-
The human PCa cell line LNCaP (Cat. No. TCHu173) was obtained from the Chinese Academy of Science Cell Bank (Shanghai, China). Fetal bovine serum (FBS), charcoal-stripped FBS (CS-FBS), RPMI1640 (phenol-red free), and 0.25% Trypsin-EDTA were bought from Gibco (Grand Island, NY). MEHP and dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO) were obtained from Sigma (St. Louis, MO) and TRC (Toronto, Canada) respectively. Gene primers were synthesized by Sangon Biotech (Shanghai, China). The QIAamp® DNA Mini Kitwas from Qiagen (Hilden, Germany). The 5-mC DNA ELISA Kit, Quest 5-hmC™ DNA ELISA Kit, and EZ DNA MethylationTM Kit were from Zymo Research (Orange, California). GoTaq® Hot Start was obtained from Promega (Madison, USA). PyroMark® Gold Q96 Reagents were bought from Qiagen (Germany).
-
LNCaP cells were cultured in RPMI1640 containing 10% FBS in a humidified atmosphere of 5% CO2 at 37 ℃. The cells were seeded in 100-mm dishes at a density of 1 × 106 cells per dish and treated with MEHP (0, 1, 5, 10, and 25 μmol/L) in CS-FBS medium for 3 days, as described previously[11]. The equivalent volume of DMSO (final concentration ≤ 0.1%) served as the vehicle.
-
Genomic DNA was extracted using the QIAamp® DNA Mini Kit according to the manufacturer's recommended protocol. The concentration and quality of DNA were assayed with a NanoDrop 2000 spectrophotometer (Thermo Fisher, Inc.). The obtained DNA was stored at -80 ℃ until further use.
-
The percentage of 5-mC (%) and 5-hmC (%) in genomic DNA was assessed using the 5-mC DNA ELISA Kit and Quest 5-hmC™ DNA ELISA Kit respectively according to the manufacturer's protocol. Briefly, 100 ng of genomic DNA was denatured and incubated with a mix consisting of anti-5-mC or anti-5-hmC monoclonal antibodies and the corresponding secondary antibodies. The absorbance at 405 nm was measured using an ELISA plate reader. The percentage of 5-mC (%) and 5-hmC (%) was separately calculated using the standard curve equation and the DNA controls in the same experiment.
-
DNA methylation was evaluated using bisulfite-converted DNA by pyrosequencing, a quantitative assay based on PCR. A total of 500 ng DNA was modified by using the Zymo EZ DNA Methylation Kit. The bisulfite-converted DNA was eluted in 30 μL of M-Elution buffer and stored at -20 ℃ until analysis. Then the DNA was amplified using GoTaqR Hot Start Polymerase to generate PCR-amplified templates; the primers are shown in Table 1. The bisulfite-converted DNA of SMO was amplified by nested PCR. The primers, SMObis1 and SMObis2, were used for the outer and inner PCRs respectively. The biotinylated PCR product underwent pyrosequencing using PyroMark Gold Q96 Reagents in the PyroMark Q96 ID Pyrosequencing System (Qiagen, Germany). The methylation value was calculated as the percentage of cytosine bases that are methylated at each CpG site. The percentage of methylated cytosines was quantified for four CpG sites in PTCH and six CpG sites in SMO. The methylation (%) of each CpG site and the average methylation (%) of all studied CpG sites were calculated.
Table 1. PCR and Pyrosequencing Primers for PTCH/SMO CpG Site Amplification and Analysis (5'-3')
Items PTCH[18] SMO[19] PCR primers F:GGGGATAGAATGGTTTAG
R:Biotin-ACTCCAAAAACTACTACTSMObis1 F:GAYGATTTTAGATTAAGTAAGGTGTT
R:TCCCACCATTAAAACCACCT
SMObis2 F:TTYGTGTATTTTAGAGAGTTTAG
R:Biotin-TCCCACCATTAAAACCACCTAnnealing
temperatures52.0 ℃ 55.6 ℃ (SMObis1)
53.6 ℃ (SMObis2)Pyrosequencing
primersAGGAGTATAAGAAAGTAGAGTT GAGTTAGAGTAATAAAGGAGT Analyzed sequences
and regionsAGTAGTTATYGYGAATTTAGTAGTTAGAGTTYGAGTA
GTTYGA (from -310 to -269 bp)aGGTYGTYGGYGGGGAGAGTTYGGGGGGTTGYGGYG
(from -479 to -445 bp)aNote. aThe transcription initiation sites of PTCH and SMO were separately designated as 0. YG indicates the detected CpG site. -
The methylation levels (%) were presented as the mean ± standard deviation (SD) values from triplicate experiments. For group comparisons, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Bonferroni's test was performed using SPSS Statistics software (version 19.0, IBM, Inc.) for statistical data analysis. The correlations between the DNA methylation of PTCH and SMO and gene expression were tested separately using Pearson correlation. Differences were considered significant at P values < 0.05. Plotting of the figures was performed using the GraphPad Prim 5 software package (GraphPad Software, Inc.).
-
The methylation status of LNCaP cells treated with MEHP was detected for 3 days because our previous findings showed that MEHP can regulate the expression of PTCH and SMO after 3 days of treatment. The effects of MEHP on genomic methylation (including the content of 5-mC and 5-hmC) in LNCaP cells were also tested. The proportion of 5-mC (%) detected in the control group was 2.28% ± 0.09%. Compared to that in the control, the amount of 5-mC (%) significantly decreased in the groups treated with MEHP (1, 5, 10, and 25 μmol/L) for 3 days (P < 0.01), decreasing by 28.16% in the group treated with 25 μmol/L MEHP (Figure 1A). However, the proportion of 5-hmC (%) in the control group was 0.06% ± 0.01%. Compared to after the control treatment, there was no significant difference in the percentage of 5-hmC (%) after treatment with MEHP (1, 5, 10, and 25 μmol/L) for 3 days (Figure 1B).
Figure 1. Effect of MEHP on the amount of 5-mC and 5-hmC in LNCaP cells. Cells were treated with MEHP (0, 1, 5, 10, and 25 μmol/L) for 3 days. Then the proportion of cytosines with 5-mC (A) and 5-hmC (B) was assessed in LNCaP cells. Bars represent the mean ± SD values from triplicate experiments. (**P < 0.01, compared to the CS-FBS control group).
-
In the CS-FBS control group, the mean methyla-tion levels of PTCH in CpG 1, CpG 2, CpG 3, and CpG 4 were 6.35% ± 1.03%, 4.25% ± 2.10%, 9.13% ± 2.27%, and 6.60% ± 0.62% respectively. Compared to the control, there were no significant changes in the methylation levels of each CpG site in groups treated with MEHP (1, 5, 10, and 25 μmol/L). Moreover, the average methylation of all of the studied CpG sites of PTCH also showed no significant differences (Figure 2). Interestingly, compared to the CS-FBS control, the methylation levels of each CpG site in SMO showed significant differences following MEHP treatment (Figure 3). Moreover, the average methylation level of the six studied CpG sites in SMO in the CS-FBS control was 14.76% ± 0.54%. Compared to the control, there were also significant changes in the average methylation levels of SMO and the methylation levels were observably upregulated after treatment with MEHP doses of 5 and 10 μmol/L.
Figure 2. Effect of MEHP on the DNA methylation of PTCH. The methylation (%) of each of the four CpG sites in PTCH and the average methylation (%) of all of the studied CpG sites were calculated. Results are presented as the mean ± SD values from triplicate experiments.
Figure 3. Effect of MEHP on the DNA methylation of SMO. The methylation (%) of each of the six CpG sites in SMO and the average methylation (%) of all of the studied CpG sites were calculated. Results are presented as the mean ± SD values from triplicate experiments. (*P < 0.05 and **P < 0.01, compared to the CS-FBS control group)
-
To explore the relationship between DNA methylation and the genetic expression of PTCH and SMO, the methylation levels of these genes were compared with their mRNA expression levels at day 3 of treatment with MEHP. Correlation analysis showed that there were no significant correlations between DNA methylation and the expression of PTCH and SMO under treatment with MEHP (Table 2).
Table 2. Correlation between Methylation and PTCH and SMO Expression under MEHP Treatmenta
Item Pearson Coefficient PValue PTCH CpG 1 0.168 0.788 CpG 2 0.537 0.351 CpG 3 0.000 1.000 CpG 4 0.577 0.308 Average 0.164 0.792 SMO CpG 1 -0.234 0.705 CpG 2 0.064 0.919 CpG 3 0.405 0.499 CpG 4 0.711 0.178 CpG 5 0.494 0.397 CpG 6 -0.048 0.938 Average 0.400 0.504 Note. aThe correlation coefficients between the gene methylation levels and gene expression when treated with MEHP for 3 days were analyzed by Pearson' correlation test.
doi: 10.3967/bes2017.085
Effect of Mono-2-ethyhexyl Phthalate on DNA Methylation in Human Prostate Cancer LNCaP Cells
-
Abstract:
Objective To evaluate whether mono (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (MEHP) affects genomic DNA methylation and the methylation status of some specific genes such as patched gene (PTCH) and smoothened gene (SMO) in LNCaP cells. Methods LNCaP cells were treated with MEHP (0, 1, 5, 10, and 25 μmol/L) for 3 days. An ELISA assay was preformed to detect genomic methylation, including 5-methylcytosine (5-mC) and 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5-hmC) content. A pyrosequencing assay was applied to assess DNA methylation in PTCH and SMO gene promoters. The correlation between DNA methylation and gene expression was assessed. Results The proportion of cytosines with 5-mC methylation in LNCaP cells was significantly decreased by MEHP (1, 5, 10, and 25 μmol/L) in a dose-dependent manner (P < 0.01). For genes in the Hedgehog pathway, there was no significant MEHP concentration-dependent difference in the DNA methylation of PTCH and SMO. Conclusion MEHP might affect the progression of prostate cancer through its effect on global DNA methylation. -
Key words:
- Mono (2-ethyhexyl) phthalate /
- LNCaP /
- Genomic /
- Methylation /
- PTCH /
- SMO
-
Figure 1. Effect of MEHP on the amount of 5-mC and 5-hmC in LNCaP cells. Cells were treated with MEHP (0, 1, 5, 10, and 25 μmol/L) for 3 days. Then the proportion of cytosines with 5-mC (A) and 5-hmC (B) was assessed in LNCaP cells. Bars represent the mean ± SD values from triplicate experiments. (**P < 0.01, compared to the CS-FBS control group).
Figure 3. Effect of MEHP on the DNA methylation of SMO. The methylation (%) of each of the six CpG sites in SMO and the average methylation (%) of all of the studied CpG sites were calculated. Results are presented as the mean ± SD values from triplicate experiments. (*P < 0.05 and **P < 0.01, compared to the CS-FBS control group)
Table 1. PCR and Pyrosequencing Primers for PTCH/SMO CpG Site Amplification and Analysis (5'-3')
Items PTCH[18] SMO[19] PCR primers F:GGGGATAGAATGGTTTAG
R:Biotin-ACTCCAAAAACTACTACTSMObis1 F:GAYGATTTTAGATTAAGTAAGGTGTT
R:TCCCACCATTAAAACCACCT
SMObis2 F:TTYGTGTATTTTAGAGAGTTTAG
R:Biotin-TCCCACCATTAAAACCACCTAnnealing
temperatures52.0 ℃ 55.6 ℃ (SMObis1)
53.6 ℃ (SMObis2)Pyrosequencing
primersAGGAGTATAAGAAAGTAGAGTT GAGTTAGAGTAATAAAGGAGT Analyzed sequences
and regionsAGTAGTTATYGYGAATTTAGTAGTTAGAGTTYGAGTA
GTTYGA (from -310 to -269 bp)aGGTYGTYGGYGGGGAGAGTTYGGGGGGTTGYGGYG
(from -479 to -445 bp)aNote. aThe transcription initiation sites of PTCH and SMO were separately designated as 0. YG indicates the detected CpG site. Table 2. Correlation between Methylation and PTCH and SMO Expression under MEHP Treatmenta
Item Pearson Coefficient PValue PTCH CpG 1 0.168 0.788 CpG 2 0.537 0.351 CpG 3 0.000 1.000 CpG 4 0.577 0.308 Average 0.164 0.792 SMO CpG 1 -0.234 0.705 CpG 2 0.064 0.919 CpG 3 0.405 0.499 CpG 4 0.711 0.178 CpG 5 0.494 0.397 CpG 6 -0.048 0.938 Average 0.400 0.504 Note. aThe correlation coefficients between the gene methylation levels and gene expression when treated with MEHP for 3 days were analyzed by Pearson' correlation test. -
[1] Jemal A, Murray T, Samuels A, et al. Cancer statistics. 2003. CA Cancer J Clin, 2003; 53, 5-26. doi: 10.3322/canjclin.53.1.5 [2] The National Cancer Institute website. http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/prost.html[2015-10]. [3] Lamont KR, Tindall DJ. Minireview:Alternative activation pathways for the androgen receptor in prostate cancer. Mol Endocrinol, 2011; 25, 897-907. doi: 10.1210/me.2010-0469 [4] Safety Assessment of Di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP)Released from PVC Medical Devices. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/UCM080457.pdf [2015-10]. [5] Lottrup G, Andersson AM, Leffers H, et al. Possible impact of phthalates on infant reproductive health. Int J Androl, 2006; 29, 172-80; discussion 81-5. doi: 10.1111/ija.2006.29.issue-1 [6] Zhao Y, Ao H, Chen L, et al. Mono-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate affects the steroidogenesis in rat Leydig cells through provoking ROS perturbation. Toxicol In Vitro, 2012; 26, 950-5. doi: 10.1016/j.tiv.2012.04.003 [7] Ming-Yue MA, Zhang YM, Guo L, et al. Effects of DEHP and MEHP on apoptosis of leydig cells of mice. Industrial Health & Occupational Diseases, 2012; 339-41. (In Chinese) http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-GYWZ201206007.htm [8] Erkekoglu P, Rachidi W, Yuzugullu OG, et al. Induction of ROS, p53, p21 in DEHP-and MEHP-exposed LNCaP cells-protection by selenium compounds. Food Chem Toxicol, 2011; 49, 1565-71. doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2011.04.001 [9] Yao PL, Lin YC, Richburg JH. Mono-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (MEHP) promotes invasion and migration of human testicular embryonal carcinoma cells. Biol Reprod, 2012; 86, 160, 1-10. https://tools.niehs.nih.gov/portfolio/index.cfm/portfolio/publicationDetail/id/1885827 [10] Zhang HY, Zhang W, Bao TY, et al. Relationship between environmental endocrine disruptor DEHP and prostatic hyperplasia in rats. Journal of Modern Urology, 2009; 347-9. (In Chinese) http://med.wanfangdata.com.cn/Paper/Detail?id=PeriodicalPaper_xdmnwkzz200905008 [11] Yong W, Jiao C, Jianhui W, et al. Mono-2-ethyhexyl phthalate advancing the progression of prostate cancer through activating the hedgehog pathway in LNCaP cells. Toxicol In Vitro, 2016; 32, 86-91. doi: 10.1016/j.tiv.2015.12.012 [12] Jaenisch R, Bird A. Epigenetic regulation of gene expression:how the genome integrates intrinsic and environmental signals. Nat Genet, 2003; 33, 245-54. doi: 10.1038/ng1089 [13] Ehrlich M. DNA hypomethylation in cancer cells. Epigenomics, 2009; 1, 239-59. doi: 10.2217/epi.09.33 [14] Jones PA, Baylin SB. The epigenomics of cancer. Cell, 2007; 128, 683-92. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2007.01.029 [15] Du P, Ye HR, Gao J, et al. Methylation of PTCH1a gene in a subset of gastric cancers. World J Gastroenterol, 2009; 15, 3799-806. doi: 10.3748/wjg.15.3799 [16] Hinoue T, Weisenberger DJ, Pan F, et al. Analysis of the association between CIMP and BRAF in colorectal cancer by DNA methylation profiling. PLoS One, 2009; 4, e8357. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0008357 [17] Wolf I, Bose S, Desmond JC, et al. Unmasking of epigenetically silenced genes reveals DNA promoter methylation and reduced expression of PTCH in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2007; 105, 139-55. doi: 10.1007/s10549-006-9440-4 [18] Lof-Ohlin ZM, Levanat S, Sabol M, et al. Promoter methylation in the PTCH gene in cervical epithelial cancer and ovarian cancer tissue as studied by eight novel Pyrosequencing(R) assays. Int J Oncol, 2011; 38, 685-92. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/33995555.pdf [19] Zhu Y, James RM, Peter A, et al. Functional Smoothened is required for expression of GLI3 in colorectal carcinoma cells. Cancer Lett, 2004; 207, 205-14. doi: 10.1016/j.canlet.2003.10.025 [20] Rodriguez J, Frigola J, Vendrell E, et al. Chromosomal instability correlates with genome-wide DNA demethylation in human primary colorectal cancers. Cancer Res, 2006; 66, 8462-9468. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-0293 [21] Wilson AS, Power BE, Molloy PL. DNA hypomethylation and human diseases. Biochim Biophys Acta, 2007; 1775, 138-62. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17045745 [22] Cravo M, Pinto R, Fidalgo P, et al. Global DNA hypomethylation occurs in the early stages of intestinal type gastric carcinoma. Gut, 1996; 39, 434-8. doi: 10.1136/gut.39.3.434 [23] Soares J, Pinto AE, Cunha CV, et al. Global DNA hypomethylation in breast carcinoma:correlation with prognostic factors and tumor progression. Cancer, 1999; 85, 112-8. doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1097-0142 [24] Kim KY, Kim DS, Lee SK, et al. Association of low-dose exposure to persistent organic pollutants with global DNA hypomethylation in healthy Koreans. Environ Health Perspect, 2010; 118, 370-4. https://experts.umn.edu/en/publications/association-of-low-dose-exposure-to-persistent-organic-pollutants [25] Rusiecki JA, Baccarelli A, Bollati V, et al. Global DNA hypomethylation is associated with high serum-persistent organic pollutants in Greenlandic Inuit. Environ Health Perspect, 2008; 116, 1547-52. doi: 10.1289/ehp.11338 [26] Yang H, Liu Y, Bai F, et al. Tumor development is associated with decrease of TET gene expression and 5-methylcytosine hydroxylation. Oncogene, 2013; 32, 663-9. doi: 10.1038/onc.2012.67 [27] Yegnasubramanian S, Haffner MC, Zhang Y, et al. DNA hypomethylation arises later in prostate cancer progression than CpG island hypermethylation and contributes to metastatic tumor heterogeneity. Cancer Res, 2008; 68, 8954-67. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-07-6088 [28] Brothman AR, Swanson G, Maxwell TM, et al. Global hypomethylation is common in prostate cancer cells:a quantitative predictor for clinical outcome? Cancer Genet Cytogenet, 2005; 156, 31-6. doi: 10.1016/j.cancergencyto.2004.04.004 [29] Bedford MT, van Helden PD. Hypomethylation of DNA in pathological conditions of the human prostate. Cancer Res, 1987; 47, 5274-6. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2443238 [30] Nestor CE, Ottaviano R, Reddington J, et al. Tissue type is a major modifier of the 5-hydroxymethylcytosine content of human genes. Genome Res, 2012; 22, 467-77. doi: 10.1101/gr.126417.111 [31] Li W, Liu M. Distribution of 5-hydroxymethylcytosine in different human tissues. J Nucleic Acids, 2011; 2011, 870726. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.349.7087 [32] Haffner MC, Chaux A, Meeker AK, et al. Global 5-hydroxymethylcytosine content is significantly reduced in tissue stem/progenitor cell compartments and in human cancers. Oncotarget, 2011; 2, 627-37. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.v2i8 [33] Rusyn I, Kadiiska MB, Dikalova A, et al. Phthalates rapidly increase production of reactive oxygen species in vivo:role of Kupffer cells. Mol Pharmacol, 2001; 59, 744-50. https://hero.epa.gov/hero/index.cfm/reference/details/reference_id/630937 [34] Valinluck V, Tsai HH, Rogstad DK, et al. Oxidative damage to methyl-CpG sequences inhibits the binding of the methyl-CpG binding domain (MBD) of methyl-CpG binding protein 2 (MeCP2). Nucleic Acids Res, 2004; 32, 4100-8. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkh739 [35] Mimeault M, Moore E, Moniaux N, et al. Cytotoxic effects induced by a combination of cyclopamine and gefitinib, the selective hedgehog and epidermal growth factor receptor signaling inhibitors, in prostate cancer cells. Int J Cancer, 2006; 118, 1022-31. doi: 10.1002/ijc.21440 [36] Narita S, So A, Ettinger S, et al. GLI2 knockdown using an antisense oligonucleotide induces apoptosis and chemosensitizes cells to paclitaxel in androgen-independent prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res, 2008; 14, 5769-77. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-4282