Expression of MHC Class I Polypeptide-Related Sequence A (MICA) in Colorectal Cancer

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-311547/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Expression of MHC Class I Polypeptide-Related Sequence A (MICA) in Colorectal Cancer

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-311547/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Background: The major histocompatibility complex class I polypeptide-related sequence A gene (MICA) is one of the ligands of NKG2D activating receptor. MICA stimulates NKG2D that further triggers activation of natural killer cells which leads to killing of infected target cells. Tumor cells utilize escape strategies to subvert the biological function of NKG2D by shedding overexpressing MICA. In this study, we determine the levels of MICA colorectal cancers (CRCs). Additionally, we establish correlations between MICA expression and clinical characteristics. Publicly available data and bioinformatics tools are used for validation purposes.

Methods: We determined the MICA RNA expression levels and correlation with clinicopathological parameters in CRC using UALCAN web-portal. We performed immunohistochemical analysis on tissue microarrays having 192 samples, acquired from 96 CRC patients to validate the expression of MICA in CRC and adjacent uninvolved tissue and investigated its prognostic significance by Kaplan-Meir and proportional hazards methods.

Results: Bioinformatics and immunohistochemical analyses showed that MICA expression was significantly upregulated in CRCs as compared to uninvolved and the overexpression of MICA was independent of pathologic stage, histotype, nodal metastasis status, p53-status, as well as patient’s race, age and gender. Moreover, PROGgeneV2 survival analysis of two cohorts showed poor prognosis of CRC patients exhibiting high MICA expression.

Conclusions: Overall, our findings demonstrate high expression of MICA, suggest poor prognosis of CRC patients exhibiting high MICA expression. These results can be further explored due to its potential to provide clues to the mechanistic contributing role of the tumor microenvironment to the progression of progression of CRC.

Cancer Biology

MICA

IHC

colorectal cancer

expression

prognostic marker

As a leading cause of cancer-related deaths in Americans, cancer of colon and rectum remains in third position for new estimated cases and mortality according to American Cancer Society in 2020 [1]. Current diagnosis of CRC is based on tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage, which lacks the interpretation of epigenetic background and genetic variants. Therefore, identification of new biologic markers is a promising approach to improve detection of aggressive phenotypes and provide better guidelines for clinicians towards CRC treatment.

MHC class I polypeptide-related sequence A (MICA) is a cell surface protein overexpressed under stress conditions [2]. Upon interaction with natural killer group 2D (NKG2D) receptors, MICA promotes activation of natural killer (NK) cells, and IFN-gamma secretion and degranulation of perforin and granzymes, leading to apoptosis of cells expressing high levels of MICA [3, 4]. Due to its functions, MICA works as an important component of the immunosurveillance system to combat infections by foreign pathogens and conditions that lead to cellular stress, including cancer [5]. Studies show that MICA has a soluble isoform (sMICA), which is reported to be highly expressed in aggressive forms of cancer and to reduce the cytotoxic activity of NK cells [6]. Therefore, MICA has been proposed as a relevant player of the tumor microenvironment (TME) [7], worth to be explored as a factor of tumorigenesis.

Aberrant expression of MICA has been described in different types of cancers, including prostate, lung, stomach, and cholangiocarcinoma [8]. Despite the level of information, the role of MICA expression in tumorigenesis is not totally clear. In carcinoma of the prostate [9], gastric cancer [10], and non-small cell lung cancer [11], higher expression of MICA related to better prognosis. On the other hand, higher expression in patients with pancreatic cancer [12], breast cancer [13], hepatocellular carcinoma [14], and non-small cell lung cancer [15] predicted for poor outcome. In relation to CRC, elevated expression of MICA has been found in tumor tissue as compared to normal specimens [16]. However, it was reported improved disease-specific survival for patients with high expression of MICA [17, 18].

Since data suggest MICA as a molecule of the TME with an emergent role as a marker of aggressive disease, further investigations are needed to establish its prognostic value in CRC. Herein, we determine the tumor levels of MICA in patients with CRC. Additionally, we establish correlations between MICA expression and clinical characteristics. Publicly available gene expression data and bioinformatics tools are used for validation purposes. Our findings agree with published literature for higher expression of MICA in CRCs, however, contrary to prior reports in CRC [17, 18], they point out to poor prognosis for patients whose CRCs exhibit high MICA expression. In all, our findings suggest additional work is needed to establish the role of MICA expression as a discriminator of aggressive CRC.

Bioinformatics analysis: The UALCAN platform was used to access MICA mRNA levels in normal (uninvolved) colon and CRC tissues [19]. This resource for gene expression analysis uses data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). mRNA data are expressed as transcripts per million and representative of standard deviations from the median across samples for the given cancer type. PROGgeneV2, prognostic database [20], was used to perform Kaplan Meier and proportional hazards survival analyses in CRC patients associated to mRNA levels of MICA (GSE41258 and GSE29621 independent publicly available data sets).

Patients and tissue samples: The study population was derived from the University of Mississippi Medical Center (UMMC), Jackson, MS, USA. Specimens collected (2006-2016) following surgery were de-identified and later provided a unique study identification. Clinical and pathological characteristics of study subjects are provided in Table 1.

Table 1: Clinicopathological characteristics of patients
Characteristic	Finding
Age, years, mean (range)	59.2 (23-87)
Sex, Number (%)
Male	50 (52.1%)
Female	46 (47.9%)
Race/ethnicity, number (%)
African Americans	56 (58.3%)
Non-Hispanic Whites	40 (41.7%)
Site, Number
Colon	62 (64.6%)
Rectum	34 (35.4%)
TNM stage, number (%)
I	11 (11.4%)
II	30 (31.3%)
III	35 (36.5%)
IV	20 (20.8%)
Histological grade, number (%)
Well-differentiated	6 (6.3%)
Moderately differentiated	78 (81.3%)
Poorly differentiated	7 (7.3%)
Unknown	5 (5.1%)
Lymph node metastasis, number (%)
Negative	36 (37.5%)
Positive	50 (52.1%)
Unknown	10 (10.4%)
Surgical margins, number (%)
Negative	74 (77.1%)
Positive	18 (18.8%)
Unknown	4 (4.1%)
Follow-up time (years), median (range)	4.6 (0.1-10.3)

The data includes sex, race, TNM stage, histological grade, evidence of LNM, surgical margins, survival times, and status. Tumor and normal colonic tissues, adjacent to tumor, were obtained immediately after operation. We included 96 cases, assessed by a board-certified pathologist (VS). Staging was performed according to the guidelines of the American Joint Committee on Cancer. Following surgery, clinical follow-up data were obtained, with the median follow-up of 5.4 years (range 0.1-10.3 years) for the 96 patients. Due to its retrospective nature, the Institutional Review Board waived the need for informed consent. The study was approved by the University of Mississippi Medical Center (UMMC) Institutional Review Board under protocol # 2012-0205. All methods were performed according to standards set by the Declaration of Helsinki.

This study (under Institutional Review Protocol number 2012-0205) was performed according to standards set by the Declaration of Helsinki.

Construction of tissue microarrays: Tumor stage-matched tissues were used to create tissue microarrays (TMA). For each patient, representative formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue blocks including a normal block and a tumor block. A total of 192 samples for the TMA construction were included in the final composite block. Based on the verified histological features, FFPE blocks of primary tumors were selected by the pathologist. From the primary FFPE blocks, cylindrical cores of 2-mm diameter were transferred to paraffin blocks using a Beecher MTA1 Manual Tissue Arrayer (Beecher Instruments, Sun Prairie, WI). For IHC staining and analysis, the resulting TMA composite blocks were sectioned at 5-μm thickness.

Immunohistochemistry: As described before [9, 21], IHC was performed according to manufacturer’s instructions provided in ABC Kit (Vector Laboratories Inc., Burlingame, CA). Following antigen retrieval, with a citrate buffer (pH 6.0) for 20 min, and incubation with 3% hydrogen peroxide, the FFPE TMA sections were deparaffinized and rehydrated during 10 min. To block unspecific binding, the slides were treated with Protein Block Serum-Free (Cat X0909, Dako, Santa Clara, CA) for 12 min followed by incubation with 10% normal serum for 1 h at room temperature. Next, the TMA slides were incubated with rabbit anti-human primary polyclonal antibody against MICA in 1:25 dilution (Cat# PA5-35346, Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA) overnight at 4°C. Next, the slides were washed with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), incubated with components of the ABC kit, and with 3, 3-diaminobenzidine (DAB) for color development. Slides were counterstained in hematoxylin and mounted. Subcellular localizations of MICA were defined as cytoplasmic/membranous or globular staining by the pathologists, and scored. Evaluation of IHC was independently performed by two independent evaluators blinded to the specific diagnosis or prognosis for each individual case. To assess the MICA cytoplasmic staining intensity, a modified version of the “quickscore” method was utilized [9]. Data are expressed as median (interquartile range). To assess the association between MICA expression and clinical features in the CRC cases, patients were dichotomized by low and high MICA tumor expression, based on the optimal cutoff point calculated as the value with the most significant log‑rank test split (3.4 for combined intensity score).

Statistical analysis: The SPSS software package, version 13.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL USA), SAS 9.4 (SAS Inc., Cary, NC, USA) and GraphPad Prism (GraphPad Software, La Jolla, CA were used to analyze the data. The difference in MICA gene expression between uninvolved tissue and tumor tissue or for any other pairwise comparison obtained using bioinformatics analyzes was evaluated by Student's t‑test. One‑way ANOVA and Dunnett's multiple comparisons were utilized when three or more groups were compared. Pairwise comparisons were always relative to normal tissue. For IHC data, differences were compared by Mann‑Whitney U test for non‑matched data or Wilcoxon signed rank test for matched‑pairs. Two‑sided P‑values were determined via Chi‑square or Fisher's exact tests for categorical variables. Overall survival was analyzed by the Kaplan‑Meier and proportional hazards methods with the use of the log‑rank test and hazard risks (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) to compare overall survival. For all analyses, the level of significance was set at P<0.05.

Bioinformatics analyses of RNA expression of MICA in CRC tissues: Inspection of uninvolved tissues (N=41) vs. primary CRC (N=286) (Figure 1A) by UALCAN database revealed a 30% increase of expression of MICA mRNA in CRC relative to normal epithelium (P=1.794E-07). Furthermore, we found elevated expression of MICA in CRCs of patients for both sexes [males (n=41) and females (n=156), P<0.0001 for each comparison] (Figure 1B). Further analysis of MICA transcripts based on individual cancer stages [stage 1 (n=45), stage 2 (n=110), stage 3 (n=80), and stage 4 (n=39)] revealed high expression for all cancer stages, relative to normal tissue (P<0.0001) for each comparison (Figure 1C), however no differences were observed between individual stages. Next, we determined the association of MICA mRNA with patient’s race. MICA transcripts were elevated regardless of race in CRC, when tumors of Caucasian (n=193), P<0.0001; African‑American (n=55), P=0.002; and Asian (n=11), P=0.022 CRC patients were compared to uninvolved tissue (Figure 1D). When analyzed by age (Figure 1E), MICA mRNA was not different between normal tissue and tumor obtained from 12 individuals aged 21-40 years old (P=0.06). MICA transcripts, however were significantly elevated for all older groups [41‑60 years (n=90), P<0.0001; 61‑80 years (n=149), P<0.0001; and 81‑100 years (n=32), P=0.002], relative to normal epithelium. Further analysis showed MICA RNA expression was higher in CRCs based on histological subtypes than uninvolved tissues (Figure 1F). Expression was high, both for adenocarcinoma (n=243), P<0.0001 and for mucinous adenocarcinoma (n=37), P<0.0001 relative to normal tissue. However, no differences in transcript levels were noted between adenocarcinomas and mucinous tumors. In addition, MICA expressions in three distinct nodal metastasis status [N0 (n=166), N1 (n=70), and N2 (n=47); P<0.0001 for each comparison] were all upregulated, but comparable, as compared to non-tumorous tissue (Figure 1G). Likewise, MICA expression based on p53-status was elevated in CRCs. It was found that 160 CRC patients with p53-wild type and 122 patients with p53-mutated status exhibited higher MICA expression (Figure 1H), P<0.0001 for each case. Transcripts of MICA, however were not different between tumors from patients with p53-wild type or p53-mutate status.

Association between expression of MICA transcripts and survival of CRC patients: Using the prognostic database PROGgeneV2, we retrieved and performed survival analyses on the datasets GSE41258 and GS29621, using the median value as threshold. In both datasets, significantly poorer prognosis was found for patients with high MICA mRNA levels relative to those with low MICA mRNA (log rank, P=0.014, HR: 2.15, 95% CI: 1.17-3.94 for GSE41258 and log rank, P=0.003, HR: 9.87, 95% CI: 2.18-44.69 for GS29621) (Figures 2a and 2b).

MICA protein expression by immunohistochemical (IHC) profiling of normal colonic and tumor tissues: Out of 384 cores, a total of 74 cores were unsuitable and excluded from analysis due to loss of tissue or lack of viable cells within the core. Higher MICA expression was observed as globular/nuclear or cytoplasmic in cells from normal tissues (Figure 3A). Nuclear staining was observed in 11.6% (8 of 69) positively stained uninvolved cores. Cytoplasmic immunostaining was observed in 40.6% (28 of 69) normal cores. In both the basal and luminal portions of colonic crypts, staining was observed mainly in the cytoplasm of epithelial cells and the peripheral cytoplasm of Goblet cells, with negative reactivity to mucous glands. In CRCs, MICA staining was predominantly cytoplasmic, as noted in 84.9% (73 of 86) of the positively stained cores (Figure 3A). Globular staining was present in 32.6% (28 of 86) of positively stained specimens (Table 2). High expression was also observed in mucinous tumors as well as moderately and poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma (Figure 3B and 3C). Analysis of nuclear immunostaining revealed a 3.5-fold higher combined intensity score in CRCs (1.4 ± 2.5) relative to normal glandular samples (0.4 ± 1.4), P=0.002. Likewise, cytoplasmic immunostaining was 2.4-fold higher when the combined intensity score in CRCs (3.4 ± 2.8) was compared to normal glandular samples (1.4 ± 2.1), P<0.0001 (Figure 3D and Table 2). Due to higher prevalence of cytoplasmic immunostaining in CRCs, we used this value to perform further analyses.

Correlation between MICA tumor expression, clinical pathological features and patient survival in UMMC cohort: In order to assess the association between MICA expression and CRC clinical features, UMMC patients were divided into low and high MICA tumor expression based on the optimal cutoff point calculated based on the median (3.4) of cytoplasmic staining. Correlations between the two groups and clinical features were calculated using Fisher’s exact test (Table 3). There was not significant association of MICA expression with patients' sex (P=0.277), race/ethnicity (P=0.665), age (P=0.821), tumor site (P>0.999), surgical margins (P=0.404), LNM (P>0.999), N stage (P>0.999) or clinical stage (P=0.817). However, high MICA tumor immunoreactivity was associated with higher T stage (P=0.020). There was correlation between high MICA expression and poor OS, however the association was not statistically significant (log rank, P=0.213; HR: 1.206, 95% CI: 0.6947-2.115) (Supplementary Figure 1), nor following stratification by race/ethnicity, sex, age, site, surgical margins, or tumor stage (data not shown).

Table 2. Frequency of MICA expression in colonic tissue according to tissue type and localization.
Tissue/Localization	Frequency	MICA average combining stage score
Normal/Cytoplasmic	28/69 (40.6%)	1.4±2.1*^#
Tumor/Cytoplasmic	73/86 (84.9%)	3.4±2.8*^#
Normal/Nuclear	8/69 (11.6%)	0.4±1.4*^#
Tumor/Nuclear	27/86 (31.4%)	1.4±2.5*^#

*P<0.05 when comparing between different tissue types in the same cellular sub localization. ^#P<0.05 when comparing between different cellular sub localization in the same tissue type.

Table 3. Correlation of clinicopathologic findings with cytoplasmic MICA expression

MICA low

MICA high

p value

Sex

Female

Male

0.277

Race

African American

Caucasian American

0.665

Age

< 55 years

≥ 55 years

0.821

Site

Colon

Rectum

>0.999

Surgical margins

Negative

Positive

0.404

Lymph node metastasis

Negative

Positive

>0.999

T stage

1-2

3-4

0.020*

N stage

1-2

>0.999

Clinical stage

I-II

III-IV

0.817

*P<0.05.

CRC mortality rate is elevated worldwide. Even though the five-year survival of CRC patients has improved due to early detection, close to 25% of patients still are diagnosed with stage 4 disease. As the relative 5-year survival rate of patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) remains poor [22], there is an urgent unmet need to develop a more effective treatment for patients suffering from this disease. PD1 inhibitors have been a successful immunotherapy approach to a specific subgroup of mCRC, that are mismatch-repair-deficient and microsatellite instability-high [23]. Ongoing research is focused on looking for treatments for other subgroups of mCRC. Emerging approaches include targeting of the TME, which might complement immune checkpoint inhibition. To this end, in the current study we evaluated MICA as a potential TME marker for aggressive disease. Analysis by UALCAN database in CRC suggested that MICA expression was closely associated with individual cancer stages. In addition, MICA expression in UMMC CRC cohort, assessed by IHC, was increased in CRCs and was associated to features of aggressive disease.

Expressed in different malignancies, MICA is considered an important component of the tumor immunosurveillance by interacting with the receptor NKG2D and activating NK cells and co-stimulating subtypes of T-cells [24-26]. Our results showed increased expression of MICA in CRC compared to uninvolved tissue. Interestingly, higher MICA expression was significantly associated to increased tumor stage (T3 and T4), suggesting the potential of MICA as a marker for aggressive CRC.

There is disagreement in the literature about the association between MICA expression and the prognosis of cancer patients. Increased tumor levels of MICA were previously associated to good prognosis in prostate cancer and cervical cancer [27]. However, elevated MICA was reported as an indicator of poor prognosis pancreatic cancer [12] and breast cancer [13]. Survival analysis performed in our cohort suggests a possible association of poor prognosis to higher expression of MICA in CRCs (Supplementary Figure 1), supported by the PROGgeneV2 survival analysis in two distinct cohorts (Figure 2). In disagreement with our findings, two independent studies indicated better prognosis in patients with expression of MICA in CRC [17, 18]. Because this controversy has been also found in other tumor sites such as Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer [15, 28] and gastric cancer [10, 29], the matter of expression of MICA and its association with outcome remains an issue of active debate.

In different tumors, MICA sheds from the cell surface into the circulation as soluble component (sMICA). Binding of sMICA to NKG2D receptor, without activation or co-stimulation of the effector cells, and promotes tumor escape. Unfortunately, we did not have access to plasma to assess circulating levels of sMICA or NKG2D levels in NK cells. This would help us understand our results on scope of the described tumor immunoevasion strategy mediated by MICA. In aggressive pancreatic carcinoma, an inverse correlation was found between expression levels of soluble MICA and NKG2D [12]. Moreover, findings of a recent study concluded that high MICA serum levels are associated with poor prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) [30]. Findings from this study also suggested that MICA blocks NKG2D signaling pathway by mediating tumor-immune escape in HCC [30]. This pathway would further protect tumor cells from NK cell-mediated cytotoxicity in CRC. Further studies are needed to evaluate protein expression of NKG2D expression in CRC, its association with MICA, and mechanistic basis of the interaction between these two molecules. Benefits include development of innovative TME-based immunotherapy strategies.

Immune checkpoint blockade therapy has achieved limited success within CRC patients. Current research has been focusing on combined treatment with immunotherapy to improve the outcome of patients with aggressive form of the disease, including chemoimmunotherapy, immunotherapy with radiation therapy and others. A potential option is the stimulation of NK cells and cytotoxic T cells through stimulation of MICA expression and neutralization of sMICA. However, additional research is needed to clarify the divergent information related to the expression of MICA in CRC tumors as well as its prognostic value, and mechanistic involvement in disease aggressiveness.

Our study provides evidence to up-regulation of MICA in CRC and suggests poor prognosis of CRC patients exhibiting high MICA expression. We believe that relevance of our findings is high due to similar patterns of high MICA expression identified in large, publicly available omics databases, and the potential of MICA as an actionable molecule of the TME.

CRC Colorectal cancer

DFS Disease Free Survival

FFPE Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded

GI Gastrointestinal

IHC Immunohistochemistry

LNM Lymph Node Metastasis

MICA MHC class I polypeptide-related sequence A

TMA Tissue microarray

TNM Tumor-Node-Metastasis

UMMC University of Mississippi Medical Center

Ethical approval

The study was approved by the UMMC Institutional Review Board.

Ethics approval and consent to participate: Institutional Review Board waived the need for informed consent given the retrospective nature of the study. The study was approved by the University of Mississippi Medical Center (UMMC) Institutional Review Board under protocol # 2012-0205. All methods were performed according to standards set by the Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent for publication: Not applicable

Availability of data and materials: Datasets utilized for bioinformatics analysis are publicly available (GSE41258: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE41258; GSE29621: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE29621). Histopathology data are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Competing interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Funding: This study was supported by the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs, University of Mississippi Medical Center (IE and CRG); Coordination for the Improvement of the Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) Foundation, Scholarship #13603-13-2 (MJS), and the Impact Funds from School of Medicine and the Department of Pathology, University of Alabama at Birmingham (UM).

Authors' contributions: IE, SA, MS, VS, WSO, and SAD contributed to the conceptualization of the research concept, performing the experiments, formal analyses, and writing the original draft. AP, UM, and CRG contributed to the conceptualization of the research concept, study design, supervision, reviewing and editing the original draft, and funding acquisition.

Acknowledgements: We thank Elizabeth Tarsi, Tara Craft, Eldrin Bhanat, Jaswinder Kaur, and Joy King for establishing and maintaining the databases. We thank Dr. Amit Reddy at the University of Mississippi Medical Center for technical assistance and Dr. Donald Hill at the University of Alabama at Birmingham for editing the manuscript

Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2020. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 2020;70(1):7-30.
Zwirner NW, Fuertes MB, Girart MV, Domaica CI, Rossi LE. Immunobiology of the human MHC class I chain-related gene A (MICA): from transplantation immunology to tumor immune escape. Inmunología. 2006;25:25-38 https://www.inmunologia.org/Upload/Articles/6/7/679.pdf.
Bauer S, Groh V, Wu J, Steinle A, Phillips JH, Lanier LL, et al. Activation of NK cells and T cells by NKG2D, a receptor for stress-inducible MICA. Science (New York, NY. 1999;285(5428):727-9.
Lopez-Soto A, Huergo-Zapico L, Acebes-Huerta A, Villa-Alvarez M, Gonzalez S. NKG2D signaling in cancer immunosurveillance. International journal of cancer. 2015;136(8):1741-50.
Spear P, Wu MR, Sentman ML, Sentman CL. NKG2D ligands as therapeutic targets. Cancer Immun. 2013;13:8.
Ferrari de Andrade L, Tay RE, Pan D, Luoma AM, Ito Y, Badrinath S, et al. Antibody-mediated inhibition of MICA and MICB shedding promotes NK cell-driven tumor immunity. Science (New York, NY. 2018;359(6383):1537-42.
Baginska J, Viry E, Paggetti J, Medves S, Berchem G, Moussay E, et al. The critical role of the tumor microenvironment in shaping natural killer cell-mediated anti-tumor immunity. Front Immunol. 2013;4:490.
Ghadially H, Brown L, Lloyd C, Lewis L, Lewis A, Dillon J, et al. MHC class I chain-related protein A and B (MICA and MICB) are predominantly expressed intracellularly in tumour and normal tissue. British journal of cancer. 2017;116(9):1208-17.
Sakiyama MJ, Espinoza I, Reddy A, de Carlo F, Kumar A, Levenson AS, et al. Race-associated expression of MHC class I polypeptide-related sequence A (MICA) in prostate cancer. Experimental and molecular pathology. 2019;108:173-82.
Chen Y, Lin WS, Zhu WF, Lin J, Zhou ZF, Huang CZ, et al. Tumor MICA status predicts the efficacy of immunotherapy with cytokine-induced killer cells for patients with gastric cancer. Immunol Res. 2016;64(1):251-9.
Okita R, Maeda A, Shimizu K, Nojima Y, Saisho S, Nakata M. Clinicopathological relevance of tumor expression of NK group 2 member D ligands in resected non-small cell lung cancer. Oncotarget. 2019;10(63):6805-15.
Chen J, Xu H, Zhu XX. Abnormal expression levels of sMICA and NKG2D are correlated with poor prognosis in pancreatic cancer. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2016;12:11-8.
Madjd Z, Spendlove I, Moss R, Bevin S, Pinder SE, Watson NF, et al. Upregulation of MICA on high-grade invasive operable breast carcinoma. Cancer Immun. 2007;7:17.
Zhang J, Xu Z, Zhou X, Zhang H, Yang N, Wu Y, et al. Loss of expression of MHC class I-related chain A (MICA) is a frequent event and predicts poor survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2014;7(6):3123-31.
Chen Y, Lin G, Guo ZQ, Zhou ZF, He ZY, Ye YB. Effects of MICA expression on the prognosis of advanced non-small cell lung cancer and the efficacy of CIK therapy. PloS one. 2013;8(7):e69044.
Zhao Y, Chen N, Yu Y, Zhou L, Niu C, Liu Y, et al. Prognostic value of MICA/B in cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget. 2017;8(56):96384-95.
Watson NF, Spendlove I, Madjd Z, McGilvray R, Green AR, Ellis IO, et al. Expression of the stress-related MHC class I chain-related protein MICA is an indicator of good prognosis in colorectal cancer patients. International journal of cancer. 2006;118(6):1445-52.
McGilvray RW, Eagle RA, Watson NF, Al-Attar A, Ball G, Jafferji I, et al. NKG2D ligand expression in human colorectal cancer reveals associations with prognosis and evidence for immunoediting. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15(22):6993-7002.
Chandrashekar DS, Bashel B, Balasubramanya SAH, Creighton CJ, Ponce-Rodriguez I, Chakravarthi B, et al. UALCAN: A Portal for Facilitating Tumor Subgroup Gene Expression and Survival Analyses. Neoplasia (New York, NY. 2017;19(8):649-58.
Goswami CP, Nakshatri H. PROGgeneV2: enhancements on the existing database. BMC Cancer. 2014;14:970.
Espinoza I, Agarwal S, Reddy A, Shenoy V, Subramony C, Sakiyama M, et al. Expression of trefoil factor 3 is decreased in colorectal cancer. Oncology reports. 2021;45(1):254-64.
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Goding Sauer A, Fedewa SA, Butterly LF, Anderson JC, et al. Colorectal cancer statistics, 2020. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 2020;70(3):145-64.
Huyghe N, Baldin P, Van den Eynde M. Immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors in colorectal cancer: what is the future beyond deficient mismatch-repair tumours? Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf). 2020;8(1):11-24.
Raulet DH. Roles of the NKG2D immunoreceptor and its ligands. Nature reviews. 2003;3(10):781-90.
Ogasawara K, Lanier LL. NKG2D in NK and T cell-mediated immunity. J Clin Immunol. 2005;25(6):534-40.
Hayakawa Y, Smyth MJ. NKG2D and cytotoxic effector function in tumor immune surveillance. Seminars in immunology. 2006;18(3):176-85.
Cho H, Chung JY, Kim S, Braunschweig T, Kang TH, Kim J, et al. MICA/B and ULBP1 NKG2D ligands are independent predictors of good prognosis in cervical cancer. BMC Cancer. 2014;14:957.
Okita R, Yukawa T, Nojima Y, Maeda A, Saisho S, Shimizu K, et al. MHC class I chain-related molecule A and B expression is upregulated by cisplatin and associated with good prognosis in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2016;65(5):499-509.
Ribeiro CH, Kramm K, Galvez-Jiron F, Pola V, Bustamante M, Contreras HR, et al. Clinical significance of tumor expression of major histocompatibility complex class I-related chains A and B (MICA/B) in gastric cancer patients. Oncology reports. 2016;35(3):1309-17.
Luo Q, Luo W, Zhu Q, Huang H, Peng H, Liu R, et al. Tumor-Derived Soluble MICA Obstructs the NKG2D Pathway to Restrain NK Cytotoxicity. Aging and disease. 2020;11(1):118-28.

No competing interests reported.

MICACRCSupplementarymaterials031521.docx

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Expression of MHC Class I Polypeptide-Related Sequence A (MICA) in Colorectal Cancer

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Background

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusions

Abbreviations

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1