Changing sediment budget of the Mekong: Cumulative threats and management strategies for a large river basin.

Two decades after the construction of the first major dam, the Mekong basin and its six riparian countries have seen rapid economic growth and development of the river system. Hydropower dams, aggregate mines, flood-control dykes, and groundwater-irrigated agriculture have all provided short-term economic benefits throughout the basin. However, it is becoming evident that anthropic changes are significantly affecting the natural functioning of the river and its floodplains. We now ask if these changes are risking major adverse impacts for the 70 million people living in the Mekong Basin. Many livelihoods in the basin depend on ecosystem services that will be strongly impacted by alterations of the sediment transport processes that drive river and delta morpho-dynamics, which underpin a sustainable future for the Mekong basin and Delta. Drawing upon ongoing and recently published research, we provide an overview of key drivers of change (hydropower development, sand mining, dyking and water infrastructures, climate change, and accelerated subsidence from pumping) for the Mekong's sediment budget, and their likely individual and cumulative impacts on the river system. Our results quantify the degree to which the Mekong delta, which receives the impacts from the entire connected river basin, is increasingly vulnerable in the face of declining sediment loads, rising seas and subsiding land. Without concerted action, it is likely that nearly half of the Delta's land surface will be below sea level by 2100, with the remaining areas impacted by salinization and frequent flooding. The threat to the Delta can be understood only in the context of processes in the entire river basin. The Mekong River case can serve to raise awareness of how the connected functions of river systems in general depend on undisturbed sediment transport, thereby informing planning for other large river basins currently embarking on rapid economic development.

Role and expression of FRS2 and FRS3 in prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: FGF receptor substrates (FRS2 and FRS3) are key adaptor proteins that mediate FGF-FGFR signalling in benign as well as malignant tissue. Here we investigated FRS2 and FRS3 as a means of disrupting global FGF signalling in prostate cancer. METHODS: FRS2 and FRS3 manipulation was investigated in vitro using over-expression, knockdown and functional assays. FRS2 and FRS3 expression was profiled in cell lines and clinical tumors of different grades. RESULTS: In a panel of cell lines we observed ubiquitous FRS2 and FRS3 transcript and protein expression in both benign and malignant cells. We next tested functional redundancy of FRS2 and FRS3 in prostate cancer cells. In DU145 cells, specific FRS2 suppression inhibited FGF induced signalling. This effect was not apparent in cells stably over-expressing FRS3. Indeed FRS3 over-expression resulted in enhanced proliferation (p = 0.005) compared to control cells. Given this functional redundancy, we tested the therapeutic principle of dual targeting of FRS2 and FRS3 in prostate cancer. Co-suppression of FRS2 and FRS3 significantly inhibited ERK activation with a concomitant reduction in cell proliferation (p < 0.05), migration and invasion (p < 0.05). Synchronous knockdown of FRS2 and FRS3 with exposure to cytotoxic irradiation resulted in a significant reduction in prostate cancer cell survival compared to irradiation alone (p < 0.05). Importantly, this synergistic effect was not observed in benign cells. Finally, we investigated expression of FRS2 and FRS3 transcript in a cohort of micro-dissected tumors of different grades as well as by immunohistochemistry in clinical biopsies. Here, we did not observe any difference in expression between benign and malignant biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest functional overlap of FRS2 and FRS3 in mediating mitogenic FGF signalling in the prostate. FRS2 and FRS3 are not over-expressed in tumours but targeted dual inhibition may selectively adversely affect malignant but not benign prostate cells.

Evidence for distinct alterations in the FGF axis in prostate cancer progression to an aggressive clinical phenotype.

Multiple fibroblast growth factor (FGF) axis alterations are known to occur in prostate cancer. Here we simultaneously profiled key components of this axis to determine their relevance in disease progression. An optimized immunohistochemistry protocol was used in expression analysis of FGF2, FGF8, FGFR1, FGFR4, and Sef (similar expression to FGF) in a single TMA of prostate cancer. FGF ligands and receptors were overexpressed in cancers compared to benign samples (p < 0.0001), while Sef expression was reduced (p < 0.0001). There was a positive association between higher grades and increased FGFR4 (p = 0.02), FGF2, and FGF8 (p = 0.002 and p < 0.0001). Sef expression was progressively lower with increasing grade (p = 0.005). Clinical stage was positively associated with FGF2, FGF8, and FGFR4 expression (p = 0.005, 0.03, and 0.012) but not with FGFR1 or Sef expression. Only reduced Sef was associated with bone metastasis (p = 0.02) and was also predictive of subsequent metastasis in initially localized tumours (p = 0.004). Down-regulation of Sef and increased FGFR4 were also the only independent variables associated with disease-specific survival (HR 1.73, p = 0.04 and HR 0.56, p = 0.01). In in vitro studies, silencing Sef enhanced the cell response to FGFs (p < 0.001) and substantially mitigated the effectiveness of an FGFR1 inhibitor. Conversely, increased Sef blocked the response to FGFs and had a comparable suppressive effect to the inhibitor. This study demonstrates that increased FGFR4 and reduced Sef may be critical FGF alterations associated with prostate cancer progression. Sef may also have a role in the tumour response to FGFR inhibition and warrants further investigation in this context.

Estrogen regulates vesicle trafficking gene expression in EFF-3, EFM-19 and MCF-7 breast cancer cells.

Estrogens are critical mediators of breast tumorigenesis. This occurs via the action of estrogens on the estrogen receptor (ER), which regulates the transcriptome of breast cancer cells. Despite the long history of the search for estrogen-regulated genes in breast cancer, knowledge of the E2-regulated transcriptome and its effects is incomplete. We used Affymetrix GeneChips to profile the effects of estradiol on the expression of genes in EFF-3, EFM-19 and MCF-7 cells. In addition to many well-characterized estrogen-regulated genes, this identified a novel group of genes that have roles in vesicle trafficking, including exocytosis. Recent evidence in the literature supports a role for vesicle trafficking in tumorigenesis. We focused on five genes (SYTL5, RAB27B, SNX24, GALNT4 and SLC12A2/NKCC1/BSC2) and confirmed their estrogen-regulation using quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR). qPCR also demonstrated that these five genes were expressed in invasive breast carcinoma tissue. Immunohistochemistry showed expression of SYTL5 in cells of normal breast ductal epithelium, ductal carcinoma in-situ (DCIS) and invasive breast carcinoma. The results suggest that a significant effect of estrogens is to regulate the expression of genes that affect diverse aspects of vesicle trafficking including exocytosis.

Application of transcript profiling in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded diagnostic prostate cancer needle biopsies.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility of transcript profiling in diagnostic formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded (FFPE) biopsies for prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Laser-capture microdissection (LCM) was used to microdissect glandular epithelium as well as stromal tissue in archival prostate needle biopsies. Optimized RNA extraction, reverse transcription and real-time PCR (QPCR) protocols were used to detect transcript expression. RNA degradation effects were assessed using hydrolysed cell line RNA and matched xenograft FFPE and frozen tumours. RESULTS: LCM and RNA extraction was achieved in all biopsies from a pilot cohort of five patients. cDNA produced was successfully used to detect expression of glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase, RPL13, prostate-specific antigen, vimentin, inhibitor of differentiation/DNA binding 1 (Id-1) and polycomb group protein enhancer of zeste homolog 2 (EZH2) transcripts. In the cell line and xenograft models, we investigated the effect of RNA degradation on transcript quantification by QPCR. In both models normalization of transcript quantity with a housekeeping gene resulted in restored expression in all degraded samples to within a 50% difference of control samples. Using an extended cohort of 29 biopsies, we tested application in detecting differences in EZH2 and Id-1 expression between malignant and benign epithelium. The results confirmed that our technique was capable of quantifying significant differences in expression between malignant and benign epithelium consistent with the reported trends. CONCLUSION: This study reports the use of standard FFPE needle biopsies for transcript profiling and supports the concept of molecular prognostic studies in tissue acquired at diagnosis in prostate cancer.