Stem Cell Markers in Cancer: Do They Have Clinical Significance?

In cancer, a subpopulation of malignant cells expresses markers of normal stem cells. These cells have the potential of initiating tumor growth and therefore also tumor recurrence. Thus, these cells are called cancer stem cells. A myriad of markers have been applied to identify these cells, but no single marker can be found exclusively in cancer stem cells. In many types of cancer, clinical recurrence and tumor progression are the main causes of mortality, despite intense oncological treatment. It has been proposed that the presence of cancer stem cells causes this resistance to therapy. The scope of this thesis is to investigate the role of stem cell markers and genes in the clinical setting. Especially, the aim was to elucidate the clinical significance of stem cell markers as novel prognostic and diagnostic tools in cancer. Tumor biopsy material from central nervous system tumors (oligodendroglioma, astrocytoma and glioblatoma), neural crest derived tumors (pheochromocytomas) and oral carcinoma was screened for stem cell markers. Initially, 15 stem cell markers were screened in a test series of gliomas. The markers applied for expanded tumor analyses (in 305 cases of glioma, 42 cases of pheochromocytoma, and 73 cases of oral carcinoma) were BMI-1, Snail, p16, mdm2, and c-Myc. Data on marker expression was compared with clinical and pathological parameters. In gliomas, BMI-1 expression was found in nearly all tumors analyzed, but the frequency of BMI-1 expressing cells was highly variable, ranging from 1 to 100%. In oligodendroglioma, BMI-1 expression was identified as a prognostic marker independent of tumor grade and clinical parameters. In pheochromocytoma, Snail expression was shown to distinguish between the metastatic and non-metastatic forms of the tumor. Snail expression was seen only in metastatic tumors, whereas non-metastatic tumors did not commonly express Snail. Finally, in oral carcinoma, BMI-1 expression was seen in roughly 80% of tumors, and Snail expression was high or very high in all cases. The lack of BMI-1 expression was associated with early relapse in oral carcinoma.

Defects in tricarboxylic acid cycle enzymes Fumarate hydratase and Succinate dehydrogenase in cancer

Hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell cancer (HLRCC) is a recently characterized cancer syndrome which predisposes to cutaneous and uterine leiomyomas as well as renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Uterine leiomyosarcoma (ULMS) has also been observed in certain Finnish HLRCC families. The predisposing gene for this syndrome, fumarate hydratase (FH), was identified in 2002. The well-known function of FH is in the tricarboxylic acid cycle (TCAC) in the energy metabolism of cells. As FH is a novel cancer gene, the role of FH mutations in tumours is in general unknown. Similarly, the mechanisms through which defective FH is associated with tumourigenesis are unclear. The loss of a wild type allele has been observed in virtually all HLRCC patients tumours and the FH enzyme activities are either totally lost or remarkably reduced in the tissues of mutation carrier patients. Therefore, FH is assumed to function as a tumour suppressor. Mutations in genes encoding subunits of other TCAC enzyme SDH have also been reported recently in tumours: mutations in SDHB, SDHC, and SDHD genes predispose to paraganglioma and pheochromocytoma. In the present study, mutations in the SDHB gene were observed to predispose to RCC. This was the first time that mutations in SDHB have been detected in extra-paraganglial tumours. Two different SDHB mutations were observed in two unrelated families. In the first family, the index patient was diagnosed with RCC at the age of 24 years. Additionally, his mother with a paraganglioma (PGL) of the heart and his maternal uncle with lung cancer were both carriers of the mutation. The RCC of the index patient and the PGL of his mother showed LOH. In the other family, an SDHB mutation was detected in two siblings who were both diagnosed with RCC at the ages of 24 and 26 years. Both of the siblings also suffered PGL. All these tumours showed LOH. Therefore, we concluded that mutations in SDHB predispose also for RCC in certain families. Several tumour types were analysed for FH mutations to define the role of FH mutations in these tumour types. In addition, patients with a putative cancer phenotype were analysed to identify new HLRCC families. Three FH variants were detected, of which two were novel. One of the variants was observed in a patient diagnosed with ULMS at the age of 41 years. However, LOH was not detected in the tumour tissue. The FH enzyme activity of the mutated protein was clearly reduced, being 43% of the activity of the normal protein. Together with the results from an earlier study we calculated that the prevalence of FH mutations in Finnish non-syndromic ULMS is around 2.4%. Therefore, FH mutations seem to have a minor role in the pathogenesis on non-syndromic ULMS. Two other germline variants were detected in a novel tumour type, ovarian mucinous cystadenoma. However, tumour tissues of the patients were not available for LOH studies and therefore LOH status remained unclear. Therefore, it is possible that FH mutations predispose also for ovarian tumours but further studies are needed to verify this result. A novel variant form of the FH gene (FHv) was identified and characterized in more detail. FHv contains an alternative first exon (1b), which appeared to function as 5 UTR sequence. The translation of FHv is initiated in vitro from exons two and three. The localization of FHv is both cytosolic and nuclear, in contrast to the localization of FH in mitochondria. FHv is expressed at low levels in all human tissues. Interestingly, the expression was induced after heat shock treatment and in chronic hypoxia. Therefore, FHv might have a role e.g. in the adaptation to unfavourable growth conditions. However, this remains to be elucidated.

Structure and function of GDNF receptor alpha splice variants

The growth factors of the glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) family consisting of GDNF, neurturin (NRTN), artemin (ARTN) and persephin (PSPN), are involved in the development, differentiation and maintenance of many types of neurons. They also have important functions outside the nervous system in the development of kidney, testis and thyroid gland. Each of these GFLs preferentially binds to one of the glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)-anchored GDNF family receptors α (GFRα). GDNF binds to GFRα1, NRTN to GFRα2, ARTN to GFRα3 and PSPN to GFRα4. The GFLs in the complex with their cognate GFRα receptors all bind to and signal through the receptor tyrosine kinase RET. Alternative splicing of the mouse GFRα4 gene yields three splice isoforms. These had been described as putative GPI-anchored, transmembrane and soluble forms. My goal was to characterise the function of the different forms of mouse GFRα4. I firstly found that the putative GPI-anchored GFRα4 (GFRα4-GPI) is glycosylated, membrane-bound, GPI-anchored and interacts with PSPN and RET. We also showed that mouse GFRα4-GPI mediates PSPN-induced phosphorylation of RET, promotes PSPN-dependent neuronal differentiation of the rat pheochromocytoma cell line PC6-3 and PSPN-dependent survival of cerebellar granule neurons (CGN). However, although this receptor can mediate PSPN-signalling and activate RET, GFRα4-GPI does not recruit RET into lipid rafts. The recruitment of RET into lipid rafts has previously been thought to be a crucial event for GDNF- and GFL-mediated signalling via RET. I secondly demonstrated that the putative transmembrane GFRα4 (GFRα4-TM) is indeed a real transmembrane GFRα4 protein. Although it has a weak binding capacity for PSPN, it can not mediate PSPN-dependent phosphorylation of RET, neuronal differentiation or survival. These data show that GFRα4-TM is inactive as a receptor for PSPN. Surprisingly, GFRα4-TM can negatively regulate PSPN-mediated signalling via GFRα4-GPI. GFRα4-TM interacts with GFRα4-GPI and blocks PSPN-induced phosphorylation of RET, neuronal differentiation as well as survival. Taken together, our data show that GFRα4-TM may act as a dominant negative inhibitor of PSPN-mediated signaling. The most exciting part of my work was the finding that the putative soluble GFRα4 (GFRα4-sol) can form homodimers and function as an agonist of the RET receptor. In the absence of PSPN, GFRα4-sol can promote the phosphorylation of RET, trigger the activation of the PI-3K/AKT pathway, induce neuronal differentiation and support the survival of CGN. Our findings are in line with a recent publication showing the GFRα4-sol might contribute to the inherited cancer syndrome multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2. Our data provide an explanation to how GFRα4-sol may cause or modify the disease. Mammalian GFRα4 receptors all lack the first Cys-rich domain which is present in other GFRα receptors. In the final part of my work I have studied the function of this particular domain. I created a truncated GFRα1 construct lacking the first Cys-rich domain. Using binding assays in both cellular and cell-free systems, phosphorylation assays with RET, as well as neurite outgrowth assays, we found that the first Cys-rich domain contributes to an optimal function of GFRα1, by stabilizing the interaction between GDNF and GFRα1.