Citation: Andrew V. Nguyen, Yuan-Yuan Wu, Elaine Y. Lin. The regulatory function of sphingosine-1-phosphate signaling axis on regulatory T cells in colorectal cancer[J]. AIMS Molecular Science, 2015, 1(1): 34-47. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2015.1.34
| [1] | Geovanni Alberto Ruiz-Romero, Carolina Álvarez-Delgado . Effects of estrogens in mitochondria: An approach to type 2 diabetes. AIMS Molecular Science, 2024, 11(1): 72-98. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2024006 |
| [2] | Fumiaki Uchiumi, Makoto Fujikawa, Satoru Miyazaki, Sei-ichi Tanuma . Implication of bidirectional promoters containing duplicated GGAA motifs of mitochondrial function-associated genes. AIMS Molecular Science, 2014, 1(1): 1-26. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2013.1.1 |
| [3] | Naba Hasan, Waleem Ahmad, Feroz Alam, Mahboob Hasan . Ferroptosis-molecular mechanisms and newer insights into some diseases. AIMS Molecular Science, 2023, 10(1): 22-36. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2023003 |
| [4] | Jian Zou, Fulton T. Crews . Glutamate/NMDA excitotoxicity and HMGB1/TLR4 neuroimmune toxicity converge as components of neurodegeneration. AIMS Molecular Science, 2015, 2(2): 77-100. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2015.2.77 |
| [5] | Fumiaki Uchiumi, Akira Sato, Masashi Asai, Sei-ichi Tanuma . An NAD+ dependent/sensitive transcription system: Toward a novel anti-cancer therapy. AIMS Molecular Science, 2020, 7(1): 12-28. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2020002 |
| [6] | Yutaka Takihara, Ryuji Otani, Takuro Ishii, Shunsuke Takaoka, Yuki Nakano, Kaori Inoue, Steven Larsen, Yoko Ogino, Masashi Asai, Sei-ichi Tanuma, Fumiaki Uchiumi . Characterization of the human IDH1 gene promoter. AIMS Molecular Science, 2023, 10(3): 186-204. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2023013 |
| [7] | Amena W. Smith, Swapan K. Ray, Arabinda Das, Kenkichi Nozaki, Baerbel Rohrer, Naren L. Banik . Calpain inhibition as a possible new therapeutic target in multiple sclerosis. AIMS Molecular Science, 2017, 4(4): 446-462. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2017.4.446 |
| [8] | Dora Brites . Cell ageing: a flourishing field for neurodegenerative diseases. AIMS Molecular Science, 2015, 2(3): 225-258. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2015.3.225 |
| [9] | Giulia Ambrosi, Pamela Milani . Endoplasmic reticulum, oxidative stress and their complex crosstalk in neurodegeneration: proteostasis, signaling pathways and molecular chaperones. AIMS Molecular Science, 2017, 4(4): 424-444. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2017.4.424 |
| [10] | Tsuyoshi Inoshita, Yuzuru Imai . Regulation of vesicular trafficking by Parkinson's disease-associated genes. AIMS Molecular Science, 2015, 2(4): 461-475. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2015.4.461 |
With the advent of technologies allowing for large-scale, high throughput data, a much clearer understanding of the genomic mechanisms behind gene regulation have been gained. The scientists found that there are unexpected far more noncoding RNAs comparing with protein-coding genes and, and these noncoding regions play important roles in determining the complexity observed in the human genome [1,2]. Within these noncoding regions, long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs), which are functionally defined as noncoding regions of RNA that are at least 200 base-pairs in length, have attracted lots of attention. Certain lncRNAs appear to act locally, while others have more distal regulatory effects, even acting across multiple chromosomes [3]. Many studies have identified specific functions of particular lncRNAs, including embryonic mechanisms, cell cycle functions, innate immunity, and disease processes. However, there are still thousands of lncRNAs have no identified functions [1,3,4,5,6]. Some studies have been performed that produce relatively few numbers of lncRNA functions [7], and have shown that the function of lncRNAs is highly cell-type-specific: one lncRNA may inhibit particular genes in one type of cell while promoting the same gene in another. This phenomenon makes it even more difficult to identify lncRNA functions on a large scale. Due to this specificity, researchers propose that future lncRNA studies should be performed on specific cell types to identify particular regulatory mechanisms.
One of the most prominent and intriguing applications of lncRNA regulatory investigation comes from cancer studies [8,9]. It has been shown that lncRNAs appear to have high connectivity with numerous diseases, especially cancer. Because of the highly cell type-specific nature of lncRNA regulatory functions and the irregularity of cancer cell genetic information, studying lncRNA regulation in specific cancer types may provide promising insight into specific genomic regulations of common cancer cells. In a few documented cases, specific lncRNAs have been shown to be significantly differentially expressed in specific cancer types, such as prostate cancer and breast cancer [1]. For these reasons, it seems appropriate to further investigate lncRNA-gene interactions in particular cancer cells.
The wealth of gene expression datasets available provides an opportunity to computationally identify co-expressed gene modules(CEMs), each of which is defined as a highly structured expression pattern on a specific gene set [10,11]. These CEMs tend to be functionally related or co-regulated by the same transcriptional regulatory signals (e.g., transcription factors, lncRNA and so on) under a specific condition or in a particular disease cell type. Overall, successful derivation of the CEMs may grant a higher-level interpretation of large-scale gene expression data, improve functional annotation of condition-specific gene activities, facilitate inference of gene regulatory relationships, hence, provide a better mechanism level understanding of complex diseases.
The computational identification of CEMs can be solved by a biclustering approach [12], which is a two-dimensional data mining technique that simultaneously identifies co-expressed genes under a subset of conditions. a high proportion of enriched biclusters on real datasets. Within this study, we try to identify new lncRNA-gene interactions and transcription factor-lncRNA partnerships from cancer RNA-seq data using a biclustering approach. The biclustering method will allow for the identification of particular expression patterns across multiple datasets, indicating networks of lncRNA and gene interactions. This developed method will also provide a framework for future lncRNA interaction studies. We applied this method on two sets of TCGA breast cancer RNA-seq data to generated CEMs based on known lncRNA-gene interactions. Then, the predicted CEMs are linked to lncRNA by a statistic p-value and the new lncRNA-gene relationship are generated. The evaluation on the predicted results showed that the pipeline can find some target genes for given lncRNA, and meanwhile the performance still has some space to be improved. We further conducted a TF motif analysis on the predicted CEMs and provide potential regulation cooperation between TFs and lncRNAs. The related original data with codes, results and supplementary data can be downloaded on https://github.com/IvesG/sGavin.git.
Two sets of TCGA (The Cancer Genome Atlas) breast cancer RNA-seq data, one from the normal cell (referred as normal data) and the other from tumor cell (referred as tumor data) were downloaded from https://portal.gdc.cancer.gov/. The normal and tumor data consist of 113 and 1091 samples, respectively. And of the 113 normal samples, 112 of them are from the same patient among the tumors. Both datasets contain 60,483 genes, among which there are 19,824 protein-coding genes and 7,399 long intergenic noncoding RNAs (lincRNAs) genes. The RNA-seq data are all Upper Quartile normalized FPKM (UQ-FPKM) values.
A total of 1,081 experimentally validated lncRNA-associated regulatory entries were downloaded from LncReg [13], describing the comprehensive regulatory relationships among 258 lncRNAs and 571 genes. All these relationships were manually collected from PubMed with focus on the data generated by laboratory methods, and can be categorized into up/down/active/inactive based on regulatory relationships or transcription/post-transcription/translation/post-translation based on regulatory mechanisms.
As we focus on lncRNA-gene interactions, the relationships downloaded from LncReg were filtered to retain only relationships describing genes regulated by lncRNAs with specified species information (constrained to Homo sapiens and Mus musculus), resulting 925 relationships in total for the downstream analysis, covering interactions between 309 unique human genes and 103 human lncRNAs, as well as between 199 mouse genes and 100 mouse lncRNAs. It is noteworthy that these 925 relationships include 28 post-transcriptional regulations, 41 post-translational regulations, 714 transcriptional regulations, 23 translational regulations, 1 transcriptional & translational regulation and 118 unspecified relationships.
As the table from LncReg [13] only provides gene symbols, while the RNA-seq dataset uses Ensembl ID as gene's identifiers, we use Ensembl BioMart [14] to match gene symbols with Ensembl IDs for all the genes and lncRNAs. Then we got orthologous genes between mouse and human also using BioMart; we found orthologous human genes for all 199 mouse genes, and 38 overlapped with original human genes. For convenience, we recorded human genes, mouse genes that don't overlap with human genes, human lncRNAs and mouse lncRNAs that don't overlap with human lncRNAs as HG, MG, HL, and ML, respectively.
We combined the normal and tumor RNA-seq dataset together, then extracted expression values for all the HG, MG, HL, ML, protein-coding genes (PC, the remaining protein-coding genes except HG and MG) and lincRNAs (linc, the remaining lincRNA except HL and ML). Taking the genes as rows and the conditions as columns, we obtained the RNA-seq expression matrix on which biclustering will be performed to detect CEMs.
QUBIC is a biclustering analysis tool designed for co-expression analyses of genes based on their gene-expression patterns under multiple conditions. The software can generally identify all statistically significant groups, or biclusters, of genes with similar expression patterns under at least a specific number of experimental conditions, which tend to be more sensitive and more specific than other biclustering tools [15]. We use a quantile-based discretization method of QUBIC to generate a qualitative representing matrix for the RNA-seq expression matrix. Then we extracted the rows of known lncRNA regulated HG and MG from this representing matrix as seed 1 and HG, MG, HL, and ML rows as seed 2. Next bi-clustering analysis was performed on these two seeds to predict co-expressed gene modules (CEMs) in the qualitative representing matrix, respectively.
For an identified CEMs, we calculated the P-value of a bicluster enriched with genes regulated by a lncRNA using the hypergeometric function [16],
|
$
\operatorname{Pr}(r | N, \mathrm{K}, n) = \frac{\left(Kr \right)\left(N−Kn−r \right)}{\left(Nn \right)}
$
|
where r is the number of genes in a CEMs (with size n) that regulated by certain lncRNA, N is the total number of known lncRNA regulated genes in the whole genome, K is the number of genes regulated by that lncRNA in the whole genome.
We assumed that, if the known target genes of a given lncRNA are highly covered by a CEM with a significant p-value, the other genes in this CEM have high possibilities regulated by the given lncRNA. Thus, we used the smallest P-value for all possible lncRNAs as the p-value of the current bicluster and the relationships between lncRNA and genes in the bicluster are predicted.
To evaluate the performance of the new methods on the prediction of new relationships between lncRNA and genes, we randomly separate seed2 into two parts with equal size named seedpart1 and seedpart2, for multiple times. Then bi-clustering analysis will be performed on seedpart2 to predict co-expressed gene modules (CEMs). For seedpart1 we find its part which is covered by co-expressed gene modules (CEMs) from seedpart2. We calculate the cover ratios by the size of seedpart1 to be divided by the size of the covered part by CEMs generated from seedpart2. Also, we calculate the p-values for the coverage rates to present the statistical significance of them.
We choose several significant CEMs with sizes or conditions below 100, to conducted TF motif analysis. The promoter regions of the corresponding genes are inputted into the sub-routine findMotifs.pl of Homer [17], respectively. The script findMotifs.pl can firstly search for the upstream promoter sequences of a certain length automatically, and then perform motif finding on the promoters. For each run of findMotifs.pl on the datasets, we let the program output at most 5 top-ranking motifs, i.e. there will be up to 5 motifs discovered by findMotifs.pl for each CEMs. To evaluate the validity of the discovered motifs, findMotifs.pl automatically compares the similarity between the discovered motif profiles and the motif profiles archived in JASPAR [18] v2018 (http://jaspar.genereg.net/) under its default parameter setting. For each discovered motif having similarity with at least one motif archived in JASPAR, we present its motif logo as well as the information of its most similar motif in JASPAR.
All the known interactions between lncRNAs and genes are showcased in Figure 1A. The related data can be download from https://github.com/IvesG/sGavin.git data/LncReg0419 and more details are written in data/readme.txt. In figure 1A, dark-blue nodes represent LncRNAs, light-blue nodes represent proteins, pink edges represent interactions documented in Homo, green edges represent interactions documented in Mus, orange edges represent interactions documented in both Homo and Mus. Meanwhile, there are some labels on the edges, categorized based on regulatory mechanisms including PTL (post-translational regulation), TC (transcriptional regulation), PTC (post-transcriptional regulation), TL (translational regulation), and NS (not sure). The distribution above is displayed in Figure 1B and nearly three fourth (714/925) of them are identified at the transcriptional level. Other labels on the edges are categorized based on regulatory relationships including down, up, active and inactive. The distribution above is displayed in Figure 1C. The down relationships (575) are more than up relationships (308), and the proportion of active/inactive is scarce (4.5%).
Figure 1E showed the distribution of a number of genes regulated by each lncRNA. It can be found that most lncRNA (~78%) regulate less than 5 genes. To show the specific details of the number of genes regulated by each lncRNA, Figure 1D is made, each point in the Figure 1D reflect the number of lncRNA (horizontal coordinate) that regulate certain number of genes (longitudinal coordinates) e.g. the point with coordinate (4, 14) in Figure 1D indicate that there are 14 lncRNA and each of them regulate 4 genes. The lncRNA that regulate more genes in Figure 1D belongs to the more concentrated parts in Figure 1(A).
With the quantile-based discretization method and biclustering analysis, there are some co-expressed gene modules (CEMs) are found. The details of the way we identify CEMs are showcased in Figure 2C. Figure 2A shows the number of co-expressed gene modules(CEMs) we have got from seed1 and seed2 processed by max(min [19])-based (QUBIC1.0, [15,20]) and KL-based bi-clustering analysis (QUBIC2.0 [21]) respectively. And the distributions of numbers of genes and conditions for each CEM can be found in Figure 2D and Figure 2E. For instance, label seed1_1genes represent that Qubic1.0 is performed on seed1. To better illustrate the distributions, we have constrained the number of each gene and the number of each condition below 100 (in Figure 2B). It is found that the KL-based biclustering method tends to generate CEMs that contain fewer genes while more conditions than max(min [22])-based biclustering method from Figure 2D and Figure 2E. The difference between the results (whether the distribution of genes sizes and condition sizes or the number of CEMs that we have predicted) we get from seed1 and seed2 is subtle.
The proportion of CEMs that have significant P-values (below a pre-selected P-value cutoff) as well as proportions of the number of unique enriched lncRNA in each bicluster that belong to certain categories (i.e., number of lncRNA = 2, 3 or > 3) are calculated and shown in Figure 3A and Figure 3B. In the figures, Seed1_qubic1 represent the proportions from the results obtained using quantile discretization and using max(min [23])-based biclustering on seed 1, seed1_qubic2 represent using quantile discretization and using KL-based biclustering on seed1. In Figure 3A, it can be found that most CEMs have P-value more than 0.001 and seed1_qubic1 seems to have more significant P-value. Constrain P-value below 0.00001 and there is barely CEMs remained (less than 7%). In Figure 3B the majority of (more than70%) CEMs are with enriched lncRNA more than 3 and especially most (around 85%) of CEMs from seed1_qubic1.
For validation, we separated the HG + MG genes into two parts randomly and equally for 10 times and obtained 10 cover ratios correspondingly to check the accuracy of the previously predicted genes. The results of our validation are calculated and shown in Table 1. From Table 1 it can be found that all of the cover ratios are under 25% and the average ratio is 16.25%. We further calculated the p-value of the coverage rates. The results indicated that even the coverage date has a lot of space to be improved, the statistical significance of them are acceptable.
| Group | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| Ratio | 14.00% | 19.60% | 14.00% | 15.70% | 14.50% | 21.30% | 9.80% | 24.30% | 14.00% | 15.30% |
| P-value | 7.58E-07 | 5.14E-14 | 7.58E-07 | 8.11E-09 | 2.56E-07 | 1.24E-16 | 5.37E-03 | 1.27E-21 | 7.58E-07 | 2.65E-08 |
DownLoad:
CSV
Since lncRNA plays an important role in regulation, they should have cooperation with transcription factor [23,24]. Thus we conduct the analysis about the DNA binding sites of related to CEMs [19,22,25]. As described in the Method section, we choose five CEMs to conducted TF motif analysis. The corresponding gene list files each containing 3, 6, 14, 20 and 21 genes. The predicted motifs and the comparison between them and JASPAR motifs are listed in Table 2, along with the function of the target TFs. In Table 2, the second column has the name of lncRNA related with this CEMs and the p-value of their correlations; The third column contains the motif consensus by Homer; The fourth column provides TF names of the most similar motifs in JASPAR, along with the similarity scores in the fifth column. These TFs may have cooperation with corresponding lncRNAs. In the first column, all the P-value of the LncRNA from the CEM is below 0.01 and the least P-value is from LncRNA HOTAIR. The supplementary table S1 with more details, including and the logo of discovered motifs and the functions of corresponding TFs, can be downloaded by visiting the GitHub link.
| lncRNA (p-value) | Homer motifs | JASPAR TFs | Scores | |
| 1 | FOXCUT 3.6e-3 |
AACCAVTTHDCG | TFCP2 | 0.64 |
| TCCTATCACACR | MEIS2 | 0.62 | ||
| TTTTHAAAGGGG | CHR | 0.67 | ||
| ARTGGTTGTWGA | FOXJ2 | 0.58 | ||
| GCAATCTCGC | IRF4 | 0.66 | ||
| 2 | ANCR 1.1e-3 |
AGGGTGACAG | SPZ1 | 0.80 |
| GGTATCTTAC | GATA5 | 0.64 | ||
| CTCATAGGAG | GCM1 | 0.65 | ||
| TAAGTGAAAG | PRDM1 | 0.86 | ||
| CTTTTGGAAC | CHR | 0.65 | ||
| 3 | 250-280 2.2e-4 |
WYTRTCTTTGCG | RXR | 0.61 |
| TCTTACGG | ELK1 | 0.71 | ||
| GGCAAGGA | SD | 0.76 | ||
| GAGGTATGTT | TEAD1 | 0.70 | ||
| TGCCGGGAGCGT | POL | 0.64 | ||
| 4 | HOXD-AS1 6.1e-3 |
CTCGAGTAGG | PB0114 | 0.63 |
| GCCCCCTGCA | PB0076 | 0.74 | ||
| ACGYMYATKYCC | GFY | 0.59 | ||
| AGCGGGTT | PH | 0.68 | ||
| AGGCGCCGCGCC | SP1 | 0.69 | ||
| 5 | HOTAIR 5e-6 |
TGGCGCAGCGCG | PB | 0.67 |
| GTACAACTTT | PB | 0.66 | ||
| CMTSTGTCWCYK | NeuroG2 | 0.66 | ||
| GTGATCCATT | RHOXF1 | 0.68 | ||
| GGTMGRRGTGMW | TBX20 | 0.58 |
DownLoad:
CSV
In order to further evaluate the biological significance of the identified CEMs, we tested the enrichment of the genes in each CEM in Gene ontology terms and KEGG pathways using clusterProfiler package of R project BioConductor under q-value cutoff 0.05, of which the description of the GO terms and KEGG pathways that the CEMs are enriched in are presented in Table 3 and Table 4 respectively. And the supplementary table S2 with more details, including original and adjusted P-value, proportion of the matched genes, gene's ID, etc., can be downloaded on GitHub link.
| LncRNA | ID | Description | q-value |
| FOXCUT | GO:0033613 | transmembrane receptor protein tyrosine kinase activity | 1.2937E-02 |
| GO:0033613 | activating transcription factor binding | 1.2937E-02 | |
| GO:0019199 | transmembrane receptor protein kinase activity | 1.2937E-02 | |
| GO:0001085 | RNA polymerase Ⅱ transcription factor binding | 2.0767E-02 | |
| 250-280 | GO:0003735 | structural constituent of ribosome | 3.1600E-06 |
| GO:0003729 | mRNA binding | 1.1140E-03 | |
| GO:0008483 | transaminase activity | 1.1140E-03 | |
| GO:0048027 | mRNA 5'-UTR binding | 1.1140E-03 | |
| GO:0016769 | transferase activity, transferring nitrogenous groups | 1.1140E-03 | |
| GO:0045182 | translation regulator activity | 1.5826E-03 | |
| GO:0030170 | pyridoxal phosphate binding | 1.5826E-03 | |
| GO:0070279 | vitamin B6 binding | 1.5826E-03 | |
| GO:0019843 | rRNA binding | 1.5826E-03 | |
| GO:0019842 | vitamin binding | 3.1903E-03 | |
| HOXD-AS1 | GO:0004714 | transmembrane receptor protein tyrosine kinase activity | 1.2937E-02 |
| GO:0033613 | activating transcription factor binding | 1.2937E-02 | |
| GO:0019199 | transmembrane receptor protein kinase activity | 1.2937E-02 | |
| GO:0001085 | RNA polymerase Ⅱ transcription factor binding | 2.0767E-02 | |
| HOTAIR | GO:0005109 | frizzled binding | 1.9097E-03 |
| GO:0001227 | transcriptional repressor activity, RNA polymerase Ⅱ transcription regulatory region sequence-specific binding | 1.9097E-03 | |
| GO:0001664 | G-protein coupled receptor binding | 1.9686E-03 | |
| GO:0001078 | transcriptional repressor activity, RNA polymerase Ⅱ core promoter proximal region sequence-specific binding | 1.1196E-02 | |
| GO:0008201 | heparin binding | 1.2885E-02 | |
| GO:0005539 | glycosaminoglycan binding | 1.8790E-02 | |
| GO:1901681 | sulfur compound binding | 1.9016E-02 | |
| GO:0045236 | CXCR chemokine receptor binding | 2.1785E-02 | |
| GO:0008301 | DNA binding, bending | 2.1785E-02 | |
| GO:0001223 | transcription coactivator binding | 2.1785E-02 | |
| GO:0042813 | Wnt-activated receptor activity | 2.1785E-02 | |
| GO:0035198 | miRNA binding | 2.2807E-02 | |
| GO:0017147 | Wnt-protein binding | 2.5258E-02 | |
| GO:1990841 | promoter-specific chromatin binding | 2.5258E-02 | |
| GO:0000982 | transcription factor activity, RNA polymerase Ⅱ core promoter proximal region sequence-specific binding | 2.5258E-02 | |
| GO:0001221 | transcription cofactor binding | 2.5587E-02 |
DownLoad:
CSV
| LncRNA | ID | Description | q-value |
| FOXCUT | hsa05216 | Thyroid cancer | 8.8587E-03 |
| hsa04510 | Focal adhesion | 8.8587E-03 | |
| hsa05205 | Proteoglycans in cancer | 8.8587E-03 | |
| hsa05218 | Melanoma | 1.7683E-02 | |
| hsa05214 | Glioma | 1.7683E-02 | |
| hsa04151 | PI3K-Akt signaling pathway | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa05215 | Prostate cancer | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa01522 | Endocrine resistance | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa04919 | Thyroid hormone signaling pathway | 2.2317E-02 | |
| hsa04152 | AMPK signaling pathway | 2.2317E-02 | |
| hsa04068 | FoxO signaling pathway | 2.4442E-02 | |
| hsa04550 | Signaling pathways regulating pluripotency of stem cells | 2.5129E-02 | |
| hsa05224 | Breast cancer | 2.5129E-02 | |
| hsa04218 | Cellular senescence | 2.7471E-02 | |
| hsa05225 | Hepatocellular carcinoma | 2.7471E-02 | |
| hsa04530 | Tight junction | 2.7471E-02 | |
| 250-280 | hsa03010 | Ribosome | 2.9900E-05 |
| hsa01210 | 2-Oxocarboxylic acid metabolism | 3.7322E-03 | |
| hsa00220 | Arginine biosynthesis | 3.7322E-03 | |
| hsa00250 | Alanine, aspartate and glutamate metabolism | 4.7849E-03 | |
| hsa01230 | Biosynthesis of amino acids | 7.9156E-03 | |
| HOXD-AS1 | hsa05216 | Thyroid cancer | 8.8587E-03 |
| hsa04510 | Focal adhesion | 8.8587E-03 | |
| hsa05205 | Proteoglycans in cancer | 8.8587E-03 | |
| hsa05218 | Melanoma | 1.7683E-02 | |
| hsa05214 | Glioma | 1.7683E-02 | |
| hsa04151 | PI3K-Akt signaling pathway | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa05215 | Prostate cancer | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa01522 | Endocrine resistance | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa04919 | Thyroid hormone signaling pathway | 2.2317E-02 | |
| hsa04152 | AMPK signaling pathway | 2.2317E-02 | |
| hsa04068 | FoxO signaling pathway | 2.4442E-02 | |
| hsa04550 | Signaling pathways regulating pluripotency of stem cells | 2.5129E-02 | |
| hsa05224 | Breast cancer | 2.5506E-02 | |
| hsa04218 | Cellular senescence | 2.7471E-02 | |
| hsa05225 | Hepatocellular carcinoma | 2.7471E-02 | |
| hsa04530 | Tight junction | 2.7471E-02 | |
| HOTAIR | hsa04310 | Wnt signaling pathway | 5.7295E-03 |
DownLoad:
CSV
Within this study, we have developed a method for elucidating lncRNA-gene and transcription factor-lncRNA interactions using a biclustering approach. The method was performed on 2 breast cancer RNA-seq datasets from TCGA. The bicluster method allows for the identification of particular expression patterns across multiple datasets, indicating networks of lncRNA and gene interactions. The developed method will also provide a way for future lncRNA interaction studies. Certainly, the predict performance still far from satisfactory, which is not unexpected since we only used RNA-Seq data. Actually, the interaction mechanism between lncRNA and genes are far more complex, and more data should be involved if we want to capture the whole picture of them. We are planning to include some other data, like proteomics and chromatin accessibility information, to improve the prediction. Besides, the evaluation on the relationship between lncRNA and predicted CEMs also has the potential to be improved, e.g. calculating the adjusted P-value or overall P-value in place of the original P-values used in this study. In view of the application, we will work on more specific examples of the regulatory functions of some particular lncRNAs and identify some hypothesized mechanisms of these regulatory functions. Also, the further analysis of the difference of lncRNA related genes between tumor and normal samples could provide more information for studying the process and mechanism of cancer occurrence and development, e.g. determination of the stage of developed tumors, which will be our concern in the future research.
This work was supported by the National Nature Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [61772313 and 61432010], Young Scholars Program of Shandong University [YSPSDU, 2015WLJH19], the Innovation Method Fund of China (2018IM020200), and Shanghai Municipal Science and Technology Major Project (2018SHZDZX01) and ZHANGJIANGLAB. Qin Ma's work was supported by an R01 Award from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health [GM131399-01]. This work used the Extreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment (XSEDE), which is supported by the National Science Foundation [ACI-1548562]. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation.
All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.
| [1] |
Curotto de Lafaille MA, Lafaille JJ (2009) Natural and adaptive foxp3+ regulatory T cells: more of the same or a division of labor? Immunity 30: 626-635. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2009.05.002
|
| [2] | Sakaguchi S (2005) Naturally arising Foxp3-expressing CD25+CD4+ regulatory T cells in immunological tolerance to self and non-self. Nat Immunol 6: 345-352. |
| [3] |
Maggi E, Cosmi L, Liotta F, et al. (2005) Thymic regulatory T cells. Autoimmun Rev 4: 579-586. doi: 10.1016/j.autrev.2005.04.010
|
| [4] |
Mougiakakos D, Choudhury A, Lladser A, et al. (2010) Regulatory T cells in cancer. Adv Cancer Res 107: 57-117. doi: 10.1016/S0065-230X(10)07003-X
|
| [5] |
Jonuleit H, Schmitt E (2003) The regulatory T cell family: distinct subsets and their interrelations. J Immunol 171: 6323-6327. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.171.12.6323
|
| [6] |
Mucida D, Kutchukhidze N, Erazo A, et al. (2005) Oral tolerance in the absence of naturally occurring Tregs. J Clini Invest 115: 1923-1933. doi: 10.1172/JCI24487
|
| [7] | Sakaguchi S, Sakaguchi N, Asano M, et al. (1995) Immunologic self-tolerance maintained by activated T cells expressing IL-2 receptor alpha-chains (CD25). Breakdown of a single mechanism of self-tolerance causes various autoimmune diseases. J Immunol 155: 1151-1164. |
| [8] |
Roncarolo MG, Gregori S, Battaglia M, et al. (2006) Interleukin-10-secreting type 1 regulatory T cells in rodents and humans. Immunol Rev 212: 28-50. doi: 10.1111/j.0105-2896.2006.00420.x
|
| [9] |
Setoguchi R, Hori S, Takahashi T, et al. (2005) Homeostatic maintenance of natural Foxp3(+) CD25(+) CD4(+) regulatory T cells by interleukin (IL)-2 and induction of autoimmune disease by IL-2 neutralization. J Exp Med 201: 723-735. doi: 10.1084/jem.20041982
|
| [10] |
Barron L, Dooms H, Hoyer KK, et al. (2010) Cutting edge: mechanisms of IL-2-dependent maintenance of functional regulatory T cells. J Immunol 185: 6426-6430. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.0903940
|
| [11] |
Read S, Mauze S, Asseman C, et al. (1998) CD38+ CD45RB(low) CD4+ T cells: a population of T cells with immune regulatory activities in vitro. Eur J Immunol 28: 3435-3447. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-4141(199811)28:11<3435::AID-IMMU3435>3.0.CO;2-P
|
| [12] |
Fu S, Yopp AC, Mao X, et al. (2004) CD4+ CD25+ CD62+ T-regulatory cell subset has optimal suppressive and proliferative potential. Am J Transplant 4: 65-78. doi: 10.1046/j.1600-6143.2003.00293.x
|
| [13] |
Allakhverdi Z, Fitzpatrick D, Boisvert A, et al. (2006) Expression of CD103 identifies human regulatory T-cell subsets. J Allergy Clin Immunol 118: 1342-1349. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2006.07.034
|
| [14] | Brunkow ME, Jeffery EW, Hjerrild KA, et al. (2001) Disruption of a new forkhead/winged-helix protein, scurfin, results in the fatal lymphoproliferative disorder of the scurfy mouse. Nat Genet 27: 68-73. |
| [15] |
Chatila TA, Blaeser F, Ho N, et al. (2000) JM2, encoding a fork head-related protein, is mutated in X-linked autoimmunity-allergic disregulation syndrome. J Clini Invest 106: R75-81. doi: 10.1172/JCI11679
|
| [16] |
Bennett CL, Christie J, Ramsdell F, et al. (2001) The immune dysregulation, polyendocrinopathy, enteropathy, X-linked syndrome (IPEX) is caused by mutations of FOXP3. Nat Genet 27: 20-21. doi: 10.1038/83713
|
| [17] |
Allan SE, Passerini L, Bacchetta R, et al. (2005) The role of 2 FOXP3 isoforms in the generation of human CD4+ Tregs. J Clini Invest 115: 3276-3284. doi: 10.1172/JCI24685
|
| [18] |
Tang Q, Bluestone JA (2008) The Foxp3+ regulatory T cell: a jack of all trades, master of regulation. Nat Immunol 9: 239-244. doi: 10.1038/ni1572
|
| [19] |
LeGuern C (2003) Regulation of T-cell functions by MHC class II self-presentation. Trends Immunol 24: 633-638. doi: 10.1016/j.it.2003.10.010
|
| [20] | Coutinho A, Caramalho I, Seixas E, et al. (2005) Thymic commitment of regulatory T cells is a pathway of TCR-dependent selection that isolates repertoires undergoing positive or negative selection. Curr Top Microbiol 293: 43-71. |
| [21] |
Burchill MA, Yang J, Vang KB, et al. (2008) Linked T cell receptor and cytokine signaling govern the development of the regulatory T cell repertoire. Immunity 28: 112-121. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2007.11.022
|
| [22] |
Liston A, Nutsch KM, Farr AG, et al. (2008) Differentiation of regulatory Foxp3+ T cells in the thymic cortex. P Natl Acad Sci USA 105: 11903-11908. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0801506105
|
| [23] | Gershon RK, Kondo K (1970) Cell interactions in the induction of tolerance: the role of thymic lymphocytes. Immunology 18: 723-737. |
| [24] |
Lopes JE, Torgerson TR, Schubert LA, et al. (2006) Analysis of FOXP3 reveals multiple domains required for its function as a transcriptional repressor. J Immunol 177: 3133-3142. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.177.5.3133
|
| [25] |
Wu Y, Borde M, Heissmeyer V, et al. (2006) FOXP3 controls regulatory T cell function through cooperation with NFAT. Cell 126: 375-387. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2006.05.042
|
| [26] |
Shimizu J, Yamazaki S, Takahashi T, et al. (2002) Stimulation of CD25(+)CD4(+) regulatory T cells through GITR breaks immunological self-tolerance. Nat Immunol 3: 135-142. doi: 10.1038/ni759
|
| [27] |
Sakaguchi S (2004) Naturally arising CD4+ regulatory t cells for immunologic self-tolerance and negative control of immune responses. Annu Rev Immunol 22: 531-562. doi: 10.1146/annurev.immunol.21.120601.141122
|
| [28] |
Krummel MF, Allison JP (1995) CD28 and CTLA-4 have opposing effects on the response of T cells to stimulation. J Exp Med 182: 459-465. doi: 10.1084/jem.182.2.459
|
| [29] |
Walunas TL, Lenschow DJ, Bakker CY, et al. (1994) CTLA-4 can function as a negative regulator of T cell activation. Immunity 1: 405-413. doi: 10.1016/1074-7613(94)90071-X
|
| [30] |
Onishi Y, Fehervari Z, Yamaguchi T, et al. (2008) Foxp3+ natural regulatory T cells preferentially form aggregates on dendritic cells in vitro and actively inhibit their maturation. P Natl Acad Sci USA 105: 10113-10118. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0711106105
|
| [31] | Belladonna ML, Puccetti P, Orabona C, et al. (2007) Immunosuppression via tryptophan catabolism: the role of kynurenine pathway enzymes. Transplantation 84: S17-20. |
| [32] |
Horwitz DA, Zheng SG, Gray JD (2008) Natural and TGF-beta-induced Foxp3(+)CD4(+) CD25(+) regulatory T cells are not mirror images of each other. Trends Immunol 29: 429-435. doi: 10.1016/j.it.2008.06.005
|
| [33] |
Apostolou I, von Boehmer H (2004) In vivo instruction of suppressor commitment in naive T cells. J Exp Med 199: 1401-1408. doi: 10.1084/jem.20040249
|
| [34] |
Kretschmer K, Apostolou I, Hawiger D, et al. (2005) Inducing and expanding regulatory T cell populations by foreign antigen. Nat Immunol 6: 1219-1227. doi: 10.1038/ni1265
|
| [35] |
Coombes JL, Siddiqui KR, Arancibia-Carcamo CV, et al. (2007) A functionally specialized population of mucosal CD103+ DCs induces Foxp3+ regulatory T cells via a TGF-beta and retinoic acid-dependent mechanism. J Exp Med 204: 1757-1764. doi: 10.1084/jem.20070590
|
| [36] |
Selvaraj RK, Geiger TL (2007) A kinetic and dynamic analysis of Foxp3 induced in T cells by TGF-beta. J Iimmunol 178: 7667-7677. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.178.12.7667
|
| [37] |
Faria AM, Weiner HL (2006) Oral tolerance and TGF-beta-producing cells. Inflamm Allergy Drug Targets 5: 179-190. doi: 10.2174/187152806778256034
|
| [38] |
Weiner HL (2001) Induction and mechanism of action of transforming growth factor-beta-secreting Th3 regulatory cells. Immunol Rev 182: 207-214. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-065X.2001.1820117.x
|
| [39] | Carrier Y, Yuan J, Kuchroo VK, et al. (2007) Th3 cells in peripheral tolerance. II. TGF-beta-transgenic Th3 cells rescue IL-2-deficient mice from autoimmunity. J Immunol 178: 172-178. |
| [40] |
Walker MR, Carson BD, Nepom GT, et al. (2005) De novo generation of antigen-specific CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells from human CD4+CD25- cells. P Natl Acad Sci USA 102: 4103-4108. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0407691102
|
| [41] |
Wilczynski JR, Radwan M, Kalinka J (2008) The characterization and role of regulatory T cells in immune reactions. Front Biosci 13: 2266-2274. doi: 10.2741/2840
|
| [42] |
Mazza G, Sabatos-Peyton CA, Protheroe RE, et al. (2010) Isolation and characterization of human interleukin-10-secreting T cells from peripheral blood. Hum Immunol 71: 225-234. doi: 10.1016/j.humimm.2009.12.003
|
| [43] |
Pinchuk IV, Beswick EJ, Saada JI, et al. (2011) Human colonic myofibroblasts promote expansion of CD4+ CD25high Foxp3+ regulatory T cells. Gastroenterology 140: 2019-2030. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2011.02.059
|
| [44] | Wingo PA, Ries LA, Parker SL, et al. (1998) Long-term cancer patient survival in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 7: 271-282. |
| [45] |
Cannon-Albright LA, Skolnick MH, Bishop DT, et al. (1988) Common inheritance of susceptibility to colonic adenomatous polyps and associated colorectal cancers. N Engl J Med 319: 533-537. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198809013190902
|
| [46] |
Peltomaki P, de la Chapelle A (1997) Mutations predisposing to hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Adv Cancer Res 71: 93-119. doi: 10.1016/S0065-230X(08)60097-4
|
| [47] |
Hawkins NJ, Ward RL (2001) Sporadic colorectal cancers with microsatellite instability and their possible origin in hyperplastic polyps and serrated adenomas. J Natl Cancer I 93: 1307-1313. doi: 10.1093/jnci/93.17.1307
|
| [48] |
Fishel R, Lescoe MK, Rao MR, et al. (1993) The human mutator gene homolog MSH2 and its association with hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer. Cell 75: 1027-1038. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(93)90546-3
|
| [49] |
Al-Tassan N, Chmiel NH, Maynard J, et al. (2002) Inherited variants of MYH associated with somatic G:C-->T:A mutations in colorectal tumors. Nat Genet 30: 227-232. doi: 10.1038/ng828
|
| [50] |
Grady WM, Carethers JM (2008) Genomic and epigenetic instability in colorectal cancer pathogenesis. Gastroenterology 135: 1079-1099. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.07.076
|
| [51] |
Kinzler KW, Vogelstein B (1996) Lessons from hereditary colorectal cancer. Cell 87: 159-170. doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81333-1
|
| [52] |
MacPhee M, Chepenik KP, Liddell RA, et al. (1995) The secretory phospholipase A2 gene is a candidate for the Mom1 locus, a major modifier of ApcMin-induced intestinal neoplasia. Cell 81: 957-966. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(95)90015-2
|
| [53] | Shoemaker AR, Gould KA, Luongo C, et al. (1997) Studies of neoplasia in the Min mouse. Biochimica et biophysica acta 1332: F25-48. |
| [54] |
de Miranda NF, Hes FJ, van Wezel T, et al. (2012) Role of the microenvironment in the tumourigenesis of microsatellite unstable and MUTYH-associated polyposis colorectal cancers. Mutagenesis 27: 247-253. doi: 10.1093/mutage/ger077
|
| [55] |
Salama P, Phillips M, Grieu F, et al. (2009) Tumor-infiltrating FOXP3+ T regulatory cells show strong prognostic significance in colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 27: 186-192. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.18.7229
|
| [56] |
Ladoire S, Martin F, Ghiringhelli F (2011) Prognostic role of FOXP3+ regulatory T cells infiltrating human carcinomas: the paradox of colorectal cancer. Cancer Immunol Immunother 60: 909-918. doi: 10.1007/s00262-011-1046-y
|
| [57] |
Boland CR (2010) Chronic inflammation, colorectal cancer and gene polymorphisms. Digestive diseases 28: 590-595. doi: 10.1159/000320053
|
| [58] | Danese S, Mantovani A Inflammatory bowel disease and intestinal cancer: a paradigm of the Yin-Yang interplay between inflammation and cancer. Oncogene 29: 3313-3323. |
| [59] |
Chaput N, Louafi S, Bardier A, et al. (2009) Identification of CD8+CD25+Foxp3+ suppressive T cells in colorectal cancer tissue. Gut 58: 520-529. doi: 10.1136/gut.2008.158824
|
| [60] |
Brudvik KW, Henjum K, Aandahl EM, et al. (2012) Regulatory T-cell-mediated inhibition of antitumor immune responses is associated with clinical outcome in patients with liver metastasis from colorectal cancer. Cancer Immunol Immunother 61: 1045-1053. doi: 10.1007/s00262-011-1174-4
|
| [61] | Zeng JC, Zhang Z, Li TY, et al. (2013) Assessing the role of IL-35 in colorectal cancer progression and prognosis. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 6: 1806-1816. |
| [62] |
Bates GJ, Fox SB, Han C, et al. (2006) Quantification of regulatory T cells enables the identification of high-risk breast cancer patients and those at risk of late relapse. J Clin Oncol 24: 5373-5380. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.05.9584
|
| [63] |
Fu J, Xu D, Liu Z, et al. (2007) Increased regulatory T cells correlate with CD8 T-cell impairment and poor survival in hepatocellular carcinoma patients. Gastroenterology 132: 2328-2339. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2007.03.102
|
| [64] |
Betts G, Jones E, Junaid S, et al. (2012) Suppression of tumour-specific CD4(+) T cells by regulatory T cells is associated with progression of human colorectal cancer. Gut 61: 1163-1171. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300970
|
| [65] | Bacic D, Uravic M, Bacic R, et al. (2011) Augmentation of regulatory T cells (CD4+CD25+Foxp3+) correlates with tumor stage in patients with colorectal cancer. Coll Antropol 35 Suppl 2: 65-68. |
| [66] |
Mempel TR, Pittet MJ, Khazaie K, et al. (2006) Regulatory T cells reversibly suppress cytotoxic T cell function independent of effector differentiation. Immunity 25: 129-141. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2006.04.015
|
| [67] |
Slaney CY, Rautela J, Parker BS (2013) The emerging role of immunosurveillance in dictating metastatic spread in breast cancer. Cancer Res 73: 5852-5857. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-13-1642
|
| [68] |
Koebel CM, Vermi W, Swann JB, et al. (2007) Adaptive immunity maintains occult cancer in an equilibrium state. Nature 450: 903-907. doi: 10.1038/nature06309
|
| [69] | Bonertz A, Weitz J, Pietsch DH, et al. (2009) Antigen-specific Tregs control T cell responses against a limited repertoire of tumor antigens in patients with colorectal carcinoma. J Clini Invest 119: 3311-3321. |
| [70] |
Duchmann R, May E, Heike M, et al. (1999) T cell specificity and cross reactivity towards enterobacteria, bacteroides, bifidobacterium, and antigens from resident intestinal flora in humans. Gut 44: 812-818. doi: 10.1136/gut.44.6.812
|
| [71] | Naito Y, Saito K, Shiiba K, et al. (1998) CD8+ T cells infiltrated within cancer cell nests as a prognostic factor in human colorectal cancer. Cancer Res 58: 3491-3494. |
| [72] |
Golby SJ, Chinyama C, Spencer J (2002) Proliferation of T-cell subsets that contact tumour cells in colorectal cancer. Clin Exp Immunol 127: 85-91. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2249.2002.01730.x
|
| [73] |
Le Gouvello S, Bastuji-Garin S, Aloulou N, et al. (2008) High prevalence of Foxp3 and IL17 in MMR-proficient colorectal carcinomas. Gut 57: 772-779. doi: 10.1136/gut.2007.123794
|
| [74] |
Nosho K, Baba Y, Tanaka N, et al. (2010) Tumour-infiltrating T-cell subsets, molecular changes in colorectal cancer, and prognosis: cohort study and literature review. J Pathol 222: 350-366. doi: 10.1002/path.2774
|
| [75] |
Gooden MJ, de Bock GH, Leffers N, et al. (2011) The prognostic influence of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes in cancer: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Brit J Cancer 105: 93-103. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2011.189
|
| [76] |
Sinicrope FA, Rego RL, Ansell SM, et al. (2009) Intraepithelial effector (CD3+)/regulatory (FoxP3+) T-cell ratio predicts a clinical outcome of human colon carcinoma. Gastroenterology 137: 1270-1279. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2009.06.053
|
| [77] |
Katz SC, Bamboat ZM, Maker AV, et al. (2013) Regulatory T cell infiltration predicts outcome following resection of colorectal cancer liver metastases. Ann Surg Oncol 20: 946-955. doi: 10.1245/s10434-012-2668-9
|
| [78] | Blatner NR, Mulcahy MF, Dennis KL, et al. (2012) Expression of RORgammat marks a pathogenic regulatory T cell subset in human colon cancer. Sci Transl Med 4: 164ra159. |
| [79] |
Awasthi A, Kuchroo VK (2009) Th17 cells: from precursors to players in inflammation and infection. Int Immunol 21: 489-498. doi: 10.1093/intimm/dxp021
|
| [80] | Liu Z, Huang Q, Liu G, et al. (2014) Presence of FOXP3(+)Treg cells is correlated with colorectal cancer progression. Int J Clin Exp Med 7: 1781-1785. |
| [81] |
Sojka DK, Huang YH, Fowell DJ (2008) Mechanisms of regulatory T-cell suppression - a diverse arsenal for a moving target. Immunology 124: 13-22. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2567.2008.02813.x
|
| [82] |
Ishimaru N, Nitta T, Arakaki R, et al. (2010) In situ patrolling of regulatory T cells is essential for protecting autoimmune exocrinopathy. PloS One 5: e8588. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0008588
|
| [83] |
Akeus P, Langenes V, von Mentzer A, et al. (2014) Altered chemokine production and accumulation of regulatory T cells in intestinal adenomas of APC(Min/+) mice. Cancer Immunol Immunother 63: 807-819. doi: 10.1007/s00262-014-1555-6
|
| [84] |
Michaud J, Im DS, Hla T (2010) Inhibitory role of sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor 2 in macrophage recruitment during inflammation. J Immunol 184: 1475-1483. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.0901586
|
| [85] |
Ishimaru N, Yamada A, Nitta T, et al. (2012) CCR7 with S1P1 signaling through AP-1 for migration of Foxp3+ regulatory T-cells controls autoimmune exocrinopathy. Am J Pathol 180: 199-208. doi: 10.1016/j.ajpath.2011.09.027
|
| [86] |
Goetzl EJ, Liao JJ, Huang MC (2008) Regulation of the roles of sphingosine 1-phosphate and its type 1 G protein-coupled receptor in T cell immunity and autoimmunity. Biochimica et biophysica acta 1781: 503-507. doi: 10.1016/j.bbalip.2008.03.001
|
| [87] | Wang W, Graeler MH, Goetzl EJ (2004) Physiological sphingosine 1-phosphate requirement for optimal activity of mouse CD4+ regulatory T Cells. FASEB J 18: 1043-1045. |
| [88] |
Rosen H, Goetzl EJ (2005) Sphingosine 1-phosphate and its receptors: an autocrine and paracrine network. Nat Rev Immunol 5: 560-570. doi: 10.1038/nri1650
|
| [89] |
Pyne S, Pyne NJ (2011) Translational aspects of sphingosine 1-phosphate biology. Trends Mol Med 17: 463-472. doi: 10.1016/j.molmed.2011.03.002
|
| [90] |
Kohama T, Olivera A, Edsall L, et al. (1998) Molecular cloning and functional characterization of murine sphingosine kinase. J Biol Chem 273: 23722-23728. doi: 10.1074/jbc.273.37.23722
|
| [91] |
Liu H, Chakravarty D, Maceyka M, et al. (2002) Sphingosine kinases: a novel family of lipid kinases. Prog Nucleic Acid Res Mol Biol 71: 493-511. doi: 10.1016/S0079-6603(02)71049-0
|
| [92] |
Wang W, Huang MC, Goetzl EJ (2007) Type 1 sphingosine 1-phosphate G protein-coupled receptor (S1P1) mediation of enhanced IL-4 generation by CD4 T cells from S1P1 transgenic mice. J Immunol 178: 4885-4890. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.178.8.4885
|
| [93] |
Sawicka E, Dubois G, Jarai G, et al. (2005) The sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor agonist FTY720 differentially affects the sequestration of CD4+/CD25+ T-regulatory cells and enhances their functional activity. J Immunol 175: 7973-7980. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.175.12.7973
|
| [94] |
Liu G, Yang K, Burns S, et al. (2010) The S1P(1)-mTOR axis directs the reciprocal differentiation of T(H)1 and T(reg) cells. Nat Immunol 11: 1047-1056. doi: 10.1038/ni.1939
|
| [95] |
Snider AJ, Orr Gandy KA, Obeid LM (2010) Sphingosine kinase: Role in regulation of bioactive sphingolipid mediators in inflammation. Biochimie 92: 707-715. doi: 10.1016/j.biochi.2010.02.008
|
| [96] |
Spiegel S, Milstien S (2011) The outs and the ins of sphingosine-1-phosphate in immunity. Nat Rev Immunol 11: 403-415. doi: 10.1038/nri2974
|
| [97] |
Maceyka M, Harikumar KB, Milstien S, et al. (2012) Sphingosine-1-phosphate signaling and its role in disease. Trends Cell Biol 22: 50-60. doi: 10.1016/j.tcb.2011.09.003
|
| [98] |
Schwalm S, Pfeilschifter J, Huwiler A (2013) Sphingosine-1-phosphate: a Janus-faced mediator of fibrotic diseases. Biochim Biophys Acta 1831: 239-250. doi: 10.1016/j.bbalip.2012.07.022
|
| [99] |
Nguyen AV, Wu YY, Liu Q, et al. (2013) STAT3 in Epithelial Cells Regulates Inflammation and Tumor Progression to Malignant State in Colon. Neoplasia 15: 998-1008. doi: 10.1593/neo.13952
|
| [100] |
Liang J, Nagahashi M, Kim EY, et al. (2013) Sphingosine-1-phosphate links persistent STAT3 activation, chronic intestinal inflammation, and development of colitis-associated cancer. Cancer Cell 23: 107-120. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2012.11.013
|
| [101] |
Lee H, Herrmann A, Deng JH, et al. (2009) Persistently activated Stat3 maintains constitutive NF-kappaB activity in tumors. Cancer Cell 15: 283-293. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2009.02.015
|
| [102] |
Nagahashi M, Hait NC, Maceyka M, et al. (2014) Sphingosine-1-phosphate in chronic intestinal inflammation and cancer. Adv Biol Regul 54: 112-120. doi: 10.1016/j.jbior.2013.10.001
|
| [103] |
Daniel C, Sartory N, Zahn N, et al. (2007) FTY720 ameliorates Th1-mediated colitis in mice by directly affecting the functional activity of CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells. J Immunol 178: 2458-2468. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.178.4.2458
|
| [104] | Bos PD, Rudensky AY (2012) Treg cells in cancer: a case of multiple personality disorder. Sci Transl Med 4: 164fs144. |
| [105] | Liao X, Lochhead P, Nishihara R, et al. Aspirin use, tumor PIK3CA mutation, and colorectal-cancer survival. N Engl J Med 367: 1596-1606. |
| [106] |
Nguyen AV, Wu YY, Lin EY (2014) STAT3 and sphingosine-1-phosphate in inflammation-associated colorectal cancer. World J Gastroenterol 20: 10279-10287. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i30.10279
|
| [107] |
Khan S, Burt DJ, Ralph C, et al. (2011) Tremelimumab (anti-CTLA4) mediates immune responses mainly by direct activation of T effector cells rather than by affecting T regulatory cells. Clin Immunol 138: 85-96. doi: 10.1016/j.clim.2010.09.011
|
| [108] |
Saha A, Chatterjee SK (2010) Combination of CTL-associated antigen-4 blockade and depletion of CD25 regulatory T cells enhance tumour immunity of dendritic cell-based vaccine in a mouse model of colon cancer. Scand J Immunol 71: 70-82. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3083.2009.02355.x
|
| [109] |
Yano H, Thakur A, Tomaszewski EN, et al. (2014) Ipilimumab augments antitumor activity of bispecific antibody-armed T cells. J Transl Med 12: 191. doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-12-191
|
| [110] |
Liu H, Hu B, Xu D, et al. (2003) CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells cure murine colitis: the role of IL-10, TGF-beta, and CTLA4. J Immunol 171: 5012-5017. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.171.10.5012
|
| [111] | von Boehmer H, Daniel C (2013) Therapeutic opportunities for manipulating T(Reg) cells in autoimmunity and cancer. Nat Rev Drug Discov 12: 51-63. |
| [112] | Rech AJ, Mick R, Martin S, et al. (2012) CD25 blockade depletes and selectively reprograms regulatory T cells in concert with immunotherapy in cancer patients. Sci Transl Med 4: 134ra162. |
| 1. | Sen Yang, Yan Wang, Shuangquan Zhang, Xuemei Hu, Qin Ma, Yuan Tian, NCResNet: Noncoding Ribonucleic Acid Prediction Based on a Deep Resident Network of Ribonucleic Acid Sequences, 2020, 11, 1664-8021, 10.3389/fgene.2020.00090 | |
| 2. | Lijun Dou, Xiaoling Li, Hui Ding, Lei Xu, Huaikun Xiang, Is There Any Sequence Feature in the RNA Pseudouridine Modification Prediction Problem?, 2020, 19, 21622531, 293, 10.1016/j.omtn.2019.11.014 | |
| 3. | Guangmin Liang, Jin Wu, Lei Xu, A prognosis-related based method for miRNA selection on liver hepatocellular carcinoma prediction, 2021, 91, 14769271, 107433, 10.1016/j.compbiolchem.2020.107433 | |
| 4. | Hua-Sheng Chiu, Sonal Somvanshi, Ting-Wen Chen, Pavel Sumazin, 2021, Chapter 22, 978-1-0716-1696-3, 263, 10.1007/978-1-0716-1697-0_22 | |
| 5. | Juexin Wang, Yan Wang, Towards Machine Learning in Molecular Biology, 2020, 17, 1551-0018, 2822, 10.3934/mbe.2020156 | |
| 6. | Consolata Gakii, Paul O. Mireji, Richard Rimiru, Graph Based Feature Selection for Reduction of Dimensionality in Next-Generation RNA Sequencing Datasets, 2022, 15, 1999-4893, 21, 10.3390/a15010021 |
Figures(2)
Andrew V. Nguyen, Yuan-Yuan Wu, Elaine Y. Lin. The regulatory function of sphingosine-1-phosphate signaling axis on regulatory T cells in colorectal cancer[J]. AIMS Molecular Science, 2015, 1(1): 34-47. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2015.1.34
| Group | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| Ratio | 14.00% | 19.60% | 14.00% | 15.70% | 14.50% | 21.30% | 9.80% | 24.30% | 14.00% | 15.30% |
| P-value | 7.58E-07 | 5.14E-14 | 7.58E-07 | 8.11E-09 | 2.56E-07 | 1.24E-16 | 5.37E-03 | 1.27E-21 | 7.58E-07 | 2.65E-08 |
DownLoad:
CSV
| lncRNA (p-value) | Homer motifs | JASPAR TFs | Scores | |
| 1 | FOXCUT 3.6e-3 |
AACCAVTTHDCG | TFCP2 | 0.64 |
| TCCTATCACACR | MEIS2 | 0.62 | ||
| TTTTHAAAGGGG | CHR | 0.67 | ||
| ARTGGTTGTWGA | FOXJ2 | 0.58 | ||
| GCAATCTCGC | IRF4 | 0.66 | ||
| 2 | ANCR 1.1e-3 |
AGGGTGACAG | SPZ1 | 0.80 |
| GGTATCTTAC | GATA5 | 0.64 | ||
| CTCATAGGAG | GCM1 | 0.65 | ||
| TAAGTGAAAG | PRDM1 | 0.86 | ||
| CTTTTGGAAC | CHR | 0.65 | ||
| 3 | 250-280 2.2e-4 |
WYTRTCTTTGCG | RXR | 0.61 |
| TCTTACGG | ELK1 | 0.71 | ||
| GGCAAGGA | SD | 0.76 | ||
| GAGGTATGTT | TEAD1 | 0.70 | ||
| TGCCGGGAGCGT | POL | 0.64 | ||
| 4 | HOXD-AS1 6.1e-3 |
CTCGAGTAGG | PB0114 | 0.63 |
| GCCCCCTGCA | PB0076 | 0.74 | ||
| ACGYMYATKYCC | GFY | 0.59 | ||
| AGCGGGTT | PH | 0.68 | ||
| AGGCGCCGCGCC | SP1 | 0.69 | ||
| 5 | HOTAIR 5e-6 |
TGGCGCAGCGCG | PB | 0.67 |
| GTACAACTTT | PB | 0.66 | ||
| CMTSTGTCWCYK | NeuroG2 | 0.66 | ||
| GTGATCCATT | RHOXF1 | 0.68 | ||
| GGTMGRRGTGMW | TBX20 | 0.58 |
DownLoad:
CSV
| LncRNA | ID | Description | q-value |
| FOXCUT | GO:0033613 | transmembrane receptor protein tyrosine kinase activity | 1.2937E-02 |
| GO:0033613 | activating transcription factor binding | 1.2937E-02 | |
| GO:0019199 | transmembrane receptor protein kinase activity | 1.2937E-02 | |
| GO:0001085 | RNA polymerase Ⅱ transcription factor binding | 2.0767E-02 | |
| 250-280 | GO:0003735 | structural constituent of ribosome | 3.1600E-06 |
| GO:0003729 | mRNA binding | 1.1140E-03 | |
| GO:0008483 | transaminase activity | 1.1140E-03 | |
| GO:0048027 | mRNA 5'-UTR binding | 1.1140E-03 | |
| GO:0016769 | transferase activity, transferring nitrogenous groups | 1.1140E-03 | |
| GO:0045182 | translation regulator activity | 1.5826E-03 | |
| GO:0030170 | pyridoxal phosphate binding | 1.5826E-03 | |
| GO:0070279 | vitamin B6 binding | 1.5826E-03 | |
| GO:0019843 | rRNA binding | 1.5826E-03 | |
| GO:0019842 | vitamin binding | 3.1903E-03 | |
| HOXD-AS1 | GO:0004714 | transmembrane receptor protein tyrosine kinase activity | 1.2937E-02 |
| GO:0033613 | activating transcription factor binding | 1.2937E-02 | |
| GO:0019199 | transmembrane receptor protein kinase activity | 1.2937E-02 | |
| GO:0001085 | RNA polymerase Ⅱ transcription factor binding | 2.0767E-02 | |
| HOTAIR | GO:0005109 | frizzled binding | 1.9097E-03 |
| GO:0001227 | transcriptional repressor activity, RNA polymerase Ⅱ transcription regulatory region sequence-specific binding | 1.9097E-03 | |
| GO:0001664 | G-protein coupled receptor binding | 1.9686E-03 | |
| GO:0001078 | transcriptional repressor activity, RNA polymerase Ⅱ core promoter proximal region sequence-specific binding | 1.1196E-02 | |
| GO:0008201 | heparin binding | 1.2885E-02 | |
| GO:0005539 | glycosaminoglycan binding | 1.8790E-02 | |
| GO:1901681 | sulfur compound binding | 1.9016E-02 | |
| GO:0045236 | CXCR chemokine receptor binding | 2.1785E-02 | |
| GO:0008301 | DNA binding, bending | 2.1785E-02 | |
| GO:0001223 | transcription coactivator binding | 2.1785E-02 | |
| GO:0042813 | Wnt-activated receptor activity | 2.1785E-02 | |
| GO:0035198 | miRNA binding | 2.2807E-02 | |
| GO:0017147 | Wnt-protein binding | 2.5258E-02 | |
| GO:1990841 | promoter-specific chromatin binding | 2.5258E-02 | |
| GO:0000982 | transcription factor activity, RNA polymerase Ⅱ core promoter proximal region sequence-specific binding | 2.5258E-02 | |
| GO:0001221 | transcription cofactor binding | 2.5587E-02 |
DownLoad:
CSV
| LncRNA | ID | Description | q-value |
| FOXCUT | hsa05216 | Thyroid cancer | 8.8587E-03 |
| hsa04510 | Focal adhesion | 8.8587E-03 | |
| hsa05205 | Proteoglycans in cancer | 8.8587E-03 | |
| hsa05218 | Melanoma | 1.7683E-02 | |
| hsa05214 | Glioma | 1.7683E-02 | |
| hsa04151 | PI3K-Akt signaling pathway | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa05215 | Prostate cancer | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa01522 | Endocrine resistance | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa04919 | Thyroid hormone signaling pathway | 2.2317E-02 | |
| hsa04152 | AMPK signaling pathway | 2.2317E-02 | |
| hsa04068 | FoxO signaling pathway | 2.4442E-02 | |
| hsa04550 | Signaling pathways regulating pluripotency of stem cells | 2.5129E-02 | |
| hsa05224 | Breast cancer | 2.5129E-02 | |
| hsa04218 | Cellular senescence | 2.7471E-02 | |
| hsa05225 | Hepatocellular carcinoma | 2.7471E-02 | |
| hsa04530 | Tight junction | 2.7471E-02 | |
| 250-280 | hsa03010 | Ribosome | 2.9900E-05 |
| hsa01210 | 2-Oxocarboxylic acid metabolism | 3.7322E-03 | |
| hsa00220 | Arginine biosynthesis | 3.7322E-03 | |
| hsa00250 | Alanine, aspartate and glutamate metabolism | 4.7849E-03 | |
| hsa01230 | Biosynthesis of amino acids | 7.9156E-03 | |
| HOXD-AS1 | hsa05216 | Thyroid cancer | 8.8587E-03 |
| hsa04510 | Focal adhesion | 8.8587E-03 | |
| hsa05205 | Proteoglycans in cancer | 8.8587E-03 | |
| hsa05218 | Melanoma | 1.7683E-02 | |
| hsa05214 | Glioma | 1.7683E-02 | |
| hsa04151 | PI3K-Akt signaling pathway | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa05215 | Prostate cancer | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa01522 | Endocrine resistance | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa04919 | Thyroid hormone signaling pathway | 2.2317E-02 | |
| hsa04152 | AMPK signaling pathway | 2.2317E-02 | |
| hsa04068 | FoxO signaling pathway | 2.4442E-02 | |
| hsa04550 | Signaling pathways regulating pluripotency of stem cells | 2.5129E-02 | |
| hsa05224 | Breast cancer | 2.5506E-02 | |
| hsa04218 | Cellular senescence | 2.7471E-02 | |
| hsa05225 | Hepatocellular carcinoma | 2.7471E-02 | |
| hsa04530 | Tight junction | 2.7471E-02 | |
| HOTAIR | hsa04310 | Wnt signaling pathway | 5.7295E-03 |
DownLoad:
CSV
| Group | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| Ratio | 14.00% | 19.60% | 14.00% | 15.70% | 14.50% | 21.30% | 9.80% | 24.30% | 14.00% | 15.30% |
| P-value | 7.58E-07 | 5.14E-14 | 7.58E-07 | 8.11E-09 | 2.56E-07 | 1.24E-16 | 5.37E-03 | 1.27E-21 | 7.58E-07 | 2.65E-08 |
| lncRNA (p-value) | Homer motifs | JASPAR TFs | Scores | |
| 1 | FOXCUT 3.6e-3 |
AACCAVTTHDCG | TFCP2 | 0.64 |
| TCCTATCACACR | MEIS2 | 0.62 | ||
| TTTTHAAAGGGG | CHR | 0.67 | ||
| ARTGGTTGTWGA | FOXJ2 | 0.58 | ||
| GCAATCTCGC | IRF4 | 0.66 | ||
| 2 | ANCR 1.1e-3 |
AGGGTGACAG | SPZ1 | 0.80 |
| GGTATCTTAC | GATA5 | 0.64 | ||
| CTCATAGGAG | GCM1 | 0.65 | ||
| TAAGTGAAAG | PRDM1 | 0.86 | ||
| CTTTTGGAAC | CHR | 0.65 | ||
| 3 | 250-280 2.2e-4 |
WYTRTCTTTGCG | RXR | 0.61 |
| TCTTACGG | ELK1 | 0.71 | ||
| GGCAAGGA | SD | 0.76 | ||
| GAGGTATGTT | TEAD1 | 0.70 | ||
| TGCCGGGAGCGT | POL | 0.64 | ||
| 4 | HOXD-AS1 6.1e-3 |
CTCGAGTAGG | PB0114 | 0.63 |
| GCCCCCTGCA | PB0076 | 0.74 | ||
| ACGYMYATKYCC | GFY | 0.59 | ||
| AGCGGGTT | PH | 0.68 | ||
| AGGCGCCGCGCC | SP1 | 0.69 | ||
| 5 | HOTAIR 5e-6 |
TGGCGCAGCGCG | PB | 0.67 |
| GTACAACTTT | PB | 0.66 | ||
| CMTSTGTCWCYK | NeuroG2 | 0.66 | ||
| GTGATCCATT | RHOXF1 | 0.68 | ||
| GGTMGRRGTGMW | TBX20 | 0.58 |
| LncRNA | ID | Description | q-value |
| FOXCUT | GO:0033613 | transmembrane receptor protein tyrosine kinase activity | 1.2937E-02 |
| GO:0033613 | activating transcription factor binding | 1.2937E-02 | |
| GO:0019199 | transmembrane receptor protein kinase activity | 1.2937E-02 | |
| GO:0001085 | RNA polymerase Ⅱ transcription factor binding | 2.0767E-02 | |
| 250-280 | GO:0003735 | structural constituent of ribosome | 3.1600E-06 |
| GO:0003729 | mRNA binding | 1.1140E-03 | |
| GO:0008483 | transaminase activity | 1.1140E-03 | |
| GO:0048027 | mRNA 5'-UTR binding | 1.1140E-03 | |
| GO:0016769 | transferase activity, transferring nitrogenous groups | 1.1140E-03 | |
| GO:0045182 | translation regulator activity | 1.5826E-03 | |
| GO:0030170 | pyridoxal phosphate binding | 1.5826E-03 | |
| GO:0070279 | vitamin B6 binding | 1.5826E-03 | |
| GO:0019843 | rRNA binding | 1.5826E-03 | |
| GO:0019842 | vitamin binding | 3.1903E-03 | |
| HOXD-AS1 | GO:0004714 | transmembrane receptor protein tyrosine kinase activity | 1.2937E-02 |
| GO:0033613 | activating transcription factor binding | 1.2937E-02 | |
| GO:0019199 | transmembrane receptor protein kinase activity | 1.2937E-02 | |
| GO:0001085 | RNA polymerase Ⅱ transcription factor binding | 2.0767E-02 | |
| HOTAIR | GO:0005109 | frizzled binding | 1.9097E-03 |
| GO:0001227 | transcriptional repressor activity, RNA polymerase Ⅱ transcription regulatory region sequence-specific binding | 1.9097E-03 | |
| GO:0001664 | G-protein coupled receptor binding | 1.9686E-03 | |
| GO:0001078 | transcriptional repressor activity, RNA polymerase Ⅱ core promoter proximal region sequence-specific binding | 1.1196E-02 | |
| GO:0008201 | heparin binding | 1.2885E-02 | |
| GO:0005539 | glycosaminoglycan binding | 1.8790E-02 | |
| GO:1901681 | sulfur compound binding | 1.9016E-02 | |
| GO:0045236 | CXCR chemokine receptor binding | 2.1785E-02 | |
| GO:0008301 | DNA binding, bending | 2.1785E-02 | |
| GO:0001223 | transcription coactivator binding | 2.1785E-02 | |
| GO:0042813 | Wnt-activated receptor activity | 2.1785E-02 | |
| GO:0035198 | miRNA binding | 2.2807E-02 | |
| GO:0017147 | Wnt-protein binding | 2.5258E-02 | |
| GO:1990841 | promoter-specific chromatin binding | 2.5258E-02 | |
| GO:0000982 | transcription factor activity, RNA polymerase Ⅱ core promoter proximal region sequence-specific binding | 2.5258E-02 | |
| GO:0001221 | transcription cofactor binding | 2.5587E-02 |
| LncRNA | ID | Description | q-value |
| FOXCUT | hsa05216 | Thyroid cancer | 8.8587E-03 |
| hsa04510 | Focal adhesion | 8.8587E-03 | |
| hsa05205 | Proteoglycans in cancer | 8.8587E-03 | |
| hsa05218 | Melanoma | 1.7683E-02 | |
| hsa05214 | Glioma | 1.7683E-02 | |
| hsa04151 | PI3K-Akt signaling pathway | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa05215 | Prostate cancer | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa01522 | Endocrine resistance | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa04919 | Thyroid hormone signaling pathway | 2.2317E-02 | |
| hsa04152 | AMPK signaling pathway | 2.2317E-02 | |
| hsa04068 | FoxO signaling pathway | 2.4442E-02 | |
| hsa04550 | Signaling pathways regulating pluripotency of stem cells | 2.5129E-02 | |
| hsa05224 | Breast cancer | 2.5129E-02 | |
| hsa04218 | Cellular senescence | 2.7471E-02 | |
| hsa05225 | Hepatocellular carcinoma | 2.7471E-02 | |
| hsa04530 | Tight junction | 2.7471E-02 | |
| 250-280 | hsa03010 | Ribosome | 2.9900E-05 |
| hsa01210 | 2-Oxocarboxylic acid metabolism | 3.7322E-03 | |
| hsa00220 | Arginine biosynthesis | 3.7322E-03 | |
| hsa00250 | Alanine, aspartate and glutamate metabolism | 4.7849E-03 | |
| hsa01230 | Biosynthesis of amino acids | 7.9156E-03 | |
| HOXD-AS1 | hsa05216 | Thyroid cancer | 8.8587E-03 |
| hsa04510 | Focal adhesion | 8.8587E-03 | |
| hsa05205 | Proteoglycans in cancer | 8.8587E-03 | |
| hsa05218 | Melanoma | 1.7683E-02 | |
| hsa05214 | Glioma | 1.7683E-02 | |
| hsa04151 | PI3K-Akt signaling pathway | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa05215 | Prostate cancer | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa01522 | Endocrine resistance | 1.8745E-02 | |
| hsa04919 | Thyroid hormone signaling pathway | 2.2317E-02 | |
| hsa04152 | AMPK signaling pathway | 2.2317E-02 | |
| hsa04068 | FoxO signaling pathway | 2.4442E-02 | |
| hsa04550 | Signaling pathways regulating pluripotency of stem cells | 2.5129E-02 | |
| hsa05224 | Breast cancer | 2.5506E-02 | |
| hsa04218 | Cellular senescence | 2.7471E-02 | |
| hsa05225 | Hepatocellular carcinoma | 2.7471E-02 | |
| hsa04530 | Tight junction | 2.7471E-02 | |
| HOTAIR | hsa04310 | Wnt signaling pathway | 5.7295E-03 |
