Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
MCT4 Expression is a Potential Therapeutic Target in Colorectal Cancer
with Peritoneal Carcinomatosis
Hee Kyung Kim1*
, InKyoung Lee2*
, Heejin Bang3, Hee Cheol Kim
4, Woo Yong Lee
4, Seong
Hyeon Yun4, Jeeyun Lee
1, Su Jin Lee
1, Young Suk Park
1, Kyoung-Mee Kim
3, and Won Ki
Kang1
1Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center,
Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
2Biological Research Institute, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School
of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
3Department of Pathology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of
Medicine, Seoul, Korea
4Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of
Medicine, Seoul, Korea
*These authors contributed equally to this work.
Running Title: Monocarboxylate transporter4 in colorectal cancer
Keywords: MCT4, Colorectal Cancer, Peritoneal carcinomatosis
Corresponding author: Won Ki Kang, MD
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
2
Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Samsung Medical
Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul
06351, Korea
Tel: +82-2-3410-3451, Fax: +82-2-3410-1754
E-mail: [email protected]
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by a grant of the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through
the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI), funded by the Ministry of Health
& Welfare, Republic of Korea (grant number; HI14C3418). WK Kang had been awarded a
grant.
Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest.
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
3
Abstract
Monocarboxylate transporters (MCTs) are transmembrane proteins which control the lactate
metabolism and associated with poor prognosis in solid tumors including colorectal cancer
(CRC). Here we aimed to investigate the biological and clinical role of MCTs in CRC and to
assess the potential of therapeutic application.
A total of 16 human CRC cell lines, 11 patient-derived cells from malignant ascites (PDC),
and 39 matched pairs of primary CRC and normal colorectal tissues were used to assess the
role of MCT in vitro and in vivo. siRNA methodology was used to determine the effect of
MCT inhibition and molecular mechanism of hypoxia- and angiogenesis-related factors in
addition to MCT4. The effect of MCT inhibition was confirmed in mouse xenograft models.
MCT4 expression in surgical tissue was evaluated by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and used
for survival analysis.
Expression of MCTs was demonstrated in CRC cell lines. siRNA-mediated MCT silencing
caused significant decline of cell proliferation both in vitro and in vivo. An additive effect of
MCT inhibition was induced by combined treatment with chemotherapy or radiotherapy. In
particular, the expression of MTC4 was markedly increased in PDCs and MCT4 inhibition
significantly decreased PDC proliferation. Hypoxia inducible factor 1-α (HIF1α) was also
highly expressed in PDCs, whereas HIF1α knockdown reduced MCT4 expression and of
other angiogenesis-related mediators. The patients with high MCT4 expression by IHC
showed shorter relapse-free survival compared with low expression.
These findings suggest that MCT4 may represent a new therapeutic target for CRC with
peritoneal carcinomatosis and serve as a prognostic indicator.
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
4
Introduction
Colorectal cancer (CRC) represents the third most common cancer in males and the
second in females worldwide, with 1.2 million new diagnoses and 608,700 deaths estimated
in 2008 (1). The survival of metastatic CRC has been markedly improved in the past decades
resulting from the development of targeted therapies such as cetuximab, panitumumab,
bevacizumab, and regorafenib (2-6). However, tumor heterogeneity and selective pressure in
patients with CRC leads to the development of resistance to anti-cancer treatments and
several studies have attempted to seek new therapeutic targets by addressing the CRC
molecular landscape (7-10). In particular, the targeting of metabolic enzymes or transporters
represents a different approach for cancer therapy and is expected to overcome the resistance
to current therapies (11).
Monocarboxylate transporters (MCTs) are proteins that are expressed in the cell
membrane and control the lactate metabolic pathway. The level of lactate is increased in
rapidly growing cancer cells (12, 13) as it is generated by glycolytic metabolism, on which
the survival of cancer cell is largely dependent (14, 15). MCTs prevent intracellular
acidification consequent to the increased intracellular lactate production in cancer cells by
balancing its influx and efflux to maintain a steady intracellular pH and protect against loss of
cancer cell viability (16). Particularly MCT1 and MCT4 require the formation of complex
with chaperone, CD147. CD147 is a transmembrane protein of the immunoglobulin
superfamily and is also known as Basigin (17-19).
The MCT family comprises 14 members in total, among which MCTs 1-4 play various
roles in mammals (20). MCT1 and MCT2 take part in lactate uptake, thus initiating the
oxidative pathway of lactate, whereas, MCT4 functions in lactate excretion (21-23).
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
5
Furthermore, the pattern of MCT expression differs according to cell type. MCT1 but not
MCT2 expression has been shown in almost all tissues (23). Similarly, MCT expression in
tumor cells depends upon tumor type; for example, MCT4 expression in lung cancer may be
down-regulated whereas both MCT1 and 4 are generally up-regulated in breast cancer (24).
In addition, tumor microenvironment such as high oxidative stress, lactate metabolism is
main determinant controlling MCT expression (25, 26).
MCTs also correlate with cancer progression, infiltration, and angiogenesis, with cells
exhibiting high MCT expression demonstrating invasiveness and poor prognosis in several
solid tumors including CRC (27). Accordingly, several studies have evaluated MCT inhibitors
as anti-cancer treatments. For example, the MCT1/2 inhibitor AR-C155858 and MCT1
inhibitor AZD3965 showed preclinical anti-cancer activity (28, 29) and a Phase 1 trial of
AZD3965 for refractory and advanced solid tumors or lymphoma is ongoing (NCT07197595).
We previously studied the clinical implication of MCT4 in metastatic gastric cancer with
peritoneal carcinomatosis, which revealed that the inhibition of MCT4 reduced tumor cell
proliferation and the export of lactate (30). However, little information is available regarding
the relationship between MCT expression and clinical outcome in CRC. In the current study,
we investigated the expression patterns of MCTs in CRC cell lines, and their therapeutic
potential as target proteins in the treatment of CRC. We also analyzed survival outcomes
according to MCT4 expression in primary CRC tissues derived from patients to determine its
prognostic impact on relapse-free and overall survival.
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
6
Materials and Methods
Cell culture
We utilized fibroblasts from normal colon (CCD-18Co) and 16 known human CRC cell
lines: CoLo320, LS513, SNU175, and SW620 cells were purchased from the Korean Cell
Line Bank in 2010. SW48, HT29, RKO, WiDr, DLD1, HCT8, HCT116, LoVo, LS174T,
NCI-H716, and SW480 cells were purchased from American Type Culture Collection
(Manassas, VA, USA) in 2010. CCD-18Co was purchased from the Korean Cell Line Bank
in 2017. DiFi was kindly provided by Dr. JO Park (Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Korea)
in 2009.
To establish patient-derived cells (PDCs) from patients with metastatic CRC and
malignant effusion, the individuals who were enrolled onto the SMC Oncology Biomarker
study (NCT#01831609) were screened for MCT expression by western blot. All patients
provided an informed consent form according to the SMC Institutional Review Board
guidelines. Briefly, collected effusions (1–5 L) were divided into 50 mL tubes, centrifuged at
1500 rpm for 10 min, and washed twice with PBS.
All cells and PDCs were grown in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% FBS, an
antibiotic, and an antimycotic (Invitrogen Corporation, Carlsbad, CA, USA). Cells were
cultured at 37°C in a humidified 5% CO2 environment.
All cell lines were tested for mycoplasma contamination and authenticated by STR DNA
profiling (Samsung Medical Center Basic Research Support Center, Seoul, Korea) every 6
months. And all cells were cultured according to the manufacturer's manual and had been
passaged for fewer than two months after thawing.
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
7
Western blot analyses
Total cell extracts were obtained using lysis buffer (20 mM HEPES [pH 7.4], 1% Triton
X-100, 1 mM EDTA, 1 mM MgCl2, 150 mM NaCl, 10% glycerol, and protease inhibitor
cocktail [Invitrogen]) and protein concentration was determined using the micro-BCA protein
reagent (Pierce Biotechnology, Rockford, IL, USA). Equal amounts of proteins (30 μg per
well) from the clarified lysates were separated by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto
nitrocellulose membranes having a 0.45-μm pore size (Whatman, Maidstone, UK). The
membranes were sequentially incubated in 5% dry milk and antibodies against MCT1 (H-1,
1:1000; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Dallas, TX, USA), MCT2 (HPA005911, 1:400; Atlas
Antibodies, Stockholm, Sweden), MCT4 (H-90, 1:500; Santa Cruz), β-actin (AC-15, 1:5,000;
Sigma, St Louis, MO, USA), PCNA PC10, 1:1,000; (Santa Cruz), HIF1α (1:1,000; Cell
Signaling Technologies [CST], Danvers, MA, USA), phospho-STAT3 (Tyr705) (3E2,
1:1,000; CST), STAT3 (124H6, 1:1,000; CST), angiopoietin 2 (1:500; AbFrontier, Seoul,
Korea), BiP (1:1,000; BD Biosciences, San Jose, CA, USA), and VEGF (A-20, 1:500; Santa
Cruz). The ECL system was used for protein detection (Invitrogen).
Reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR)
Total cellular RNA was extracted using an RNeasy MiniKit (Qiagen, Valencia, CA, USA)
and treated with DNase I (Qiagen). Then, 1 μg RNA was converted to cDNA using an
Omniscript RT Kit (Qiagen). The primer sequences designed from the coding region of
human MCT cDNA were as follows: MCT1 cDNA forward, 5'-GGA AGG TGG ACC AGA
ATG AA-3' and reverse, 5'-CAA TTT AGC AAG GCC CAA AA-3' (GenBank accession no.
AK312500); MCT2 cDNA forward, 5'-AGG ATT AAT TGC AAA CTC CA-3', and reverse,
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
8
5'- CCG AAT GTT TAG ATT TGC TC-3' (GenBank accession no. AF058056); and MCT4
cDNA forward, 5'-AGG AGC TCA TAC AGG AGT TT-3' and reverse, 5'-GTG AGG TAG
ACC TGG ATG AT-3' (GenBank accession no. AK223040). The PCR conditions were as
follows: 30 cycles of 95°C for 30 s, 55°C for 30 s, and 72°C for 30 s.
Real-time PCR was performed using a Prism 7900HT Sequence Detection System (PE
Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA). MCT1, MCT2, MCT4 mRNA and 18S rRNA
were detected using TaqMan Gene Expression Master Mix Reagent and TaqMan probes
(Applied Biosystems). Data were normalized using 18S rRNA as an endogenous control and
calculated using the comparative Ct method (2-delta delta Ct).
RNA interference and transfection
The 21-nucleotide-long siRNAs targeting MCT1, MCT2, MCT4, and the negative control
siRNA (siC) were purchased from Dharmacon (Lafayette, CO, USA). Cells (3 × 105 cells per
60-mm dish) were transfected with 20 nM siRNAs using HiPerfect transfection reagents
(Qiagen) according to the manufacturer’s instructions and were used for western blot analysis
48 h after transfection. Sequences of the siRNAs used were: MCT1-targeted siRNA (siMCT1)
(5-CCA AGG CAG GGA AAG AUA AGU CUA A-3), MCT2-targeted siRNA (siMCT2)
(5-GGA UUU AAC UGG AGA AUA U-3), MCT4-targeted siRNA (siMCT4) (5-CGA CCC
ACG UCU ACA UGU ACG UGU UUU-3), HIF1α-targeted siRNA (siHIF1α) (5- ACA
CGC AAA UAG CUG AUG GUA AGC CUC-3), and control nontargeting siRNA (5-UAG
CGA CUA AAC ACA UCA A-3).
Cell growth assessment and colony formation assay
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
9
To assess cell numbers, cells (1 × 105 cells per 6-well plate, Corning Costar Corp, NY,
USA) were transfected with siRNAs and incubated for 3 days. Adhered cells were trypsinized,
stained with 0.2% trypan blue (Sigma), and counted using a hemocytometer. Cell
proliferation following each treatment was compared that of with untreated cells.
For the clonogenic assay, cells were transfected with siRNAs for 24 h, irradiated with a
137Cs source (2.01 Gy/min, IBL-437C, CIS-US Inc.), trypsinized, and counted. Then, 400
cells were replated in 6-well plate. After incubation at 37°C for 10–14 days, colonies were
stained with 0.005% (w/v) crystal violet (Sigma). Colonies (> 50 cells) were counted and
surviving fractions following the given treatments were calculated based on the survival of
nonirradiated cells.
ELISA assay
Secreted protein levels of VEGF and Angiopoietin 2 were assessed using culture media
(200 μL) collected from siHIF1a or siMCT4 transfected cells. Protein levels of VEGF and
Angiopoietin 2 were measured using an ELISA kit for human VEGF and Angiopoietin 2
(R&D Systems, Minneapolis, MN, USA), according to the manufacturer’s instructions and
quantified using a microtiter plate reader at 450 nm wavelength.
Xenograft study
Male BALB/c nude mice, 4–6 weeks old, were obtained from Orient Bio Inc. (Seongnam,
Korea). Mice were implanted subcutaneously with SW602 (5 × 106) cells in a 100 μL volume.
The mice were randomized and the treatment started when the tumor size reached 60 mm3 at
11 days after inoculation. Mice were assigned into five groups: siC, siMCT1, siMCT2,
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
10
siMCT4, or a combination of siMCT1 and siMCT4. siMCTs (1 μg with HiPerfect
transfection reagent/tumor, intratumoral injection) were administered 2 times per week.
Tumor growth was measured using a digital caliper (Proinsa, Vitoria, Spain) every 3–4
days and average tumor volumes were calculated using the following formula: V = (L × W2) /
2, where V = volume (in cubic millimeters), L = length (in millimeters), and W = width (in
millimeters). The mice were sacrificed and the tumors (three tumors per treatment group)
were resected and frozen in liquid nitrogen until later use for western blot analyses. All
mouse experiments were conducted in accordance with the Institute for Laboratory Animal
Research Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals and the protocols were approved
by the appropriate Institutional Review Boards at Samsung Medical Center (Agreement-
20141211001).
Human CRC and PDCs
We collected 39 matched pairs of primary CRC and normal colorectal tissues and PDCs
(N = 11) at the Samsung Medical Center. All CRC tumors and control tissues were confirmed
by the hospital’s Clinical Pathology department. The normal colorectal tissue was collected at
a distance of at least of 10 cm from the tumor site. To establish PDCs from patients with
metastatic CRC and malignant effusion, individuals who were enrolled in the SMC Oncology
Biomarker study (NCT#01831609) were screened for the expression of MCTs by western
blot and real-time PCR.
All patients provided written informed consent. This study was performed in accordance
with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Institutional Review Board of
Samsung Medical Center.
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
11
Patients for immunohistochemistry and survival analysis
We collected data from the electronic medical records of patients who were diagnosed
with CRC and who underwent curative surgery at the Samsung Medical Center between June
2008 and May 2009 (N=586). Data including sex, node-metastasis, staging, location of tumor,
histology, lymphatic invasion, perineural invasion, and vascular invasion were collected. This
study was approved by the institutional review board of the Samsung Medical Center, Seoul,
Korea.
MCT4 immunohistochemistry
Immunohistochemistry (IHC) analysis was performed on tissue microarray blocks. Two
tissue cores with a diameter of 2.0 mm from representative tumor areas marked by
pathologists were punched from tumor tissue blocks and included in each array block.
Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded blocks were cut into 4-m serial sections. Antigen
retrieval was performed for 20 min with pH 6.0 LOW buffer (EnVision™ FLEX Target
Retrieval Solution Low pH (50x) (Dako, Denmark)) in a 97C water bath. Endogenous
peroxidase blocking was conducted for 5 min. The sections were incubated using a primary
antibody to MCT4. MCT4 expression was evaluated by two independent pathologists (Kim
KM and Bang H). To determine MCT4 expression, the intensity and proportion of staining in
the tumor cell membrane were assessed semi-quantitatively. The intensity was classified into
negative, weak, moderate, and positive and scored as 0, 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The
proportion of stained tumor cells was scored on a scale 0 to 4 (0, < 5%; 1, 5%-25%; 2, 26%-
50%; 3, 51%-75%; 4, > 75%).
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
12
Statistical analysis
Preclinical data were evaluated by a two-tailed t-test or one-way ANOVA using GraphPad
Prism version 4.01 (San Diego, CA, USA). For analysis of the MCT4 IHC cohort, SPSS
statistical software version 23 (Chicago, IL, USA) was used. All comparisons were examined
by the χ2 test or Fisher exact test. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was measured from the date
of curative surgery to the date of first cancer recurrence or death. Overall survival (OS) was
measured from the date of curative surgery to the date of death or date the patient was last
seen. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate RFS, OS, and survival curves were
compared by the log-rank test. To evaluate the prognostic value of MCT4, we utilized a
multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression model. All tests were two-tailed and P
values < 0.05 were considered significant.
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
13
Results
MCTs are expressed in CRC cell lines and MCT knockdown suppresses tumor
proliferation
Fig. 1A illustrates the expression of MCT mRNA and proteins in 16 CRC cell lines as
assessed by RT-PCR and western blot. All CRC cell lines expressed MCT1, whereas MCT2
and MCT4 demonstrated different patterns of expression. Specifically, MCT2 was expressed
at a lower level than in KRAS-wild or BRAF-mutant type CRC cell lines in comparison with
KRAS-mutant cell lines. Fig. 1D demonstrated the inhibition of MCT1 and MCT4 decreased
Basigin expression, but not MCT2 expression.
The proliferation of CRC cell lines decreased following MCT inhibition by transfection
with siRNA (Fig. 1B and Supplementary Fig. S1). MCTs were effectively knocked down by
siMCT1, 2, or 4 after 72 h, and cell proliferation was significantly decreased depending on
the type of MCTs expressed in each respective cell line. In particular, MCT1 expression was
confirmed by western blot in 5 cell lines (CoLo320, NCI-H716, SW620, SW480 and DiFi)
which showed decreased proliferation by the addition of siMCT1. MCT2 was expressed in
NCI-H716 and SW480 cell lines, and transfection with siMCT2 hindered the expression of
MCT2 as well as cell proliferation in these lines. Similarly, SW620 and SW480 cell lines
exhibited MCT4 expression and their cell proliferation was inhibited by siMCT4. Fig. 1C
illustrated that normal colorectal cell line (CCD-18Co) did not express MCT4 and was not
affected by siMCT4. These results suggested that knockdown of MCT1, 2 and 4 inhibited
cancer cell proliferation which expressed MCT1, 2, 4, respectively.
Effect of MCT inhibition on CRC growth in vivo
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
14
To determine whether the anti-tumor effect of MCT inhibition could also be observed in
vivo, we implanted SW620 cells, which expressed MCT1 and 4, into mice and assigned them
to the following 5 groups (n = 5 mice per treatment group): untreated control, siMCT1,
siMCT2, siMCT4, and the combination siMCT1 and 4. Mice were subjected to 2
subcutaneous injections in each flank to promote the growth of 2 tumors (10 tumors per
treatment group). The combination siMCT1 and siMCT4 treatment resulted in the most
significant decrease of tumor volume on day 17 (siControl vs siMCT4, mean tumor volume
on day 17, 857.5 vs 381.2 cm3; mean difference, 476.3 cm
3; 95% CI, 320.4–632.3; P <
0.0001, Fig. 2A). A single treatment with siMCT1 or siMCT4 but not siMCT2 also showed a
significant reduction of tumor volume.
The xenograft tumors were resected and protein expression was evaluated using IHC.
IHC was performed by applying a monoclonal anti-PCNA antibody for the validation of
tumor growth inhibition with SW620 in xenografts (Fig. 2B). The expression level of PCNA
in IHC was lowest in the combination siMCT1 and MCT4 group; siMCT1 or siMCT4 alone
also lessened the level of protein expression in the xenograft tumors. Similar results of
protein expression were observed by western blot (Fig. 2C).
MCT inhibition in conjunction with 5-fluorouracil or radiotherapy showed additive
anti-tumor effects
We next assessed the additive effects of MCT inhibition and radiotherapy or cytotoxic
chemotherapy. SW620 cells were transfected with MCT siRNA and then irradiated with a
137Cs source or treated with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) after 24 h. As the dose of radiation
increased, the cell proliferation became further decreased, demonstrating a radiation dose-
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
15
dependent inhibition in cells with concomitant knockdown of MCT1, or 4 (Fig. 3A).
Knockdown of MCT1 or 4 significantly induced cell death upon treatment of 5-FU, whereas
in the case of MCT2 the level of cell proliferation was not significantly different than that of
the control (Fig. 3B). The other tested cell lines (CoLo320, NCI-H716, and SW480) also
demonstrated best additive effects of MCT inhibition with irradiation or 5-FU
(Supplementary Fig. S2)
MCT4 expression is increased in malignant ascites and MCT4 knockdown decreases
PDC cell proliferation
We next investigated the MCT expression levels in 39 matched paired normal colon tissue,
CRC tissue, and 11 PDCs acquired from malignant ascites using qRT-PCR, which
demonstrated markedly increased MCT4 expression in PDCs from malignant ascites (Fig.
4A). IHC performed to evaluate the MCT4 expression in tissue samples and PDCs also
showed strong expression in PDCs from malignant ascites (Fig. 4B). Treatment of 3 PDCs
with siMCT4 indicated that knockdown of MCT4 also induced the reduction of MCT4
expression and cell death (Fig. 4C), similar to the effects in the CRC cell lines.
Hypoxia and angiogenesis related-factors are correlated with MCT4 expression
We analyzed expression of MCT4, hypoxia-inducible factor alpha (HIFα), STAT3
phosphorylation, angiogenesis-related mediators including angiopoietin 2 (ANGPT2),
binding immunoglobulin protein (BiP), and VEGF in PDCs using western blot. All the
factors were distinctly expressed to a greater degree in PDCs compared with normal and
primary tumor tissue (Fig. 5A).
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
16
To determine the order of contribution of these factors to the underlying mechanism, we
induced a hypoxic condition using 1% oxygen and transfected the SW48 cells with siHIFα or
siMCT4. Hypoxia induced the expression of HIFα and MCT4 , ANGPT2, and BiP expression
were decreased after knockdown of HIFα. However, knockdown of MCT4 did not influence
the expression of HIFα and MCT4 expression was up-regulated following overexpression of
HIF1α (Fig. 5B).
We also measured the expression of the angiogenesis-related mediators, ANGPT2 and
VEGF by ELISA in PDCs. Transfection with siHIFα or siMCT4 in the hypoxic condition in
PDCs induced a decrease of VEGF and ANGPT2 expression (Fig. 5C). A similar
phenomenon was also observed in other cell lines (HT29, HCT8) treated with siHIFα or
siMCT4 (Supplementary Fig. S3 and S4).
Strong MCT4 expression by IHC is associated with significantly shorter RFS in patients
with CRC
A total of 586 patients who had been diagnosed with CRC received curative surgery
between June 2008 and May 2009. We compared baseline characteristics and survival
outcome by dividing the patients into two groups, MCT4 positive and negative (Table 1). The
MCT4 positive group was defined as exhibiting strong positive MCT4 expression by IHC
(intensity score 3) and the MCT4 negative group had an intensity score of 0 to 2 by IHC (Fig.
4B). During the 83.5 months of median follow-up duration, the patients with positive MCT4
expression by IHC showed significantly shorter RFS than the MCT4 negative group (5-year
RFS rate, 83.5% vs. 73.1%, P = 0.013, Fig. 6). Notably, in the multivariate analysis, the
MCT4 positive state was identified as an independent risk factor for RFS (hazard ratio 1.29,
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
17
95% CI, 1.11–1.49, P = 0.001).
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
18
Discussion
MCT expression has been known to correlate with tumor invasion or metastasis in several
cancers in addition to CRC (31) including gastric (32), lung (33), breast (34), and prostate (35)
cancers. In the current study, we showed that MCT proteins are expressed in CRC cell lines
and tumor tissue and present the first demonstration that MCT4 expression was significantly
elevated in malignant cells in CRC ascites. In our previous report regarding MCT4 in gastric
cancer, MCT4 also was found to be overexpressed in malignant cells in ascites. However,
MCT4 expression in gastric cancer was not revealed as a factor for poor prognosis in survival
analysis (30). An association between MCT4 expression and poor survival has been reported
in pancreas cancer (36) and clear renal cell carcinoma (37); in comparison, here we provide
the first report that in patients with CRC, MCT4 expression instead represents a risk factor
for early relapse and shorter RFS.
MCT4 is up-regulated by hypoxia as a transporter and is known to be under the control of
HIF-1α (37, 38), which performs essential roles in pH regulation, metabolism, and cell
invasion in addition to controlling VEGF and ANGPT2 in the hypoxia-signaling pathway
(39). We identified significantly higher expression of HIF-1α and and MCT1, 2, 4, VEGF,
and ANGPT2 in PDCs from malignant ascites in comparison with normal and tumor tissue.
These results implied that hypoxic conditions in the peritoneal space induced metabolic
adaptation including up-regulation of MCT4 in CRC with peritoneal seeding. We also
verified HIF-1α as an additional key upstream regulatory factor of MCT4 because HIF-1α
knockdown or up-regulation led to reduced or increased expression of MCT4, respectively.
MCT4 also has been reported to be associated with VEGF in CRC (40). VEGF is usually
up-regulated and induced by angiogenesis and hypoxia in cancer cells (41) and is known as a
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
19
therapeutic target of metastatic CRC for the anti-VEGF antibody, bevacizumab. Bevacizumab
function depends on the presence of a specific genomic alteration and does not induce
marked survival benefits. Recent studies reported the mechanisms between adaptive
resistance to anti-angiogenic treatments and metabolic symbiosis. Metabolic symbiosis based
on the exchange of lactate and depends on MCTs is also responsible for tumor resistance to
anti-angiogenic treatments (42-44). In the current study, MCT4 inhibition was also able to
down-regulate VEGF expression in CRC cell lines. Therefore, an MCT4 inhibitor might have
a potential role in the treatment of CRC along with bevacizumab.
We used RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% FBS (fetal bovine serum) for
culture of all cells and PDCs. In current study, not only MCT4 but also MCT1 and MCT2
inhibition demonstrated the suppression of tumor growth in the absence of exogenous lactate.
However, lactate could be generated from metabolism of cancer cells and transported through
the membrane. In case of MCT2, we previously reported that knockdown of MCT2 could
suppress tumor growth in colorectal cancer in the absence of exogenous lactate (45).
According to the findings following clinical applications of MCT inhibitor (17, 29, 46),
therapeutic approaches for targeting MCTs appear to hold promise. Here, we demonstrated
that MCT knockdown was able to inhibit tumor cell proliferation and enhance the efficacy of
radiotherapy or cytotoxic chemotherapy, which is consistent with the previous findings that
hypoxia and lactate concentration are linked with the treatment failure of radiotherapy or
chemotherapy in many cancers (47-49). Similarly, Sonveaux P, et al. demonstrated that MCT
inhibition increased tumor radiosensitivity (50) and Bola et al. showed that the MCT1
inhibitor AZD3965 augmented radiosensitivity in the treatment of small cell lung cancer (51).
Notably, our finding that elevated MCT4 expression in CRC as measured by IHC could
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
20
serve as a negative prognostic factor reflected the observation that RFS was significantly
worse with high MCT4 expression; however, no difference was noted in terms of OS
(Supplementary Fig. S5). The association between MCT4 expression and shorter OS has
previously been described in several studies involving CRC and other cancers (49, 52). One
potential explanation for this discrepancy may be selection bias. The patients assessed in the
current study were not diagnosed with metastatic disease and all had received curative
resection at the time of tissue archiving. As MCT4 expression is associated with metastatic
and advanced disease, the survival analysis of MCT4 expression might be more conclusive in
patients with metastatic CRC.
Metastatic CRC with peritoneal carcinomatosis carries a grave prognosis with a median
survival of 6 to 9 months following diagnosis (53, 54). Approximately 4 to 7% of patients
with CRC present with peritoneal carcinomatosis despite early detection, with the peritoneum
serving in second place to the liver as a site of metastasis (55). MCT4 was strongly expressed
in cells from malignant ascites of CRC in our study; thus, this result indicates that an MCT4
inhibitor may overcome the treatment failure in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis.
However, we observed that the expression of basigin could be decreased by MCT1 and
MCT4 inhibition. The possible role of basigin in peritoneal carcinomatosis could not be
excluded.
In conclusion, the result of this study showed that MCT4 was expressed in CRC and most
notably in PDCs from malignant ascites, and that it may serve as a factor indicating poor
prognosis in this disease. MCT4 inhibitor might be a key treatment for hypoxic tumors in
conjunction with radiotherapy or chemotherapy. Further studies such as clinical trials to
elucidate the benefit of MCT4 inhibitor treatment and the role of basigin are therefore
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
21
warranted.
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
22
Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest
No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
23
References
1. Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer
statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin 2015;65:87-108.
2. Chung KY, Shia J, Kemeny NE, Shah M, Schwartz GK, Tse A, et al. Cetuximab
shows activity in colorectal cancer patients with tumors that do not express the
epidermal growth factor receptor by immunohistochemistry. J Clin Oncol
2005;23:1803-10.
3. Grothey A, Van Cutsem E, Sobrero A, Siena S, Falcone A, Ychou M, et al.
Regorafenib monotherapy for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer
(CORRECT): an international, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3
trial. Lancet 2013;381:303-12.
4. Hecht JR, Mitchell E, Neubauer MA, Burris HA, 3rd, Swanson P, Lopez T, et al. Lack
of correlation between epidermal growth factor receptor status and response to
Panitumumab monotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer. Clin Cancer Res
2010;16:2205-13.
5. Hochster HS, Hart LL, Ramanathan RK, Childs BH, Hainsworth JD, Cohn AL, et al.
Safety and efficacy of oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine regimens with or without
bevacizumab as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: results of the
TREE Study. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:3523-9.
6. Van Cutsem E, Kohne CH, Hitre E, Zaluski J, Chang Chien CR, Makhson A, et al.
Cetuximab and chemotherapy as initial treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. N
Engl J Med 2009;360:1408-17.
7. Medico E, Russo M, Picco G, Cancelliere C, Valtorta E, Corti G. The molecular
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
24
landscape of colorectal cancer cell lines unveils clinically actionable kinase targets.
2015;6:7002.
8. Sartore-Bianchi A, Martini M, Molinari F, Veronese S, Nichelatti M, Artale S, et al.
PIK3CA mutations in colorectal cancer are associated with clinical resistance to
EGFR-targeted monoclonal antibodies. Cancer Res 2009;69:1851-7.
9. Diaz LA, Jr., Williams RT, Wu J, Kinde I, Hecht JR, Berlin J, et al. The molecular
evolution of acquired resistance to targeted EGFR blockade in colorectal cancers.
Nature 2012;486:537-40.
10. Greaves M, Maley CC. Clonal evolution in cancer. Nature 2012;481:306-13.
11. Vander Heiden MG. Targeting cancer metabolism: a therapeutic window opens. Nat
Rev Drug Discov 2011;10:671-84.
12. Garcia CK, Goldstein JL, Pathak RK, Anderson RG, Brown MS. Molecular
characterization of a membrane transporter for lactate, pyruvate, and other
monocarboxylates: implications for the Cori cycle. Cell 1994;76:865-73.
13. Levine AJ, Puzio-Kuter AM. The control of the metabolic switch in cancers by
oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes. Science 2010;330:1340-4.
14. Dang CV, Semenza GL. Oncogenic alterations of metabolism. Trends Biochem Sci
1999;24:68-72.
15. Kallinowski F, Vaupel P, Runkel S, Berg G, Fortmeyer HP, Baessler KH, et al.
Glucose uptake, lactate release, ketone body turnover, metabolic micromilieu, and pH
distributions in human breast cancer xenografts in nude rats. Cancer Res
1988;48:7264-72.
16. Izumi H, Torigoe T, Ishiguchi H, Uramoto H, Yoshida Y, Tanabe M, et al. Cellular pH
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
25
regulators: potentially promising molecular targets for cancer chemotherapy. Cancer
Treat Rev 2003;29:541-9.
17. Le Floch R, Chiche J, Marchiq I, Naiken T, Ilc K, Murray CM, et al. CD147 subunit
of lactate/H+ symporters MCT1 and hypoxia-inducible MCT4 is critical for
energetics and growth of glycolytic tumors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
2011;108:16663-8.
18. Kirk P, Wilson MC, Heddle C, Brown MH, Barclay AN, Halestrap AP. CD147 is
tightly associated with lactate transporters MCT1 and MCT4 and facilitates their cell
surface expression. Embo j 2000;19:3896-904.
19. Wilson MC, Meredith D, Fox JE, Manoharan C, Davies AJ, Halestrap AP. Basigin
(CD147) is the target for organomercurial inhibition of monocarboxylate transporter
isoforms 1 and 4: the ancillary protein for the insensitive MCT2 is EMBIGIN (gp70).
J Biol Chem 2005;280:27213-21.
20. Halestrap AP. The monocarboxylate transporter family--Structure and functional
characterization. IUBMB Life 2012;64:1-9.
21. Halestrap AP, Meredith D. The SLC16 gene family-from monocarboxylate
transporters (MCTs) to aromatic amino acid transporters and beyond. Pflugers Arch
2004;447:619-28.
22. Halestrap AP, Price NT. The proton-linked monocarboxylate transporter (MCT)
family: structure, function and regulation. Biochem J 1999;343 Pt 2:281-99.
23. Halestrap AP, Wilson MC. The monocarboxylate transporter family--role and
regulation. IUBMB Life 2012;64:109-19.
24. Pinheiro C, Reis RM, Ricardo S, Longatto-Filho A, Schmitt F, Baltazar F. Expression
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
26
of monocarboxylate transporters 1, 2, and 4 in human tumours and their association
with CD147 and CD44. J Biomed Biotechnol 2010;2010:427694.
25. Curry JM, Tuluc M, Whitaker-Menezes D, Ames JA, Anantharaman A, Butera A, et al.
Cancer metabolism, stemness and tumor recurrence: MCT1 and MCT4 are functional
biomarkers of metabolic symbiosis in head and neck cancer. Cell Cycle
2013;12:1371-84.
26. Romero-Garcia S, Moreno-Altamirano MM, Prado-Garcia H, Sanchez-Garcia FJ.
Lactate Contribution to the Tumor Microenvironment: Mechanisms, Effects on
Immune Cells and Therapeutic Relevance. Front Immunol 2016;7:52.
27. Vegran F, Boidot R, Michiels C, Sonveaux P, Feron O. Lactate influx through the
endothelial cell monocarboxylate transporter MCT1 supports an NF-kappaB/IL-8
pathway that drives tumor angiogenesis. Cancer Res 2011;71:2550-60.
28. Ovens MJ, Davies AJ, Wilson MC, Murray CM, Halestrap AP. AR-C155858 is a
potent inhibitor of monocarboxylate transporters MCT1 and MCT2 that binds to an
intracellular site involving transmembrane helices 7-10. Biochem J 2010;425:523-30.
29. Polanski R, Hodgkinson CL, Fusi A, Nonaka D, Priest L, Kelly P, et al. Activity of the
monocarboxylate transporter 1 inhibitor AZD3965 in small cell lung cancer. Clin
Cancer Res 2014;20:926-37.
30. Lee JY, Lee I, Chang WJ, Ahn SM, Lim SH, Kim HS, et al. MCT4 as a potential
therapeutic target for metastatic gastric cancer with peritoneal carcinomatosis.
Oncotarget 2016.
31. Pinheiro C, Longatto-Filho A, Scapulatempo C, Ferreira L, Martins S, Pellerin L, et al.
Increased expression of monocarboxylate transporters 1, 2, and 4 in colorectal
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
27
carcinomas. Virchows Arch 2008;452:139-46.
32. Pinheiro C, Longatto-Filho A, Simoes K, Jacob CE, Bresciani CJ, Zilberstein B, et al.
The prognostic value of CD147/EMMPRIN is associated with monocarboxylate
transporter 1 co-expression in gastric cancer. Eur J Cancer 2009;45:2418-24.
33. Izumi H, Takahashi M, Uramoto H, Nakayama Y, Oyama T, Wang KY, et al.
Monocarboxylate transporters 1 and 4 are involved in the invasion activity of human
lung cancer cells. Cancer Sci 2011;102:1007-13.
34. Pinheiro C, Albergaria A, Paredes J, Sousa B, Dufloth R, Vieira D, et al.
Monocarboxylate transporter 1 is up-regulated in basal-like breast carcinoma.
Histopathology 2010;56:860-7.
35. Pertega-Gomes N, Vizcaino JR, Miranda-Goncalves V, Pinheiro C, Silva J, Pereira H,
et al. Monocarboxylate transporter 4 (MCT4) and CD147 overexpression is associated
with poor prognosis in prostate cancer. BMC Cancer 2011;11:312.
36. Baek G, Tse YF, Hu Z, Cox D, Buboltz N, McCue P, et al. MCT4 defines a glycolytic
subtype of pancreatic cancer with poor prognosis and unique metabolic dependencies.
Cell Rep 2014;9:2233-49.
37. Kim Y, Choi JW, Lee JH, Kim YS. Expression of lactate/H(+) symporters MCT1 and
MCT4 and their chaperone CD147 predicts tumor progression in clear cell renal cell
carcinoma: immunohistochemical and The Cancer Genome Atlas data analyses. Hum
Pathol 2015;46:104-12.
38. Ullah MS, Davies AJ, Halestrap AP. The plasma membrane lactate transporter MCT4,
but not MCT1, is up-regulated by hypoxia through a HIF-1alpha-dependent
mechanism. J Biol Chem 2006;281:9030-7.
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
28
39. Pouyssegur J, Dayan F, Mazure NM. Hypoxia signalling in cancer and approaches to
enforce tumour regression. Nature 2006;441:437-43.
40. Gotanda Y, Akagi Y, Kawahara A, Kinugasa T, Yoshida T, Ryu Y, et al. Expression of
monocarboxylate transporter (MCT)-4 in colorectal cancer and its role: MCT4
contributes to the growth of colorectal cancer with vascular endothelial growth factor.
Anticancer Res 2013;33:2941-7.
41. Ferrara N. VEGF and the quest for tumour angiogenesis factors. Nat Rev Cancer
2002;2:795-803.
42. Allen E, Mieville P, Warren CM, Saghafinia S, Li L, Peng MW, et al. Metabolic
Symbiosis Enables Adaptive Resistance to Anti-angiogenic Therapy that Is Dependent
on mTOR Signaling. Cell Rep 2016;15:1144-60.
43. Jimenez-Valerio G, Martinez-Lozano M, Bassani N, Vidal A, Ochoa-de-Olza M,
Suarez C, et al. Resistance to Antiangiogenic Therapies by Metabolic Symbiosis in
Renal Cell Carcinoma PDX Models and Patients. Cell Rep 2016;15:1134-43.
44. Pisarsky L, Bill R, Fagiani E, Dimeloe S, Goosen RW, Hagmann J, et al. Targeting
Metabolic Symbiosis to Overcome Resistance to Anti-angiogenic Therapy. Cell Rep
2016;15:1161-74.
45. Lee I, Lee SJ, Kang WK, Park C. Inhibition of monocarboxylate transporter 2 induces
senescence-associated mitochondrial dysfunction and suppresses progression of
colorectal malignancies in vivo. Mol Cancer Ther 2012;11:2342-51.
46. Mathupala SP, Parajuli P, Sloan AE. Silencing of monocarboxylate transporters via
small interfering ribonucleic acid inhibits glycolysis and induces cell death in
malignant glioma: an in vitro study. Neurosurgery 2004;55:1410-9; discussion 9.
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
29
47. Hirschhaeuser F, Sattler UG, Mueller-Klieser W. Lactate: a metabolic key player in
cancer. Cancer Res 2011;71:6921-5.
48. Brown JM. Tumor hypoxia in cancer therapy. Methods Enzymol 2007;435:297-321.
49. Bovenzi CD, Hamilton J, Tassone P, Johnson J, Cognetti DM, Luginbuhl A, et al.
Prognostic Indications of Elevated MCT4 and CD147 across Cancer Types: A Meta-
Analysis. Biomed Res Int 2015;2015:242437.
50. Sonveaux P, Vegran F, Schroeder T, Wergin MC, Verrax J, Rabbani ZN, et al.
Targeting lactate-fueled respiration selectively kills hypoxic tumor cells in mice. J
Clin Invest 2008;118:3930-42.
51. Bola BM, Chadwick AL, Michopoulos F, Blount KG, Telfer BA, Williams KJ, et al.
Inhibition of monocarboxylate transporter-1 (MCT1) by AZD3965 enhances
radiosensitivity by reducing lactate transport. Mol Cancer Ther 2014;13:2805-16.
52. Nakayama Y, Torigoe T, Inoue Y, Minagawa N, Izumi H, Kohno K, et al. Prognostic
significance of monocarboxylate transporter 4 expression in patients with colorectal
cancer. Exp Ther Med 2012;3:25-30.
53. Lemmens VE, Klaver YL, Verwaal VJ, Rutten HJ, Coebergh JW, de Hingh IH.
Predictors and survival of synchronous peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal origin:
a population-based study. Int J Cancer 2011;128:2717-25.
54. Jayne DG, Fook S, Loi C, Seow-Choen F. Peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal
cancer. Br J Surg 2002;89:1545-50.
55. Aoyagi T, Terracina KP, Raza A, Takabe K. Current treatment options for colon
cancer peritoneal carcinomatosis. World J Gastroenterol 2014;20:12493-500.
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
30
Table 1. Patients’ characteristics
All patients
(n=586)
MCT4 (-)
(n=485)
MCT4 (+)
(n=91)
P-value
Median age (range) 59 (28-90) 59 (28-90) 60 (33-88) 0.207
Sex
Male
Female
365 (62.3%)
221 (37.7%)
305 (62.9%)
180 (37.1%)
53 (58.2%)
38 (41.8%)
0.402
Stage at diagnosis
II
III
308 (52.6%)
278 (47.4%)
251 (51.8%)
234 (48.2%)
57 (62.6%)
34 (37.4%)
0.056
Location
Colon
Rectum
434 (74.3%)
150 (25.7%)
357 (73.6%)
127 (26.2%)
70 (76.9%)
20 (22.0%)
0.423
Histology 0.848
Adenocarcinoma
Mucinous carcinoma
Signet ring cell
carcinoma
559 (95.4%)
25 (4.3%)
2 (0.3%)
463 (95.5%)
20 (4.1%)
2 (0.4%)
88 (96.7%)
3 (3.3%)
0
Lymphatic invasion
no
yes
430 (73.4%)
156 (26.6%)
355 (73.2%)
130 (26.8%)
69 (75.8%)
22 (24.2%)
0.602
Perineural invasion
no
yes
543 (92.7%)
43 (7.3%)
450 (92.8%)
35 (7.2%)
85 (93.4%)
6 (6.6%)
0.832
Vascular invasion
no
yes
504 (86.0%)
82 (14.0%)
412 (84.9%)
73 (15.1%)
84 (92.3%)
7 (7.7%)
0.063
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
31
Figure legend
Figure 1: The expression pattern of MCTs (MCT1, 2 and 4) in colorectal cancer (CRC)
cell lines.
A. RT-PCR and western blot analysis of MCTs expression in 16 CRC cell lines (KRAS wild
type, N = 3; BRAF mutant, N = 3; KRAS mutant, N = 10)
B. MCTs knockdown by transfection of MCTs-siRNA suppressed CRC cell proliferation and
protein expression by western blot analysis.
C. MCTs knockdown suppressed SW620 cell proliferation but no significant effect was
observed in the normal colon fibroblast cell line (CCD-18Co).
D. Knockdown of MCT1 and MCT4 reduced Basigin expression, but not MCT2.
*P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001.
Figure 2: Effect of MCTs knockdown on tumor growth in vivo. BALB/c nude mice were
injected subcutaneously in the bilateral flank with SW620 cells (5 x 106 cells). One week
after injection, mice were treated 2 times per week with an intratumoral injection of siMCTs
(1 μg with HiPerfect transfection reagents /tumor).
A. Time course of tumor growth following injection of siMCTs (left) and mean tumor volume
and standard deviation (right).
B. Cell proliferation in xenograft of SW620 was analyzed by IHC with anti-PCNA antibody
(Santa Cruz Biotechnology, PC-10, 1:2000). The brown staining in the nucleus is the PCNA
signal, and cell proliferation was decreased by siMCT1 and/or siMCT4.
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
32
C. The level of MCTs proteins and Basigin were decreased by siMCTs in western blot
analysis.
*P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001.
Figure 3: Additive effect of MCTs inhibition with radiotherapy or chemotherapy.
SW620 cells were transfected with indicating siMCTs, then the cells were irradiated with a
137Cs source or 5-fluorouracil after 24 hours.
A. Downregulation of MCTs is associated with the radiosensitizing effects. Radiosensitivity
assessed by clonogenic cell survival. SW620 cell lines treated with siMCTs and radiation
were plated (300 cells/well in 6-well) and maintained at for 14 days. Colonies were stained
with 0.1% crystal violet and colonies larger than 50 cells were counted. Surviving fractions
following the given treatments were calculated based on the survival of non-irradiated cells.
B. Additive effect of MCTs inhibition with 5-fluorouracil. SW620 cell lines treated with
siMCTs and 5-fluorouracil for 3 days and stained with 0.4% trypan blue. Results of cell
counts are expressed as percentage of cell proliferation using the control as reference.
*P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001.
Figure 4: MCTs expression in patients’ tumor tissues.
A. MCT1, MCT2, and MCT4 mRNA and 18S rRNA were detected using real-time PCR in
patients’ tissues according to tissue (normal tissue, primary tumor tissue, and PDCs collected
from malignant ascites). MCT4 expression in PDCs from malignant ascites was markedly
increased in comparison with increment of MCT1 and MTC2. Data were normalized using
18S rRNA as an endogenous control.
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
33
B. MCT4 immunostaining of colorectal cancer tissues and PDCs. Intensity MCT4
immunostaining was measured as score 0 (negative), score 1 (weak), score 2 (moderate), and
score 3 (strong) for positive cases of colorectal cancer tissue (left panel). Right panel
represents two cases of PDCs with highly strong MCT4 expression. Original magnification, x
200.
C. MCT4 expression in PDCs collected from malignant ascites and the effects of MCT4
inhibition on cell proliferation
*P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001.
Figure 5: Correlation between MCT4 expression and hypoxia- or angiogenesis-related
factors.
A. Strong expression of MCT4 and hypoxia/angiogenesis-related factors in PDCs compared
to normal and tumor tissue.
B. Left panel showed the protein expression when siRNA of HIF1α and MCT4 were
transfected on SW48 cell line, in hypoxic condition with 1% of oxygen. The MCT4
expression was decreased by knockdown of HIF1α but silencing of MCT4 could not reduce
the HIF1α expression. Right panel showed that the transfection with vector of HIF1α induced
the MCT4 expression.
C. Angiogenesis-related factors including VEGF and Angiopoietin 2 were also decreased by
siHIF1α or siMCT4 in PDCs with ELISA assay. Left two graphs showed that VEGF and
ANGPT2 were significantly decreased by siRNA of HIF1α and MCT4. Right two graphs
showed that the transfection with vector of HIF1α increased VEGF and ANGPT2.
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
34
*P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001.
Figure 6: Relapse-free survival according to MCT4 expression by IHC
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535
Published OnlineFirst February 26, 2018.Mol Cancer Ther Hee Kyung Kim, InKyoung Lee, Heejin Bang, et al. Colorectal Cancer with Peritoneal CarcinomatosisMCT4 Expression is a Potential Therapeutic Target in
Updated version
10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535doi:
Access the most recent version of this article at:
Material
Supplementary
http://mct.aacrjournals.org/content/suppl/2018/02/24/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535.DC1
Access the most recent supplemental material at:
Manuscript
Authorbeen edited. Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet
E-mail alerts related to this article or journal.Sign up to receive free email-alerts
Subscriptions
Reprints and
To order reprints of this article or to subscribe to the journal, contact the AACR Publications
Permissions
Rightslink site. Click on "Request Permissions" which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center's (CCC)
.http://mct.aacrjournals.org/content/early/2018/02/24/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535To request permission to re-use all or part of this article, use this link
Research. on September 18, 2020. © 2018 American Association for Cancermct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on February 26, 2018; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0535