切除后的结直肠癌肝转移患者预后影响的meta分析[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(6): 786-792.
[9]	杨鹿笛, 王高明, 胡仁豪, 蒋小华, 崔然. 生物信息学方法筛选胰腺癌进展相关的核心基因[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(5): 571-578.
[10]	陈旭光, 施晟懿, 胡岚, 陈瑜, 陆一鸣, 叶静. 血浆纤维蛋白降解产物对出血性脑卒中患者早期预后的评估价值[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(5): 612-616.
[11]	顾琦晟, 张米粒, 曹灿, 李继坤. 基于TCGA数据库分析胃癌可变剪接与肿瘤免疫的关系[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(4): 448-458.
[12]	包汝娟, 陈慧芳, 董宇, 叶幼琼, 苏冰. 基于转录组异常表达构建结直肠癌特征基因预后风险评分模型[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(3): 285-296.
[13]	吴任燕, 郭晓琳, 洪登礼, 陈磊. 基于生物信息学方法的儿童急性不明确谱系白血病的潜在治疗靶基因筛选[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(3): 320-327.
[14]	马燕如, 季林华, 童天颖, 严宇青, 沈超琴, 张昕雨, 曹颖颖, 洪洁, 陈豪燕. 基于单细胞RNA测序的结直肠癌预后预测模型的建立和验证[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(2): 159-165.
[15]	胡培堃, 何杰, 吴连明, 葛恒, 许建荣, 卜军. ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者微血管阻塞对左室功能及预后的影响[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(2): 173-179.