Characterization of proteins, mRNAs, and miRNAs of circulating extracellular vesicles from prostate cancer patients compared to healthy subjects

Prostate cancer (PC) is the fifth leading cause of death in men globally. Measurement of the blood PSA level is still considered the gold-standard biomarker test for PC despite its high rate of delivering false positives and negatives that result in an inappropriate medical response, including overtreatment. We collected extracellular vesicles (EVs) from the blood plasma of PC patients with organ-confined, extracapsular-invading, and seminal vesicle–invading tumors and from healthy subjects. We examined the protein, mRNA, and miRNA content of these EVs using mass spectrometry (MS), a human PC PCR array, and a miScript miRNA PCR array, respectively. The proteomic analysis showed distinct groups of proteins that are differently expressed in each group of patients, as well as in healthy subjects. Samples from healthy subjects and each tumor type were used for both mRNA and miRNA arrays. The mRNA analysis showed distinct groups of mRNAs that were overexpressed in healthy or in one of the three tumor types but not in the EVs of the other groups. The miRNA analysis showed distinct groups of miRNAs as well. The fold of regulation in the expression of the identified mRNA and miRNA of each stage of the disease from healthy subjects showed that various mRNAs and miRNAs could discriminate the disease stage. Overall, our data suggest many molecular marker candidates for distinguishing between healthy subjects and PC patients using the cargo of circulating vesicles, as well as markers to discriminate between the different tumor types. Once verified, these markers might have a diagnostic value for PC

Microvesicles as mediators of intercellular communication in cancer—the emerging science of cellular ‘debris’.

Abstract Cancer cells emit a heterogeneous mixture of vesicular, organelle-like structures (microvesicles, MVs) into their surroundings including blood and body fluids. MVs are generated via diverse biological mechanisms triggered by pathways involved in oncogenic transformation, microenvironmental stimulation, cellular activation, stress, or death. Vesiculation events occur either at the plasma membrane (ectosomes, shed vesicles) or within endosomal structures (exosomes). MVs are increasingly recognized as mediators of intercellular communication due to their capacity to merge with and transfer a repertoire of bioactive molecular content (cargo) to recipient cells. Such processes may occur both locally and systemically, contributing to the formation of microenvironmental fields and niches. The bioactive cargo of MVs may include growth factors and their receptors, proteases, adhesion molecules, signalling molecules, as well as DNA, mRNA, and micro-RNA (miRs) sequences. Tumour cells emit large quantities of MVs containing procoagulant, growth regulatory and oncogenic cargo (oncosomes), which can be transferred throughout the cancer cell population and to nontransformed stromal cells, endothelial cells and possibly to the inflammatory infiltrates (oncogenic field effect). These events likely impact tumour invasion, angiogenesis, metastasis, drug resistance, and cancer stem cell hierarchy. Ongoing studies explore the molecular mechanisms and mediators of MV-based intercellular communication (cancer vesiculome) with the hope of using this information as a possible source of therapeutic targets and disease biomarkers in cancer

Microvesicles-Messengers and mediators of tumour proression

Cellular interactions play a crucial role in progression, angiogenesis and invasiveness of tumours, including glioma. The traditionally accepted view is that medium and long range cellular communications occur primarily through gradients of soluble ligands, recognizable by the cell-associated receptors. Recent findings, however, suggest the existence of another mode of intercellular communication, where the ‘units’ of information are microvesicles containing a multitude of biologically active protein and RNA species, including oncogenic receptors, such as EGFRvIII. Moreover, microvesicles can be retrieved from the circulating blood of cancer patients, and reveal the presence of oncogenes in their tumours, thereby potentially serving as information-rich prognostic and predictive biomarkers

Tissue distribution of a menthyl-conjugated oligodeoxyribonucleotide antisense to PAI-1 mRNA

The inhibitory effect of numerous analogues of PO-16, an hexadecadeoxyribonucleotide antisense to sequences -22 to -17 of PAI-1 mRNA coding for a fragment of the signal peptide, on the expression of PAI-1 in endothelial cells, and physiological consequences of the subsequently reduced PAI-1 activity tested in vitro and in vivo, were described in our previous studies. Of particular interest was PO-16 5'-O-conjugated with menthyl phosphorothioate (MPO-16R). In this work, tissue localisation of MPO-16R labelled with [35S] phosphorothioate at the 3'-end, was determined. [35S]MPO-16R and control [35S]MPO-16R-SENSE oligonucleotides were administered intravenously into 22 rats and organ distribution of the labelled bioconjugates was assessed after 24 and 48 h. For this purpose, tissue sections were subjected to autoradiography, and quantitated by liquid scintillation after solubilisation. Overall clearance of radioactivity was already seen after 24 h, with the radioactivity recovered mainly in the kidney and liver. A smaller fraction of radioactivity was also retained in the spleen and heart. The kidney concentration of the labelled probe was higher than that of liver by 50%. The distribution of PAI-1 mRNA in untreated rat kidney, liver, spleen and heart established by two independent techniques: Ribonuclease Protection Assay and Real-Time PCR, shows the same pattern as that observed for [35S]MPO-16R antisense

Microvesicles Contribute to the Bystander Effect of DNA Damage

Genotoxic treatments elicit DNA damage response (DDR) not only in cells that are directly exposed but also in cells that are not in the field of treatment (bystander cells), a phenomenon that is commonly referred to as the bystander effect (BE). However, mechanisms underlying the BE remain elusive. We report here that etoposide and ultraviolet (UV) exposure stimulate the production of microvesicles (MVs) in DU145 prostate cancer cells. MVs isolated from UV-treated DU145 and A431 epidermoid carcinoma cells as well as etoposide-treated DU145 cells induced phosphorylation of ataxia-telangiectasia mutated (ATM) at serine 1981 (indicative of ATM activation) and phosphorylation of histone H2AX at serine 139 (γH2AX) in naïve DU145 cells. Importantly, neutralization of MVs derived from UV-treated cells with annexin V significantly reduced the MV-associated BE activities. Etoposide and UV are known to induce DDR primarily through the ATM and ATM- and Rad3-related (ATR) pathways, respectively. In this regard, MV is likely a common source for the DNA damage-induced bystander effect. However, pre-treatment of DU145 naïve cells with an ATM (KU55933) inhibitor does not affect the BE elicited by MVs isolated from etoposide-treated cells, indicating that the BE is induced upstream of ATM actions. Taken together, we provide evidence supporting that MVs are a source of the DNA damage-induced bystander effect

Table_1_Characterization of proteins, mRNAs, and miRNAs of circulating extracellular vesicles from prostate cancer patients compared to healthy subjects.pdf

Prostate cancer (PC) is the fifth leading cause of death in men globally. Measurement of the blood PSA level is still considered the gold-standard biomarker test for PC despite its high rate of delivering false positives and negatives that result in an inappropriate medical response, including overtreatment. We collected extracellular vesicles (EVs) from the blood plasma of PC patients with organ-confined, extracapsular-invading, and seminal vesicle–invading tumors and from healthy subjects. We examined the protein, mRNA, and miRNA content of these EVs using mass spectrometry (MS), a human PC PCR array, and a miScript miRNA PCR array, respectively. The proteomic analysis showed distinct groups of proteins that are differently expressed in each group of patients, as well as in healthy subjects. Samples from healthy subjects and each tumor type were used for both mRNA and miRNA arrays. The mRNA analysis showed distinct groups of mRNAs that were overexpressed in healthy or in one of the three tumor types but not in the EVs of the other groups. The miRNA analysis showed distinct groups of miRNAs as well. The fold of regulation in the expression of the identified mRNA and miRNA of each stage of the disease from healthy subjects showed that various mRNAs and miRNAs could discriminate the disease stage. Overall, our data suggest many molecular marker candidates for distinguishing between healthy subjects and PC patients using the cargo of circulating vesicles, as well as markers to discriminate between the different tumor types. Once verified, these markers might have a diagnostic value for PC.</p