Genome-wide Expression Profile and Copy Number Variations (cnvs) of Small Cell Esophageal Carcinoma (SCEC) Based on Bioinformatics: A Preliminary Report

L. Di,Y. Shen,M. Fan,J. Zhang,L. Xie,G. Jiang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.07.893
2015-01-01
Abstract:SCEC is a rare, aggressive high-grade neuroendocrine malignancy without standard treatment algorithms. Current treatment regimens are derived from pivotal studies of small cell lung cancer (SCLC), even if there is no robust data, either clinical or genetic, demonstrating the similarities between SCEC and SCLC. This study was designed to investigate the gene expression profile and CNVs of SCEC, and compare it with the known data of SCLC and adeno/squamous cancer of the esophagus (EAC/ESCC) by bioinformatics approach De novo gene expression profile and array-based Comparative Genomic Hybridization(aCGH) was performed on three pairs of primary SCEC and corresponding normal samples. The expression data were complemented with public data sets from the GEO repository using the same working platforms (GSE30219, GSE26886). After individual normalization, primary tumors were submitted to statistical analysis(GeneSpring GX 12.5) for identifying differentially expressed genes(DEGs) as compared with their paired normal tissues. Gene enrichments with functions and genes interactions were analyzed by DAVID 6.7 and STRING 9.0, respectively. Putative CNV intervals identification was performed by CytoGenomics software 2.7.8.0. Copy number associated aberration in gene expression (CNV-FC), Pearson correlation coefficients between copy number and expression for the recurrent genes were computed. The genes with CNV-FC ≥ 2 meanwhile r ≥0.6 (p <0.05) were selected as possibly cancer-associated genes SCEC shared more DEGs in common with SCLC than EC (829 vs. 450), leading to greater correlation between SCEC and SCLC (r = 0.60 for SCEC vs. SCLC, 0.51 or 0.45 for SCEC vs. ESCC or EAC, 0.73 for ESCC vs. EAC). Similar findings were obtained by Principal Component Analysis using all DEGs from four groups. Functional annotation showed that a higher proportion of biological processes and pathways were in common between SCEC and SCLC, associating with cell cycle, mitosis, DNA replication, telomere maintenance, P53 and RB pathway (Benjamini p <0.05). Comparing with EAC/ESCC, SCEC shared more co-up regulated DEGs coding for these pathways with SCLC (584 vs. 155). Overlapped gene interactive network between SCEC and SCLC was centered by NUF2. The gained or lost regions in all samples detected by aCGH were located at 14q11.2 and 4q22.3-23.3, respectively. There were 39 individual genes selected as possibly cancer-associated (median CNV-FC: 5.35, 95% CI: 4.53-16.98). The gene representing the highest correlation to separate SCEC from adjacent noncancerous tissue was PTP4A3 (CNV-FC: 21362, r =0.998, p =0.037) This bioinformatics analyses revealed that SCEC and SCLC display notably similar patterns of gene expression and CNVs on cell cycle and other biological processes. NUF2 and PTP4A3 might play a key role in carcinogenesis and metastasis of SCEC
What problem does this paper attempt to address?