Non-mutational mechanisms underlie loss of CDK2AP1 expression in OSCC
While the loss of CDK2AP1 protein expression in oral squamous cell carcinoma has been previously reported7,18,19, the underlying mechanisms are yet poorly understood. To further explore on the relevance of CDK2AP1 loss in OSCC progression towards malignancy, we took advantage of a retrospective cohort of primary oral squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue (n = 100) collected between 2007 and 2013 at the Erasmus MC Cancer Institute and encompassing patients that received surgery as the primary form of treatment (Table 1). IHC analysis of CDK2AP1 expression in this cohort confirmed our previous report7 in that a small percentage of the cases was either completely negative (∼10%) or positive (∼30%) for CDK2AP1 expression, with the vast majority of the tumors showing an admixture of negative and positive cells (Supplementary Fig. 1A-C). We then established two categories of CDK2AP1 immunoreactivity based on the staining intensity and an optimal threshold of 45% cancer cells negative for CDK2AP1 (Supplementary Fig. 1D-E). Using this cut-off, disease-free survival negatively correlated with patients showing more than 45% of tumor cells negative for CDK2AP1 (Log- rank p = 0,02; Fig. 1A-B).
Next, we interrogated the TGCA pan-cancer atlas dataset and in particular the mutation spectra relative to 438 patient-derived head and neck cancers not associated with HPV infection. As expected, the most commonly mutated genes were TP53 (81,5% of the cases), followed by CDKN2A (61,6%), FAT1, and NOTCH1 (33,1% and 22,4%, respectively). In contrast, the incidence of CDK2AP1 genetic alterations was only 0.5%, mainly as the result of gene amplification events (Fig. 1C, left panel).
To further validate the low incidence of CDK2AP1 mutations in oral squamous cell carcinoma, we established a panel of OSCC cell lines shown by western analysis to be either proficient or deficient for CDK2AP1 protein expression. As shown in Fig. 1D, the tongue squamous cell carcinoma cell lines SCC4, SCC9, SCC15 and SCC25 do not express the CDK2AP1 protein whereas the OSCC cell lines CA1 (derived from floor of the mouth), LM (mandibular region of the mouth), LUC4 (floor of the mouth), and two non-cancerous immortalized control cell lines, namely OKF-6 (normal human oral keratinocyte) and HEK293T (human embryonic kidney), are positive for the 12 KDa protein (Fig. 1D; Supplementary file A). Direct mutation analysis of our panel of proficient and deficient cell lines by whole exome sequencing (WES), and by interrogating the COSMIC database (https://cancer.sanger.ac.uk/cosmic) for SCC4, SCC9, SCC15 and SCC25, confirmed the absence of any CDK2AP1 gene mutation in the cell line panel regardless of their positive/negative protein expression (Fig. 1C, right panel). Accordingly, RT-qPCR analysis of CDK2AP1 transcriptional activity did not reveal any significant differences in expression values throughout the panel, irrespective of CDK2AP1 protein expression (ANOVA p = 0,27; Fig. 1E).
Altogether, these observations confirmed that, contrarily to what its DOC1 acronym would suggest, non-mutational and possibly post-transcriptional mechanisms underlie the silencing of CDK2AP1 protein expression in OSCC.
Several miRNAs target the 3’ UTR of the CDK2AP1/DOC1 gene in OSCC.
As mentioned above, two studies have previously suggested the involvement of specific microRNAs, namely miR-21 and miR-205, in the silencing of CDK2AP1 expression in oral and laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma, respectively13,14. In order to establish in more comprehensive and systematic fashion the spectrum of miRs responsible for CDK2AP1 repression, a novel approach based on the integration of in silico analyses and in vitro assays was exploited (Supplementary Fig. 2). First, we performed a cell line-based miRNA microarray profiling of the CDK2AP1-deficient cell lines (SCC4, SCC9, SCC15 and SCC25). miRs whose expression levels were increased in the CDK2AP1-deficient lines were then further selected based on their affinity for the CDK2AP1 3’-UTR using the following databases: TarBAse v.820, miRWalk 2.021, miRtarBase22, and miRecords23. miRs with a final score of ≥ 7 (n = 12; see Material and Methods) were selected and validated by RT-qPCR in the CDK2AP1-deficient and -proficient OSCC cell lines (Fig. 2A). High degree of expression heterogeneity was observed even with miR-21, i.e. the most frequently overexpressed miR among human cancers, thus suggesting that the regulation of CDK2AP1 expression involves multiple non-coding RNAs. Based on these results, we selected 5 miRs, namely miR-21-5p, miR-26b-5p, miR-23b-3p, miR-93-5p, and miR-155-5p, whose expression was consistently and significantly increased in CDK2AP1-deficient cell lines, for subsequent functional validation. Of note, we did not include miR-193a-5p and miR-615-5p whose expression was significantly increased in SCC9 (miR-193a-5p) and in SCC9, SCC15 and SCC25 (miR-615-5p) when compared with the CDK2AP1-proficient cell lines, due to the very low expression levels detected by RT-qPCR (Fig. 2A).
Next, we exploited the StarMIr tool24 which allows the visualization of the interaction between each miR candidate and the CDK2AP1 3’-UTR. High-confidence structural predictions were obtained for all top 5 candidates, together with the identification of their seed sequences within the CDK2AP1-3’UTR sequence (Supplementary Fig. 3A-B). Of interest, two high-confidence predictions were made for the miR-155-5p interactor sites 1 (upstream) and 2 (downstream).
Altogether, these results indicate that multiple miRNAs contribute to suppress CDK2AP1 protein expression in our panel of OSCC cell lines and that 5 in particular appear to play a central role in this process.
Functional validation of the newly identified CDK2AP1 antagonist miRs
We first analyzed the role of miR-21-5p, the top-ranked post-transcriptional regulator of CDK2AP1, by transfecting proficient cell lines with a pre-miR-21 expression vector (pCDH-CMV-MCS lentivector; System Bioscience). This approach ensures a more physiological maturation of the final miR15 since overexpression of mature miRs can result in excessive levels (in the 100–1000 fold range) likely to cause off-target and artifactual effects25. The reverse approach was employed for the CDK2AP1-deficient cell lines, transduced with the miR-21 inhibitor (miRZip-21 lentivector; System bioscience).
Ectopic pre-mir-21 expression in the CDK2AP1-proficient cell lines (CA1, LM and LUC4) as well as in the non-cancerous cell lines OKF-6, validated by RT-qPCR (Fig. 2B), results in a decrease of CDK2AP1 protein expression as shown by western blot analysis (Fig. 2C). Protein expression levels of PDCD4 (Programmed Cell Death 4), a well-established miR-21-5p target, were likewise decreased26.
Vice versa, inhibition of miR-21-5p by miRZip-21 resulted in the rescue of CDK2AP1 and PDCD4 expression in the SCC4, SCC9, SCC15 and SCC25 cell lines (Fig. 2D). Notably, miR-21-5p inhibition in SCC9 resulted in consistent rescue of PDCD4, comparable with the other SCC lines, while CDK2AP1 re-expression was less prominent. The latter is likely to result from the action of miRs other than miR-21-5p, as also indicated by the significantly increased expression of the other candidates, i.e. miR-23b-3p, miR26b-5p, and miR193a-5p, in SCC9 (Fig. 2A).
In order to ultimately validate the CDK2AP1-specificity of the selected miRs, the CDK2AP1-3’UTR full-length wild type sequence (CDK2AP1-3’UTR, 754 bp; Supplementary Fig. 3B) was cloned in the pGL3 luciferase reporter vector (Promega). Mutant versions of the reporter vector (mut-CDK2AP1-3’UTR) were then generated by in vitro site-directed mutagenesis to carry specific alterations at the predicted miRNA binding sites (Fig. 3A). The embryonic kidney cell line HEK293T was here employed due to its high transfection efficiency, to transiently express the newly generated pGL3-Luc vectors together with the corresponding miR expression vectors. Expression of the mature forms of each of the candidate miRs was confirmed by RT-qPCR (Fig. 3B) and luciferase activity was measured for each of the selected miRs. In the case of the wild type pGL3-CDK2AP1-3’UTR vector, reduction of the relative luciferase activity compared to the mock control was detected for each of the 5 miRs ranging from 75% for miR21-5p to 42% for miR155-5p (Fig. 3C). The vectors encompassing targeted deletions of the specific seed sequences (pGL3-mut-CDK2AP1-3’UTR) abolished the miRs-driven reduction in reporter activity, thus confirming the 3’-UTR sequence specificity of their inhibitory effects (Fig. 3D). Notably, when multiple seed sequences for the same miRNA were identified in the 3’-UTR, as was the case of mir155-5p, ablating only one of the two sites allowed only partial rescue of luciferase activity. Accordingly, when both predicted seed sequences were mutated, full rescue of luciferase expression was observed (Fig. 3D).
Altogether, these observations highlight the sequence specificity of the inhibitory effects exerted by the selected miRs on CDK2AP1 protein expression, and indicate that, notwithstanding the central role of miR-21-5p, multiple miRs target the CDK2AP1 3’-UTR and contribute to negatively regulate its translation. However, the co-expression of multiple miRs targeting the same 3’-UTR poses additional questions relative to their cumulative or synergistic effects on the inhibition of CDK2AP1 protein expression. To this end, we chose to transiently express the 5 miR candidates, individually and in different combinations, in the HEK293T cell line, and evaluate their effects on the inhibition of protein expressions by western blot as well as by luciferase reporter assay. As expected, transient expression of the 5 individual miRs led to reduction in CDK2AP1 and PCDC4 expression when compared to the mock control, with miR-21-5p showing the most pronounced effects albeit not to a degree of full suppression (Fig. 3E-F). Instead, a more complete ablation of CDK2AP1 protein expression might be attained by the cooperation of multiple miRs. To test this hypothesis, we co-expressed miR-21-5p with each of the other miR candidates (Fig. 3E-F). As shown in Fig. 3G, we did not observe any significant effect or further reduction in relative luciferase levels upon co-expression of any of the four miRs with miR-21-5p. In order to quantitatively evaluate the degree of cooperativity among the different miRs, we calculated the Coefficient of Drug Interaction (CDI), defined as the quotient between the combination treatment (co-expression of miR-21-5p with each of the other candidates) and the average of the individual treatments. No evidence of significant synergism or even cumulative effects between any specific miR was found (Fig. 3G).
Overall, these results confirm the validity of our approach in that gain- and loss-of-function alterations in the newly identified miRs result in the down- and up-regulation of CDK2AP1 expression. Moreover, the presence of seed sequences for the candidate miRs in the 3’UTR of the CDK2AP1 gene which, when deleted, dramatically affect the capacity of the selected ncRNAs to modulate its expression, further validate the authenticity of our findings.
Expression and relevance of the CDK2AP1 antagonist miRs in head and neck and oral squamous cell carcinomas.
To assess the clinical relevance of the tumor-specific expression of the newly identified miRs, we analyzed miR-seq data obtained from patient-derived head and neck cancers, publicly available from the TCGA-HNSC database (https://portal.gdc.cancer.gov/projects/TCGA-HNSC), by integrating clinical follow-up information with miR expression profiles.
We first stratified the miRs based on their tumor-specific expression levels compared with the matched normal tissues (Fig. 4A). Based on this analysis, we excluded mir23b-3p and mir26b-5p which showed significant downregulation in the tumor samples. Next, we stratified tumors with high- and low-miR expression. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that tumors with high expression of miR-21-5p and miR-93-5p share a worse overall DFS probability (p = 0.018 and p = 0.0037, respectively; Fig. 4B). In contrast, and in disagreement with previous reports27–30, increased miR-155-5p expression does not affect survival probability (p = 0.15). The latter may be due to the heterogeneity of the head and neck cohort, encompassing tumors from different anatomical locations. Moreover, the miR-seq data were obtained from bulk preparations, inclusive of different cell types from the TME which may also express miR-155-5p and act as confounders31,32.
Next, we repeated the analysis by combining miR-21-5p expression with miR-93-5p and miR-155-5p. In the case of the miR-21/miR-93 combination, the difference in overall survival became significant when compared with cancers with increased expression of the single miRs (p = 0.0036; Fig. 4C). The same was not true for the miR-21/miR-155 combination (p = 0.067 vs. p = 0.018; Fig. 4C), although an improving trend, when compared with miR-21 alone, is observed. Therefore, the combination of miR-21-5p and miR-93-5p expression predicts at best overall survival in the analyzed cohort of head and neck cancers.
IF/ISH analysis of tumor TMAs enables improved spatial characterization of the inverse correlation between CDK2AP1 and miR-21-5p expression.
In order to better characterize the inverse relationship between CDK2AP1 and miR-21-5p expression as predicted by the results thus far, we performed a multiplex immunofluorescence (IF) and in situ hybridization (ISH) analysis of tumor tissue microarrays (TMAs) encompassing a retrospective cohort of primary oral squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue from patients that received surgery as the primary form of treatment (Table 1). In total, our TMAs included 432 tumor cores, derived from 144 OSCCs. From each tumor, 3 regions of interest were annotated by S.K. to be included in the TMA (see Material and Methods). In addition to CDK2AP1 and miR-21-5p, the tissue sections were stained with the 34BE12 antibody (Ventana) that recognizes several cytokeratins (i.e., CK-1, -5, -10, and − 14) and distinguishes tumor cells from the surrounding stroma.
Computational analysis of the digital TMA scanned images allowed us to derive signal intensities from every cell in each core, in the context of the spatial architecture of the tumors and surrounding microenvironment. As depicted in Supplementary Fig. 4A, epithelial tumor cells (highlighted in red by 34BE12 expression and showed as red dots in the digital reconstruction) are clearly distinguished from the surrounding stromal cells (34BE12-negative and represented as grey dots. Representative images of CDK2AP1pos and CDK2AP1lo/neg tumors are depicted in Fig. 5A. The anti-correlation between CDK2AP1 expression in the nuclei and that of miR-21-5p in the cytoplasm is clearly visible in the higher magnification inlets of the cancer fields and the digital representation of the expression densities (Supplementary Fig. 4B). The relative quantifications of the tumor and stromal compartments provide additional support for the antagonism between the tumor suppressor protein and the miR (Fig. 5B). Next, cores with less than 500 tumor cells (34BE12pos) were excluded and the relative abundance of miR-21-5p was established in the tumor and stromal compartments. As shown in Supplementary Fig. 4C, miR-21-5p expression appears increased throughout the TME. This approach highlights not only the inter-tumor heterogeneity but also the different CDK2AP1 and miR-21-5p expression patterns within each core when the microscope image is paired with the digital reconstruction across the TMA core (Fig. 5C).
Upon stratification of the TMA data based on mir-21-5p expression (mean_miR-21-5p > 150: high; mean_miR-21-5p < 150: low; Supplementary Fig. 4D), CDK2AP1 expression was found to significantly differ between the 2 groups (p = 0.006; Fig. 5D). However, it is noteworthy that considerable heterogeneity is observed again suggesting that miR-21-5p is unlikely to be the only CDK2AP1 antagonist.
Taken together, these results confirm the anti-correlation between miR-21-5p and CDK2AP1 expression highlighting how the interaction between miRs and their gene targets can benefit from cell type stratification and spatial information.