HNRNPA1, a Splicing Regulator, Is an Effective Target Protein for Cervical Cancer Detection: Comparison With Conventional Tumor Markers.

OBJECTIVE: Heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein A1 (HNRNPA1), serine/arginine-rich splicing factor 1 (SRSF1), and SRSF3 are splicing regulators associated with oncogenesis. However, the alterations of SF proteins and their diagnostic values in cervical cancer are unclear. To apply SFs clinically, effective marker selection and characterization of the target organ properties are essential. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We concurrently analyzed HNRNPA1, SRSF1, SRSF3, and the conventional tumor markers squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCCA) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in cervical tissue samples (n = 127) using semiquantitative immunoblotting. In addition, we compared them with p16 (cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A [CDKN2A]), which has shown high diagnostic efficacy in immunohistochemical staining studies and has been proposed as a candidate protein for point-of-care screening biochemical tests of cervical neoplasia. RESULTS: HNRNPA1, higher molecular weight forms of SRSF1 (SRSF1-HMws), SRSF3, CEA, and p16 levels were higher (P < 0.05) in cervical carcinoma tissue samples than in nontumoral cervical tissue samples. However, the levels of SRSF1-Total (sum of SRSF1-HMws and a lower molecular weight form of SRSF1) and SCCA, a commonly used cervical tumor marker, were not different between carcinoma and nontumoral tissue samples. In paired sample comparisons, HNRNPA1 (94%) showed the highest incidence of up-regulation (carcinoma/nontumor, >1.5) in cervical carcinoma, followed by p16 (84%), SRSF1-HMws (69%), SRSF3 (66%), CEA (66 %), SCCA (32%), and SRSF1-Total (31%). HNRNPA1 (92%) and p16 (91%) presented the two highest diagnostic accuracies for cervical carcinoma, which were superior to those of SRSF3 (75%), SRSF1-HMws (72%), CEA (72%), SCCA (59%), and SRSF1-Total (55%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results identified that HNRNPA1 is the best diagnostic marker among the SFs and conventional markers given its excellent diagnostic efficacy for cervical carcinoma, and it has a p16-comparable diagnostic value. We suggest that HNRNPA1 is an additional effective target protein for developing cervical cancer detection tools.

Comparative expression patterns and diagnostic efficacies of SR splicing factors and HNRNPA1 in gastric and colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Serine/arginine-rich splicing factors (SRSFs) and HNRNPA1 have oncogenic properties. However, their proteomic expressions and practical priority in gastric cancer (GC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) are mostly unknown. To apply SFs in clinics, effective marker selection and characterization of properties in the target organ are essential. METHODS: We concurrently analyzed SRSF1, 3, and 5-7, and HNRNPA1, together with the conventional tumor marker carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), in stomach and colorectal tissue samples (n = 420) using semiquantitative immunoblot, subcellular fractionation, and quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction methods. RESULTS: In the semiquantitative immunoblot analysis, HNRNPA1 and SRSF7 levels were significantly higher in GC than in gastric normal mucosa, and SRSF7 levels were higher in intestinal-type compared with diffuse-type of gastric adenocarcinoma. Of the SFs, only HNRNPA1 presented greater than 50 % upregulation (cancer/normal mucosa > 2-fold) incidences and CEA-comparable, acceptable (>70 %) detection accuracy (74 %) for GC. All SF protein levels were significantly higher in CRC than in colorectal normal mucosa, and HNRNPA1 levels were higher in low-stage CRC compared with high-stage CRC. Among the SFs, HNRNPA1 and SRSF3 presented the two highest upregulation incidences (88 % and 74 %, respectively) and detection accuracy (90 % and 84 %, respectively) for CRC. The detection accuracy of HNRNPA1 was comparable to that of CEA in low (≤ II)-stage CRC but was inferior to that of CEA in high (>II)-stage CRC. Extranuclear distributions of HNRNPA1 and SRSF6 (cytosol/microsome) differed from those of other SRSFs (membrane/organelle) in both cancers. In an analysis of the six SF mRNAs, all mRNAs presented unacceptable detection accuracies (≤70 %) in both cancers, and all mRNAs except SRSF6 were disproportionate to the corresponding protein levels in GC. CONCLUSION: Our results provide a comprehensive insight into the six SF expression profiles in GC and indicate that, among the SFs, HNRNPA1, but not HNRNPA1 mRNA, is the most effective, novel GC marker. Regardless of the good to excellent detection accuracy of SRSF3 and HNRNPA1 in CRC, the SFs have lower practical priority than CEA, especially for high-stage CRC detection.

SRSF5: a novel marker for small-cell lung cancer and pleural metastatic cancer.

OBJECTIVES: SR-splicing factors (SRSFs) play important roles in oncogenesis. However, the expression of SRSF 5-7 proteins in lung cancer (LC) is unclear, and their use in the diagnosis of pleural diseases has never been assessed. We evaluated SRSF 5-7 protein levels in LC and their diagnostic potential for cancer cells in lung and pleural effusion (PE) and, for the dysregulated SRSFs, investigated their neutralization effect on LC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SRSF 5-7 levels in lung tissue and PE cell lysate samples (n=453) were compared with the results of conventional tumor markers. Knockdown of SRSF gene expression was performed using small interfering RNAs on small-cell LC (SCLC) cell lines. RESULTS: In lung tissue analysis, SRSF 5-7 levels were up-regulated in LC samples compared with non-tumoral lung tissue samples; they were markedly higher in SCLC than in adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma. SRSF5 showed the highest detection accuracy (89%) for total LC, and it was superior to that (74%) of carcinoembryonic antigen [CEA, a commonly used non-SCLC (NSCLC) marker]. Notably, the detection accuracies of the three SRSFs for SCLC were all 100% and higher than that (69%) of a pro-gastrin-releasing peptide (a well-known SCLC marker). In PE cell analysis, the detection accuracy (86%) of SRSF5 for malignant cells was highest among SRSFs and comparable to that (83%) of CEA. SRSF5 additionally detected 70% of CEA-missed non-NSCLC cases. Down-regulation of the SRSFs induced mild (SRSF5 and SRSF7) to remarkably (SRSF6) reduced cell proliferation. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrated the up-regulated expression of SRSF 5-7 proteins in LC with much more profound up-regulation in SCLC than in NSCLC and suggest that up-regulation of the SRSFs is related to SCLC proliferation. Moreover, we identified SRSF5 as a novel detection marker for SCLC and pleural metastatic cancer cells.