Abstract
Purpose
Overexpression of CD44 has been detected in many types of tumor tissues. Moreover, CD44 is recognized as a cancer stem cell marker for many cancers. However, the prognostic value of CD44 for glioma patients has not yet been clarified. The authors tried to explore the impact of CD44 expression on grade II/III glioma patients.
Methods
To assess the RNA expression levels of CD44 in glioma tissues and normal brain tissues, meta-analyses were conducted in the online Oncomine database. The mRNA expression levels of CD44, CD44s, and CD44v2–v10 in 112 grade II/III glioma patients in Hokkaido University Hospital (HUH) were detected by qPCR. The RNA-seq data and clinical data of grade II/III glioma patients were obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and the Chinese Glioma Genome Atlas (CGGA) databases.
Results
Based on the Oncomine database, CD44 has significantly high expression in glioma tissues as compared with normal tissues. We explored the clinical relevance of CD44 mRNA expression based on the HUH cohorts, the TCGA cohorts, and the CGGA cohorts. In survival analysis, high mRNA expression of CD44 was correlated with poor overall survival and poor progression-free survival in grade II/III glioma patients. Multivariate Cox regression analyses confirmed CD44 as an independent prognostic factor for grade II/III glioma patients.
Conclusions
The present study suggests that overexpression of CD44 is associated with a poor prognosis for grade II/III glioma patients. Moreover, our findings suggest that CD44 could serve as a prognostic biomarker in grade II/III glioma patients.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Glioma accounts for about 80% of primary malignant brain tumors. Based on the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria, gliomas are classified into four grades (i.e., WHO grade I, II, III, and IV). Glioblastoma (GBM), is considered a grade IV tumor and accounts for 50% of all gliomas [1]. GBM is the most aggressive type of brain tumor in adults. Despite surgery and post-operative chemotherapy and radiotherapy, the median survival is only 14.6 months [2]. Glioma stem cells (GSCs) are considered to be largely responsible for the poor prognosis in GBM [3].
CD 44 is a major cell surface receptor for hyaluronan (HA) and many other extracellular matrix components, and is implicated in cell adhesion, cell migration, and signaling [4]. The concentrations of HA in malignant tumors are usually higher than that are seen in the corresponding benign or normal tissues, and the high expression levels of HA contribute to tumor proliferation, progression, and metastasis [5]. Overexpression of HA is correlated with poor prognosis in many cancers [6], suggesting that CD44 might be important in tumor progression, and migration. There are two families of CD44 isoforms: (1) the standard isoform of CD44 (CD44s), and (2) the variant isoforms of CD44 (CD44v). CD44s is encoded by ten constant exons. CD44v is encoded by ten constant exons and any combination of the remaining nine exons [7]. Different isoforms of CD44 possess similar or distinct cellular functions [8].
Compared with normal tissues, CD44 is overexpressed in a variety of tumors, including glioma [9]. Some studies have reported that increased expression levels of CD44 are associated with a poor prognosis in GBM patients [10,11,12,13,14,15], while others found no correlation [16, 17]. Still, others have identified CD44 as a positive prognostic indicator of survival for GBM patients [18]. Klank et al., suggested a biphasic relationship between CD44 expression levels and survival of glioma patients [19].
GSCs define a small subpopulation of tumor cells in GBM with the ability to self-renew, and to differentiate into tumor lineages and initiate tumors. GSCs in GBM are responsible for tumor progression, chemo-resistance, radio-resistance, recurrence, and metastasis [20, 21]. CD44 is recognized as a cancer stem cell marker in various cancers [22],however, whether or not CD44 is an applicable GSC marker remains controversial. Several studies support the suggestion that CD44 might be a GSC marker [23,24,25]. However, Wang et al., have found that CD44 low-expressing cells exhibit more GSC traits, and his group suggested that CD44 is not an appropriate GSC marker [26].
Compared to GBM, the prognostic value of CD44 for grade II/III glioma patients has not been investigated. In the present study, we investigated in the gene expression patterns of total CD44, CD44s, and CD44v2–v10 in grade II/III gliomas. We correlated gene expression of CD44 to the clinical characteristics of glioma patients, and estimated its potential prognostic value for grade II/III glioma patients. Moreover, a gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) was performed to explore the function of CD44 and its related signaling pathways.
Methods and Materials
Oncomine analysis
To evaluate the mRNA expression of CD44 in glioma tissues as compared to normal tissues, a meta-analysis was conducted using previously published and publicly available microarray data in the online Oncomine database (www.oncomine.com; Oncomine™, Compendia Bioscience, Ann Arbor, MI, USA). RNA expression levels are reported as Log2 median-centered intensity in the Oncomine database. CD44 mRNA expression levels in tumor specimens were compared with that in normal controls by the Student’s t-test to generate a P value.
Patients in Hokkaido University Hospital
A cohort of 112 patients from the department of Neurosurgery in Hokkaido University Hospital (HUH) between January 2003 and March 2019 were evaluated. All the patients were diagnosed as grade II or III gliomas based on WHO 2000 criteria, WHO 2007 criteria, or WHO 2016 criteria. Patient who was younger than 16 years old at the time of diagnosis was excluded from the present study. Both clinical data and detailed follow-up data were obtained for all patients. The isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutation status was investigated using Sanger sequencing. In addition, we also investigated in the 1p/19q loss of heterozygosity status of the tumors using a multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification procedure.
RNA extraction and quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) analysis
The total RNA was extracted from the frozen specimens stored in − 80 °C using a RNeasy Mini Kit (QIAGEN, Hilden, Germany). cDNA was synthesized using the PrimeScript™ II 1st Strand cDNA Synthesis kit (Takara Biotechnology Co., Ltd., Dalian, China) with 1 mg of total RNA. The primer sequences of CD44, CD44s, CD44v2, CD44v3, CD44v4, CD44v5, CD44v6, CD44v7, CD44v8, CD44v9, CD44v10, and β-actin are listed in Supplementary Table 1. Reverse transcription-qPCR analysis was performed using FastStart Essential DNA Green Master with LightCycler 96 (Roche Diagnostics, Basel, Switzerland). The PCR product specificities were confirmed by melt curve analysis. All PCR experiments were done in triplicates, and the means of three values are presented. The relative target gene mRNA expression levels compared to β-actin were measured by qPCR using the 2−ΔΔCT method [27].
Data mining in TCGA and CGGA
Clinical information, gene expression, and gene mutation status were obtained from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA, https://portal.gdc.cancer.gov/) database and the Chinese Glioma Genome Atlas (CGGA, https://cgga.org.cn/) database for grade II/III glioma patients. Patient who was less than 16 years old at the time of diagnosis was excluded. Patients without survival data were also excluded from the present study. The raw count data of RNA-seq was obtained from TCGA and then normalized using the edgeR package (version 3.26.1) in R (version 3.5.3). The RNA-seq data from the CGGA database was presented directly as the value of fragments per kilobase per million mapped reads (FPKM).
Gene set enrichment analysis
GSEA is a method to identify groups of genes or proteins that are over-represented in a large set of genes or proteins. These groups of genes or proteins may have an association with biological functions or phenotypes. In the present study, the phenotype was determined by the expression level of CD44 (high versus low) based on the TCGA database. We selected annotated gene sets (c2.cp.kegg. v6.2 symbols) as the reference gene sets. The normalized enrichment score (NES), nominal p-value, and false discovery rate (FDR) q-value were used to indicate the significance of association between the gene sets and the pathways.
Statistical analysis
The mRNA expression levels of CD44 were compared by the Mann–Whitney U-test between groups. Categorical variables were expressed as frequency and were compared using the Chi-square (χ2) test. The value of CD44 mRNA expression higher than the median value was considered as CD44 high expression, while the value of CD44 mRNA expression level lower than the median value was considered as CD44 low expression. OS and PFS were presented as Kaplan–Meier curves. The Kaplan–Meier survival curves with the log-rank test were calculated and then plotted using Graphpad Prism version 8. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression analyses were conducted using SPSS version 22.0. Factors that were significant at the 0.1 level on univariate analysis were selected for multivariate analysis. P < 0.05 was considered to indicate a statistically significant difference.
Results
The mRNA expression levels of CD44 in glioma tissues and normal brain tissues
Based on the data in the Oncomine database, we further confirmed that CD44 mRNA expression was significantly higher in glioma tissues as compared to normal brain tissues (Supplementary Fig. 1).
The mRNA expression levels of CD44, CD44s, CD44v2, CD44v3, CD44v4, CD44v5, CD44v6, CD44v7, CD44v8, CD44v9, and CD44v10 in grade II/III gliomas
Compared with mRNA expression level of CD44s, the mRNA expression levels of CD44v3, CD44v4, CD44v5, CD44v6, CD44v7, CD44v8, CD44v9, and CD44v10 were much lower (Fig. 1a). Further, extremely low mRNA expression level of CD44v2 was detected in grade II/III gliomas. We even failed to detect the mRNA expression of CD44v2 in 30 specimens. Besides, tumor specimens which belonged to CD44 high group also belonged to CD44s high group (data not shown). Thus, in grade II/III gliomas, the mRNA expression level of CD44s could practically represent the mRNA expression level of total CD44.
The relationship between the mRNA expression levels of CD44 and the clinicopathological characteristics seen in glioma patients
Based on the RNA-seq data in the TCGA and CGGA databases, and the qPCR analysis of the glioma cases in HUH, we next explored the relationship between CD44 mRNA expression levels and various clinicopathological characteristics seen in grade II/III glioma patients (Table 1, Supplementary Table 2 and 3, Fig. 1b–n). In HUH cohorts, compared with patients younger than 60 years old, CD44 expression was significantly higher in patients over 60 years old (Fig. 1b). The CD44 expression levels in IDH wild type tumors were significantly higher than that in IDH mutant tumors (Fig. 1h). In the TCGA cohorts, the CD44 expression levels in grade III gliomas and IDH wild type gliomas were significantly higher than that in grade II gliomas and IDH mutant gliomas, respectively (Fig. 1f, i). Besides, high CD44 expression level was significantly associated with high recurrent probability (Fig. 1n). In the CGGA cohorts, the CD44 expression levels in 1p/19q non co-deleted gliomas were significantly higher than that in 1p/19q co-deleted gliomas (Fig. 1l). To some extent, the majority of the results showed the similar tendency among the HUH cohorts, the TCGA cohorts, and the CGGA cohorts, although some of the results did not reach statistical significance. The above results indicated that CD44 expression was associated with various clinicopathological characteristics and might serve as a potential prognostic biomarker for glioma patients.
The correlation between CD44 expression and overall survival of glioma patients
The Kaplan–Meier survival curves and log-rank test analyses illustrated that high expression of CD44 was significantly associated with poor OS of grade II/III gliomas in the HUH cohorts, the TCGA cohorts and the CGGA cohorts (Fig. 2). We then performed survival analysis towards CD44 mRNA expression in subgroups of grade II/III gliomas (Supplementary Fig. 2). The results suggested a similar tendency that high CD44 expression was associated with a poor OS of each subgroup, although inconsistencies exist among the three cohorts. Thus, we suggest that CD44 could serve as a potential prognostic factor for grade II/III glioma patients.
The correlation between CD44 expression and progression-free survival of glioma patients
The results of the survival analyses demonstrated that high CD44 mRNA expression was significantly associated with a poor PFS of grade II/III glioma patients (Fig. 2d). Moreover, high CD44 expression was significantly associated with a poor PFS of each subgroup (Fig. 2e–h).
CD44 was an independent prognostic marker for grade II/III glioma patients
Based on the above findings, we used univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses to evaluate the utility of CD44 expression as an independent prognostic factor (Table 2, Supplementary Tables 4, 5). Multivariate Cox regression analyses found that CD44 expression was significantly associated with OS as a prognostic factor in the HUH cohorts (P = 0.027), the TCGA cohorts (P = 0.029), and the CGGA cohorts (P = 0.003).
Gene set enrichment analysis
We performed GSEA to explore the function of CD44 and its related signaling pathways base on the TCGA database. The significantly enriched signaling pathways were picked out according to the NES, FDR q-value, and nominal p-value. In the present study, gene sets of Toll-like receptors (TLRs) signaling pathway, cell adhesion molecules, regulation of actin cytoskeleton, and chemokine signaling pathway are differentially enriched in CD44 high expression phenotype (Supplementary Table 6, Fig. 3).
Discussion
Overexpression of HA is correlated with poor prognosis in many cancer types [6]. CD44, which is a major cell surface receptor for HA and many other extracellular matrix components, is implicated in cell adhesion, migration, and signaling [4].
There are two families of CD44 isoforms: (1) the standard isoform of CD44; and (2) the variant isoforms of CD44 [8]. Miwa et al., found that CD44s cells were associated with increased chemotaxis, invasiveness, and decreased tumorigenicity in gallbladder cancer, while CD44v cells were associated with decreased chemotaxis, invasiveness, and increased tumorigenicity [28]. In human gliomas, Ranuncolo et al., found that overexpression of CD44s is associated with a highly invasive behavior [17]. CD44s appears to be the dominant form of CD44 in primary brain tumors [29, 30]. Expression levels of CD44s do not seem to correlate with the grading range of gliomas [29, 31]. Several studies have demonstrated that absent or low expression of CD44v was found in primary brain tumors, although high expression levels of CD44v were detected in metastatic brain tumors [17, 30, 32,33,34]. Thus, the lack of CD44v expression might be one of the explanations for the lack of metastatic potential of gliomas. In other words, CD44v might play a role in the intracranial spread of metastatic brain tumors. However, Kaaijk et al. suggest a strong focal expression of CD44v5 in highly malignant gliomas [29].
GSCs are considered to be largely responsible for the poor prognosis of GBMs [3], however, whether or not CD44 could be a useful GSC marker remains controversial, although it has been considered as a cancer stem cell marker for many types of tumors [22,23,24,25,26]. Several studies have explored the prognostic significance of CD44 for GBM patients, but the results are inconsistent [10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19]. Moreover, the prognostic value of CD44 for grade II/III glioma patients has not been studied.
In the present study, we confirmed that CD44 expression was significantly up-regulated in glioma tissues. Further, we confirmed that CD44s is the dominant form of CD44 in grade II/III gliomas. CD44 expression was associated with the age of patients, IDH status, tumor WHO grade, and recurrent probability of grade II/III gliomas. We then performed survival analyses. The Kaplan–Meier survival curve analysis and log-rank test revealed that high CD44 expression was significantly associated with poor OS and PFS in grade II/III glioma patients, which suggested that CD44 mRNA expression might serve as a prognostic factor for grade II/III gliomas. Multivariate cox regression analyses further confirmed that CD44 expression might serve as an independent prognostic factor for grade II/III glioma patients. Next, we found that gene sets of Toll-like receptors (TLRs) signaling pathway, cell adhesion molecules, regulation of actin cytoskeleton, and chemokine signaling pathway are differentially enriched in CD44 high expression phenotype.
Toll like receptor signaling pathway
TLRs are expressed by various immune cells, endothelial cells, epithelial cells, and tumor cells. Modulation of TLR signaling can have anti- and pro-tumor effects depending on the TLR, the tumor subtype, and the immune cells infiltrating the tumor. The pro-tumor effect is mainly driven by TLR expressed by tumor cells [35]. The stimulation of TLR in tumor cells could result in increased cell survival and proliferation, or resistance to chemotherapy [35]. It has been reported that high expression TLR2 and TLR9 is associated with poor prognosis of glioma patients. The contribution of TLR2, TLR4, and TLR9 to glioma progression has been mostly described as tumor promoting [36,37,38]. Qadri et al. suggested that TLR2 activation could be regulated by CD44 [39].
Regulation of actin cytoskeleton
The actin cytoskeleton is essential for whole cell migration and cell interaction with the environment [40]. Infiltration of glioma cells is largely regulated by reshaping the cytoskeleton. The regulation and organization of the cytoskeleton in glioma cells differs strongly from that of the normal glia cells [41]. Compared with normal glia cells, several actin skeleton associated proteins and signaling molecules high expressed in glioma cells, such as Arp2/3, Rac1, RhoG, FAK, etc. Increased Cdc42 and Rac1 activity was observed in invading glioma cells [41]. Besides, invading glioma cells also exhibit increased expression of FAK [42]. Kwiatkowska et al. suggest RhoG plays an important role in the invasive behavior of glioblastoma cells [43]. CD44 could interact with various GTPases (e.g. RhoA, Rac1, and Cdc42) during tumor progression [44].
Chemokine signaling pathway
Chemokines are a group of secreted chemotactic cytokines which play a fundamental role in immune cell migration, tumor growth, tumor angiogenesis, and tumor metastasis [45]. Chemokines have been considered as the central components of cancer-related inflammation [46]. The chemokine superfamily consists of about 50 chemokine ligands and 20 G protein–coupled receptors, including the CC, CXC, CX3C, and XC subfamilies [45]. Various sets of chemokine and its corresponding chemokine receptor, including CX3CL1/CX3CR1, CXCL12/CXCR4, and CXCL16/CXCR6, contribute to tumor proliferation, migration, and invasion [47,48,49]. Further, accumulating evidence indicates that CXCL12/CXCR4 axis plays an important role in glioma cell invasion [48, 49]. Tang et al. suggest that CXCL12/CXCR4 expression is associated with glioma recurrence [50]. Thus, chemokine signaling might have an important effect on regulation of glioma cell functions and immune cell infiltration in CD44 high expression gliomas.
TLR signaling pathway, regulation of actin cytoskeleton, and chemokine signaling pathway are closely related with cell adhesion molecules, focal adhesion, and tumor microenvironment. The results of GSEA suggested that the poor prognosis of CD44 high phenotype might be due, at least in part, to the distinct functions of adhesion molecules and the distinct components of the tumor microenvironment.
Conclusions
In conclusion, the present study demonstrated that overexpression of CD44 is correlated with a poor prognosis for grade II/III glioma patients. Our findings suggest that CD44 could play an important role as a useful prognostic biomarker for grade II/III glioma patients.
References
Ostrom QT, Gittleman H, Truitt G, Boscia A, Kruchko C, Barnholtz-Sloan JS (2018) CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and other central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2011–2015. Neuro Oncol 20:iv1–iv86. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/noy131
Stupp R, Mason WP, van den Bent MJ, Weller M, Fisher B, Taphoorn MJ, Belanger K, Brandes AA, Marosi C, Bogdahn U, Curschmann J, Janzer RC, Ludwin SK, Gorlia T, Allgeier A, Lacombe D, Cairncross JG, Eisenhauer E, Mirimanoff RO, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Brain Tumour and Radiotherapy Groups, National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group (2005) Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 352:987–996. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa043330
Auffinger B, Spencer D, Pytel P, Ahmed AU, Lesniak MS (2015) The role of glioma stem cells in chemotherapy resistance and glioblastoma multiforme recurrence. Expert Rev Neurother 15:741–752. https://doi.org/10.1586/14737175.2015.1051968
Ponta H, Sherman L, Herrlich PA (2003) CD44: from adhesion molecules to signalling regulators. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 4:33–45. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm1004
Toole BP (2004) Hyaluronan: from extracellular glue to pericellular cue. Nat Rev Cancer 4:528–539. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc1391
Tammi RH, Kultti A, Kosma VM, Pirinen R, Auvinen P, Tammi MI (2008) Hyaluronan in human tumors: pathobiological and prognostic messages from cell-associated and stromal hyaluronan. Semin Cancer Biol 18:288–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semcancer.2008.03.005
Prochazka L, Tesarik R, Turanek J (2014) Regulation of alternative splicing of CD44 in cancer. Cell Signal 26:2234–2239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cellsig.2014.07.011
Chen C, Zhao S, Karnad A, Freeman JW (2018) The biology and role of CD44 in cancer progression: therapeutic implications. J Hematol Oncol 11:64. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13045-018-0605-5
Dosio F, Arpicco S, Stella B, Fattal E (2016) Hyaluronic acid for anticancer drug and nucleic acid delivery. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 97:204–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2015.11.011
Anido J, Saez-Borderias A, Gonzalez-Junca A, Rodon L, Folch G, Carmona MA, Prieto-Sanchez RM, Barba I, Martinez-Saez E, Prudkin L, Cuartas I, Raventos C, Martinez-Ricarte F, Poca MA, Garcia-Dorado D, Lahn MM, Yingling JM, Rodon J, Sahuquillo J, Baselga J, Seoane J (2010) TGF-beta receptor inhibitors target the CD44(high)/Id1(high) glioma-initiating cell population in human glioblastoma. Cancer Cell 18:655–668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccr.2010.10.023
Wang F, Zheng Z, Guan J, Qi D, Zhou S, Shen X, Wang F, Wenkert D, Kirmani B, Solouki T, Fonkem E, Wong ET, Huang JH, Wu E (2018) Identification of a panel of genes as a prognostic biomarker for glioblastoma. EBioMedicine 37:68–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2018.10.024
Nishikawa M, Inoue A, Ohnishi T, Kohno S, Ohue S, Matsumoto S, Suehiro S, Yamashita D, Ozaki S, Watanabe H, Yano H, Takahashi H, Kitazawa R, Tanaka J, Kunieda T (2018) Significance of glioma stem-like cells in the tumor periphery that express high levels of CD44 in tumor invasion, early progression, and poor prognosis in glioblastoma. Stem Cells Int 2018:5387041. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5387041
Bhat KPL, Balasubramaniyan V, Vaillant B, Ezhilarasan R, Hummelink K, Hollingsworth F, Wani K, Heathcock L, James JD, Goodman LD, Conroy S, Long L, Lelic N, Wang S, Gumin J, Raj D, Kodama Y, Raghunathan A, Olar A, Joshi K, Pelloski CE, Heimberger A, Kim SH, Cahill DP, Rao G, Den Dunnen WFA, Boddeke H, Phillips HS, Nakano I, Lang FF, Colman H, Sulman EP, Aldape K (2013) Mesenchymal differentiation mediated by NF-kappaB promotes radiation resistance in glioblastoma. Cancer Cell 24:331–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccr.2013.08.001
Jijiwa M, Demir H, Gupta S, Leung C, Joshi K, Orozco N, Huang T, Yildiz VO, Shibahara I, de Jesus JA, Yong WH, Mischel PS, Fernandez S, Kornblum HI, Nakano I (2011) CD44v6 regulates growth of brain tumor stem cells partially through the AKT-mediated pathway. PLoS ONE 6:e24217. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0024217
Pietras A, Katz AM, Ekstrom EJ, Wee B, Halliday JJ, Pitter KL, Werbeck JL, Amankulor NM, Huse JT, Holland EC (2014) Osteopontin-CD44 signaling in the glioma perivascular niche enhances cancer stem cell phenotypes and promotes aggressive tumor growth. Cell Stem Cell 14:357–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2014.01.005
Tsidulko AY, Kazanskaya GM, Kostromskaya DV, Aidagulova SV, Kiselev RS, Volkov AM, Kobozev VV, Gaitan AS, Krivoshapkin AL, Grigorieva EV (2017) Prognostic relevance of NG2/CSPG4, CD44 and Ki-67 in patients with glioblastoma. Tumour Biol 39:1010428317724282. https://doi.org/10.1177/1010428317724282
Ranuncolo SM, Ladeda V, Specterman S, Varela M, Lastiri J, Morandi A, Matos E, Bal de Kier Joffe E, Puricelli L, Pallotta MG (2002) CD44 expression in human gliomas. J Surg Oncol 79:30–35; discussion 35–36
Wei KC, Huang CY, Chen PY, Feng LY, Wu TW, Chen SM, Tsai HC, Lu YJ, Tsang NM, Tseng CK, Pai PC, Shin JW (2010) Evaluation of the prognostic value of CD44 in glioblastoma multiforme. Anticancer Res 30:253–259
Klank RL, Decker Grunke SA, Bangasser BL, Forster CL, Price MA, Odde TJ, SantaCruz KS, Rosenfeld SS, Canoll P, Turley EA, McCarthy JB, Ohlfest JR, Odde DJ (2017) Biphasic dependence of glioma survival and cell migration on CD44 expression level. Cell Rep 18:23–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2016.12.024
Singh SK, Hawkins C, Clarke ID, Squire JA, Bayani J, Hide T, Henkelman RM, Cusimano MD, Dirks PB (2004) Identification of human brain tumour initiating cells. Nature 432:396–401. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03128
Galli R, Binda E, Orfanelli U, Cipelletti B, Gritti A, De Vitis S, Fiocco R, Foroni C, Dimeco F, Vescovi A (2004) Isolation and characterization of tumorigenic, stem-like neural precursors from human glioblastoma. Cancer Res 64:7011–7021. https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-1364
Yan Y, Zuo X, Wei D (2015) Concise review: emerging role of CD44 in cancer stem cells: a promising biomarker and therapeutic target. Stem Cells Transl Med 4:1033–1043. https://doi.org/10.5966/sctm.2015-0048
Brown DV, Daniel PM, D’Abaco GM, Gogos A, Ng W, Morokoff AP, Mantamadiotis T (2015) Coexpression analysis of CD133 and CD44 identifies proneural and mesenchymal subtypes of glioblastoma multiforme. Oncotarget 6:6267–6280. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.3365
Brown DV, Filiz G, Daniel PM, Hollande F, Dworkin S, Amiridis S, Kountouri N, Ng W, Morokoff AP, Mantamadiotis T (2017) Expression of CD133 and CD44 in glioblastoma stem cells correlates with cell proliferation, phenotype stability and intra-tumor heterogeneity. PLoS ONE 12:e0172791. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172791
Tanaka S, Nakada M, Yamada D, Nakano I, Todo T, Ino Y, Hoshii T, Tadokoro Y, Ohta K, Ali MA, Hayashi Y, Hamada J, Hirao A (2015) Strong therapeutic potential of gamma-secretase inhibitor MRK003 for CD44-high and CD133-low glioblastoma initiating cells. J Neurooncol 121:239–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-014-1630-z
Wang HH, Liao CC, Chow NH, Huang LL, Chuang JI, Wei KC, Shin JW (2017) Whether CD44 is an applicable marker for glioma stem cells. Am J Transl Res 9:4785–4806
Livak KJ, Schmittgen TD (2001) Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2(-delta delta C(T)) method. Methods 25:402–408. https://doi.org/10.1006/meth.2001.1262
Miwa T, Nagata T, Kojima H, Sekine S, Okumura T (2017) Isoform switch of CD44 induces different chemotactic and tumorigenic ability in gallbladder cancer. Int J Oncol 51:771–780. https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.2017.4063
Kaaijk P, Troost D, Morsink F, Keehnen RM, Leenstra S, Bosch DA, Pals ST (1995) Expression of CD44 splice variants in human primary brain tumors. J Neurooncol 26:185–190
Ariza A, Lopez D, Mate JL, Isamat M, Musulen E, Pujol M, Ley A, Navas-Palacios JJ (1995) Role of CD44 in the invasiveness of glioblastoma multiforme and the noninvasiveness of meningioma: an immunohistochemistry study. Hum Pathol 26:1144–1147
Ylagan LR, Quinn B (1997) CD44 expression in astrocytic tumors. Mod Pathol 10:1239–1246
Resnick DK, Resnick NM, Welch WC, Cooper DL (1999) Differential expressions of CD44 variants in tumors affecting the central nervous system. Mol Diagn 4: 219–232. 10.154/MODI00400219
Li H, Hamou MF, de Tribolet N, Jaufeerally R, Hofmann M, Diserens AC, Van Meir EG (1993) Variant CD44 adhesion molecules are expressed in human brain metastases but not in glioblastomas. Cancer Res 53:5345–5349
Li H, Liu J, Hofmann M (1995) CD44 expression patterns in primary and secondary brain tumors. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi 75(525–528):573
Dajon M, Iribarren K, Cremer I (2017) Toll-like receptor stimulation in cancer: A pro- and anti-tumor double-edged sword. Immunobiology 222:89–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imbio.2016.06.009
Wang C, Cao S, Yan Y, Ying Q, Jiang T, Xu K, Wu A (2010) TLR9 expression in glioma tissues correlated to glioma progression and the prognosis of GBM patients. BMC Cancer 10:415. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-10-415
Li C, Ma L, Liu Y, Li Z, Wang Q, Chen Z, Geng X, Han X, Sun J, Li Z (2019) TLR2 promotes development and progression of human glioma via enhancing autophagy. Gene 700:52–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gene.2019.02.084
Jiang Y, Zhou J, Luo P, Gao H, Ma Y, Chen YS, Li L, Zou D, Zhang Y, Jing Z (2018) Prosaposin promotes the proliferation and tumorigenesis of glioma through toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4)-mediated NF-kappaB signaling pathway. EBioMedicine 37:78–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2018.10.053
Qadri M, Almadani S, Jay GD, Elsaid KA (2018) Role of CD44 in regulating TLR2 activation of human macrophages and downstream expression of proinflammatory cytokines. J Immunol 200:758–767. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1700713
Svitkina TM (2018) Ultrastructure of the actin cytoskeleton. Curr Opin Cell Biol 54:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceb.2018.02.007
Hohmann T, Dehghani F (2019) The cytoskeleton—a complex interacting meshwork. Cells. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells8040362
Zagzag D, Friedlander DR, Margolis B, Grumet M, Semenza GL, Zhong H, Simons JW, Holash J, Wiegand SJ, Yancopoulos GD (2000) Molecular events implicated in brain tumor angiogenesis and invasion. Pediatr Neurosurg 33:49–55. https://doi.org/10.1159/000028975
Kwiatkowska A, Didier S, Fortin S, Chuang Y, White T, Berens ME, Rushing E, Eschbacher J, Tran NL, Chan A, Symons M (2012) The small GTPase RhoG mediates glioblastoma cell invasion. Mol Cancer 11:65. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-4598-11-65
Bourguignon LY (2008) Hyaluronan-mediated CD44 activation of RhoGTPase signaling and cytoskeleton function promotes tumor progression. Semin Cancer Biol 18:251–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semcancer.2008.03.007
Chow MT, Luster AD (2014) Chemokines in cancer. Cancer. Immunol Res 2:1125–1131. https://doi.org/10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-14-0160
Mantovani A, Allavena P, Sica A, Balkwill F (2008) Cancer-related inflammation. Nature 454:436–444. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07205
Sciume G, Soriani A, Piccoli M, Frati L, Santoni A, Bernardini G (2010) CX3CR47/CX3CL1 axis negatively controls glioma cell invasion and is modulated by transforming growth factor-beta1. Neuro Oncol 12:701–710. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/nop076
Ehtesham M, Winston JA, Kabos P, Thompson RC (2006) CXCR48 expression mediates glioma cell invasiveness. Oncogene 25:2801–2806. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1209302
Zhang J, Sarkar S, Yong VW (2005) The chemokine stromal cell derived factor-1 (CXCL12) promotes glioma invasiveness through MT2-matrix metalloproteinase. Carcinogenesis 26:2069–2077. https://doi.org/10.1093/carcin/bgi183
Tang W, Wang X, Chen Y, Zhang J, Chen Y, Lin Z (2015) CXCL12 and CXCR50 as predictive biomarkers of glioma recurrence pattern after total resection. Pathol Biol 63:190–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patbio.2015.07.002
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Mr. Xie Tao for the English language review.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
The present study was approved by the local Ethics Committee at Hokkaido University Hospital (Sapporo, Japan; 015–0154). As this study was retrospective, informed consent was waived by the IRB. All procedures performed in the present study were in accordance with 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
11060_2019_3288_MOESM1_ESM.tif
Oncomine microarray database was used to evaluate the mRNA expression of CD44 in glioma tissues vs. normal brain tissues. a Nine microarray datasets containing 18 groups regarding mRNA expression of CD44 in glioma tissues vs. normal brain tissues were involved in this meta-analysis. b A meta-analysis of five microarray datasets containing ten groups regarding mRNA expression of CD44 in grade II/III glioma tissues vs. normal brain tissues. c A meta-analysis of six microarray datasets containing six groups regarding mRNA expression of CD44 in GBM tissues vs. normal brain tissues. d Box plots derived from gene expression data of each group comparing expression of CD44 in glioma tissues and normal brain tissues are shown. Data are shown as a median rank of CD44 through each dataset analysis. The P value for CD44 was presented using the median ranked analysis about glioma vs. normal tissues—Supplementary Fig. 1 (TIFF 1934 kb)
11060_2019_3288_MOESM2_ESM.tif
The correlation between CD44 mRNA expression and OS of glioma patients. a–c The association between CD44 mRNA expression and OS in grade II gliomas. d–f The association between CD44 mRNA expression and OS in grade III gliomas. g–i The association between CD44 mRNA expression and OS in IDH mutant gliomas. j–l The association between CD44 mRNA expression and OS in IDH wild type gliomas—Supplementary Fig. 2 (TIFF 931 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hou, C., Ishi, Y., Motegi, H. et al. Overexpression of CD44 is associated with a poor prognosis in grade II/III gliomas. J Neurooncol 145, 201–210 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-019-03288-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-019-03288-8