| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Biochemistry |
Divisions of Molecular Epidemiology [B. F. C., F. F. K.], and Biochemical Toxicology [D. R. D., M. I. C.], National Center for Toxicological Research, Jefferson, Arkansas 72079; Division of Epidemiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454 [K. E. A.]; Department of Surgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences and Arkansas Cancer Research Center, Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 [N.P.L.]: and Surgery Services, Central Arkansas Veterans Health Care System, Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 [N. P. L.]
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
50100-fold between samples, well beyond the range of other
subunits, suggesting that their expression is highly inducible. Linear
correlations (P < 0.0010.003) existed
between levels of the most consistently expressed GST, GSTP1, and total
GSTs, GSTA2 and M3, and in GSTM1-positive samples, between GSTM1, M3,
and P1. The correlation between GST subunits P1 and M3 was bimodal
according to M1 genotype, reflecting the presence of the
regulatory element in hGSTM3*B that is linked with the
hGSTM1*A genotype. It is concluded that although a
degree of regulation of expression of GSTs occurs in human pancreas,
the variability of phenotype is high and might obscure the effects of
genetic polymorphisms on individual cancer susceptibility.
Interindividual variation of GST expression is, therefore, a factor
that should be taken account of in epidemiological studies. | INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In previous studies of human pancreas, we have analyzed levels of exogenous (12) and endogenous (13) DNA adducts in relation to genetic polymorphisms of the GSTs. Here, we present data on the variation of expression of GSTs of the alpha, mu, and pi classes in normal pancreatic tissue to illustrate how interindividual GST protein expression can vary 6- to over 100-fold, depending on the subunit. That is, phenotypic expression of GSTs in a single organ may present greater variation in enzyme activity than that predicted from genetic polymorphisms and should be taken into account in epidemiological studies when considering the effect of genetic polymorphisms on cancer susceptibility.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Analysis of GSTs.
A portion of the GST eluate (0.250 ml) was subjected to HPLC analysis
within 2 days of storage (at 4°C), essentially by the method of
Ostlund-Farrants et al. (15)
. Significant
change from this method is the use of a Phenomenex "Jupiter" 5
µm, C18 column (4.6-mm inside
diameter x 250 mm; Phenomenex, Torrance, CA), which
provided for better GST subunit separation. GST subunits were
identified by their HPLC elution profile (16)
and
electrospray mass spectrometry, using a Platform single quadrupole mass
spectrometer (Micromass, Altrincham, United Kingdom). For this purpose,
GST subunits purified by HPLC were dried with a stream of argon and
dissolved in 50% aqueous acetonitrile/0.5% formic acid. Positive ion
data were acquired over the range of m/z 500-2000 in MCA
mode using infusion at 5:l/min. The instrument was calibrated using the
multiple-charged ion peaks from a separate introduction of horse heart
myoglobin (Sigma; M-1882; 16,951.5 Da), and data were acquired
under the same conditions as the GST samples. Subtracted data were
processed by maximal entropy calculation to convergence using 1
Da/channel resolution. The data were centroided to accurately
determine the masses.
Quantitation of GSTs.
Subunits were quantitated by absorption at 214 nm and by reference to
known quantities of authentic GSTP11, M1b-1b, and A1-1 standards
(PanVera, Madison, WI). Those peaks for which no standards were
available were quantitated using data established for peaks of similar
retention time and peak width. Approximately one-third of analyses were
repeated to establish the reliability of quantitation. Correlations
between levels of subunit expression within each tissue sample were
examined using the program SigmaStat (Jandel Corp., San Rafael, CA).
Protein concentrations were determined by the dye-binding method using
Bio-Rad reagent (Hercules, CA), according to the suppliers
instructions and using BSA as standard.
Genotyping.
The hGSTM1/M1*0 polymorphism was determined by PCR using
albumin as positive control, essentially as reported previously
(17)
.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Confirmation of Subunit Identity.
On the basis of established HPLC elution profiles for GSTs (15
, 16) , subunits present in pancreas were identified as: P1, M1a,
M1b, M2, M3, A1, and A2 (Fig. 1)
. Identity was confirmed by mass spectrometry (Table 1)
for subunits P1, M1a, M2, M3, and A1. The masses of subunits A1 and M3
corresponded to the posttranslationally modified
NH2-terminal acetylated derivatives
(16)
. The P1 subunit subjected to mass spectrometry was
derived from a homozygous P1*B donor (data not shown), and
the predicted mass agrees with that of the Val104
form (4)
.
|
|
50% of the analyses (Fig. 1B)
25,520 Da,
corresponding to the mass of the N-acetylated product of the
hGSTA2 clone reported by Röhrdanz et al.
(19)
, which codes for a
GSTA2-Ser111, Ala209
variant.
Two subunits that were not readily identifiable on the basis of known
elution profiles of human GSTs were present as major components in
several samples (Fig. 1, C and D
, peaks x and
y). These were determined to be isoforms within the alpha
class by their cross-reaction with antibodies raised to the GST alpha
class but not to those of the mu or pi classes (results not shown).
Automated Edman degradation of the HPLC-purified subunits demonstrated
that they possessed blocked NH2 termini; GSTP1
retained a free NH2 terminus after an identical
purification procedure. Their masses (Table 1)
do not agree with the
deduced masses for any known human alpha class GST (16
, 20, 21, 22)
. However, the later eluting peak "y" apparently
represents the GSTA4 subunit because its mass corresponds to that of
putative NH2 terminally acetylated
hGSTA4 gene product (20
, 21)
. The mass of
subunit "x" does not correspond to that of any known alpha class
GST nor to likely posttranslationally modified products and appears to
be a novel form designated here as GSTA5.
Minor components eluting in the region of subunits M4 and M5
(16)
were inconsistently expressed in most samples
(labeled "M" in Fig. 1
). The peak from one sample that contained
the greatest amount of such material gave a mass corresponding to that
of the deduced M5 sequence quoted by Rowe et al. ( Ref.
16
; although not that of the observed mass for testicular
GSTM5). This region of the HPLC profile was variable between samples,
and because of the small amounts of protein present, we have not been
able to investigate the identity of these minor components further. Two
further minor components (* of Fig. 1
) appear to represent anomalous
modification of subunits P1 and M3 after storage of GST pools, because
during repeat analysis, they increased in height as the P1 and M3 peaks
decreased in height. Their masses (i.e., mass of adjacent
peak plus
300 Da, results not shown) are consistent with the
formation of mixed protein-SG disulfides, as suggested by Rowe et
al. (16)
.
Variation of Expression of GST Subunits.
Distributions of data for GST subunit expression are presented in Fig. 2
, and variation of expression is summarized in Table 2
. Total GST expression among the samples varied by 7.3-fold. GST
subunits identified in all samples were P1, M2, M3, and A1 (Figs. 1
and 2)
. All samples expressed a form of GSTA2. Of these A2 forms,
A2-Thr111 alone was expressed in 13 samples; a
mixture of A2-Thr111 plus either
A2-Ser111or
A2-Ser111/Ala209 was
expressed in 20 samples, and either A2-Ser111 or
A2-Ser111/Ala209 was
expressed in 10 samples. Although unambiguous assignment to subunits
A2-Ser111 or
A2-Ser111/Ala209 was not
made in all cases, tissues were identified that expressed only one of
the three A2 forms or any two of them. Because of this complexity, GST
subunit A2 forms have been grouped together for analysis.
|
|
The lower limit of quantitation of GSTP1 and mu class GSTs was 0.01 µg/mg cytosolic protein, and for GSTs of the alpha class, 0.02 µg/mg cytosolic protein. Repetition of analyses established that quantitation was reliable to within ± 8%; HPLC analyses were reproducible to within ± 3%.
Correlations between GST Subunit Expression.
For each sample, the total amount of GST subunits did not correlate
with age, smoking status, body mass index, or gender (results not
shown). Nor was there any significant correlation between amounts of
any one GST subunit and these variables (results not shown).
Comparisons between levels of the least variable major component, the
GSTP1 subunit, with total GSTs, GSTA2 or GSTM3, for each of the samples
established a correlation between expression of the subunit pairs
(Table 3
and Figs. 3
and 4
). Excluding M1-null individuals, there was also a significant
correlation between GSTs P1 and M1 (Table 2
; Fig. 3B
) and M3
and M1 (Fig. 3D)
. In addition, there was a trend for higher
expression of total GSTs and of subunits A1 or A2 to be associated with
higher expression of the minor GST components; subunits M1 (in
M1-positive samples) and M2 (r < 0.5;
P = 0.010.03). Those samples that expressed
GSTs A4 and A5 at high levels (Fig. 1, C and D
;
Fig. 2
) did not, otherwise, exhibit an anomalous pattern of GST
expression. Expression of these subunits was not correlated with that
of other alpha class GSTs nor with each other.
|
|
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
7-fold variation in GST subunits P1and M3 and 1530-fold variation
in subunits A2 and A1. Although tissue-specific expression of GSTs in
pancreas has been described on the basis of a few tissue samples
(16
, 23)
, the physiological and genetic basis for this is
still unknown. Additionally, the phenotype appears to be independent of
age (859 years), gender, and smoking status. However, it should be
noted that GST composition is highly variable within different cell
types of the pancreas (24)
. Superimposed on this pattern is the expression of GST subunits M1a, M1b, A4, and A5. Although the expression of GSTM1 depends on the genotype, within the group of GSTM1-positive individuals, low level of M1 expression is also part of the pancreas phenotype.
Complexity of the Alpha Class GSTs in Pancreas.
Particularly notable and complex is the high level of expression of
GSTs of the alpha class in pancreas, where four alpha class GSTs
(subunits A1, A2, A4, and A5) are expressed. Concerning GSTA2, three
variants are known, two on the basis of the amino acid substitution
Thr-111
Ser (18
, 25)
and the third on the basis of the
GSTA2 gene isolated by Röhrdanz et al.
(19)
, in which the base substitutions at 401 and 695 bp
code for the amino acid changes Thr-111
Ser, Glu-209
Ala. Our
assignment to these forms is based on the observed masses of the
HPLC-purified subunits, which agree with the predicted amino acid
substitutions, taking into account the known posttranslational
modification of human alpha class GSTs (removal of the
NH2-terminal methionine and acetylation of the
resultant alanine; Ref. 16
). The genomic GSTA2
sequence of Röhrdanz et al. (19)
apparently differs from that of Klöne et al.
(25)
in the approximate lengths of introns 1 and 6, and it
has been suggested, on this basis, that the two GSTA2 clones
represent distinct genes. The gene for the
A2-Ser111 variant has not been reported. It is
not clear, therefore, whether the three A2 proteins are the products of
separate gene loci or whether they represent allelic variation within
the A2 locus. Despite the reported differences in
intron length between the known A2 genes, they are identical
in the 5' upstream region for 310 bp (26)
and may,
therefore, be subject to coregulation. Thus they may behave as allelic
forms, even if they are distinct genes. Because of these ambiguities,
we have regarded the A2 proteins as the products of allelic variation,
which is consistent with their pattern of expression in pancreas.
Whatever their nature, GSTA2 protein is clearly subject to
polymorphism, and there are individuals who appear to be homozygous or
heterozygous within the three forms.
In addition to GSTs A1 and A2, DNA sequences are available for GSTA3 and GSTA4. As mentioned above, the late-eluting HPLC peak "y" appears to represent the NH2 terminally acetylated protein product of the GSTA4 gene. GSTA4 is known to be expressed in pancreas on the basis of the presence of its mRNA (20) but has not, previously, been observed as a native protein. The available clones for GSTA3 are incomplete cDNAs (21 , 22) , and an accurate, deduced mass is not available. However, the mass of subunit A5 does not correspond to the amino acid sequence deduced from the purported full-length GSTA3 cDNA (21) , nor to likely posttranslationally modified products. On this basis, GSTA5 appears to be a novel gene product. Whether subunits A4 and A5 are related to the basic GSTs of human skin (27) or lung (28) is unclear. However, their highly variable pattern of expression, independent of that of subunits A1 and A2, suggests that they are products of highly inducible gene expression.
All known human class alpha GSTs have peroxidase activity (2 , 20 , 21 , 28 , 29) . Additionally, GSTA4 has high activity toward the genotoxic hydroxyalkenal products of lipid peroxidation (21 , 29) . Because a high-energy diet, possibly resulting in high levels of lipid peroxidation products, is a risk factor in pancreatic cancer (30 , 31) , variation between individuals in type and levels of alpha class GSTs may be of considerable importance in pancreatic disease.
Regulation of GSTs.
The genes for the alpha mu and pi classes of GSTs are located on
separate chromosomes (2
, 32)
, and a molecular basis for
the apparent coregulation of expression of GSTs P1, A2, and M3 in the
pancreas is not clear. In the case of GSTP1, the gene is known to
contain a complex of regulatory elements between -95 to 55 bp
[summarized in Hayes and Pulford (2)
]. These include an
nuclear factor-
B-like (silencer) element and ARE/TRE (AP-1
recognition site) consensus motifs contained in the "C1-region"
(33)
. This last is absolutely required for GSTP1
transcription. Activation of the C1 region (e.g., by binding
of the Fos-Jun complex) is apparently cell type specific (34
, 35)
. GSTP1 expression is also enhanced by insulin
(36)
. Alpha class GST mRNA and protein levels are
selectively inducible in human hepatocytes in primary culture by
dithiolethiones, phenobarbital and 3-methylcholathrene
(37)
. In addition, a daily intake of Brussels sprouts also
leads to selective GST alpha class protein induction in humans
(38)
. Variation in diet may, therefore, be the cause of
the wide variation of expression of GST subunits A1, A4, and A5 in the
pancreas. Although potential AP1, AP2, GRE, and HNF1 regulatory
elements have been identified in the 5'-upstream regulatory region of
human GST alpha class genes (26
, 39
, 40)
, no elements
corresponding to ARE or XRE consensus sequences have been revealed, and
the mechanism by which inducers act is not known. Also, there are no
similarities between the 5'-upstream regions of the human GST alpha and
Pi genes (26)
, nor between those of GSTM1 and M3
(41)
. It has been suggested that SP1 elements in the
GSTM3 gene are responsible for low levels of expression of
M3 in most tissues (41)
. Whether such sites offer a
mechanism for coinduction is not clear.
GSTs and Cancer Susceptibility.
Much attention has been focused on GSTs of the mu and pi classes
because they have activity toward the carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbon metabolites that are a consequence of smoking and dietary
exposure (1
, 2)
, and there are also genetic polymorphisms
in these classes that are reflected in levels of enzyme expression or
specific activity (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8)
. The most marked of these is the
M1-null polymorphism, where GSTM1-null
individuals cannot express the GSTM1 protein. However, even in this
case, correlation between genotype and cancer susceptibility is highly
dependent on the organ under study (11)
. In the case of
pancreas, GSTM1-null genotype does not appear to be a risk
factor for pancreatitis or pancreatic cancer, although possession of
the GSTM1*B allele may confer risk for pancreatic disease
(42)
. Nevertheless, our studies illustrate several factors
concerning the complexity of the GSTM1-positive phenotype in the
pancreas. Although the M1-positive genotype is well defined,
the M1-positive phenotype is not, because protein levels vary by
12.5-fold and may consist of the M1a and/or Mlb subunits. Further
complexity is introduced by the M1*A allele being in linkage
with the M3*B allele and the suggestion that a regulatory
element in the latter could cause reduced expression of the M3 subunit
in M1*A individuals compared with M1*0 or
M1*B individuals (3)
. However, in the lung,
M1-positive individuals were shown to have higher levels of expression
of GSTM3 than M1-negative individuals (43)
. This is also
seen in the pancreas in the case of GSTM1a-positive samples, but only
when GSTM3 expression is normalized to GSTP1 levels. Thus, the effect
of GSTM1-deletion is compounded by the tendency toward lower
levels of expression of GSTM3.
In GSTP1, at least three alleles are known (4 , 5) in which mutations in exonic sequence lead to proteins that differ in their catalytic properties. However, these differences appear to be moderate. For example, the kcat of the P1a-1a and P1b-1b homodimers toward the carcinogenic benzo(a)pyrene metabolite, (+)-anti-benzo(a)pyrene-7,8-diol-9,10-oxide, determined using cell expression protein, are 1.3 and 4.4 s-1, respectively (5) . This 3.4-fold variation could be masked by variation in expression, such as the 6-fold variation of GSTP1 seen in this study. For example, two samples that were homozygous for the P1*A allele exhibited levels of expression of P1a-1a of 4.1 and 5.3 µg/mg cytosolic protein, and two that were heterozygous, P1*A/P1*B, express P1a and P1b subunits (presumably as a mix of homo- and heterodimers) at 1.2 and 1.7 µg/mg cytosolic protein. Assuming subunit activity to be independent of protein dimer (i.e., a 2.7-fold difference in activity between P1a-1a and P1a-1b), the catalytic activity of the cytosols would be the reverse of that predicted from genotype.
Concluding Remarks.
The data presented here show that although pancreas-specific expression
of GSTs is highly regulated, variability of phenotypic expression of
GSTs in the pancreas should be taken into account when assessing the
possible effects of genetic polymorphisms in the GSTs. The pancreas is
not unique in this respect. Similar ranges of variation of GST
expression is known to be a property of many human organs and of both
normal and tumor tissue, e.g., breast (44)
,
colon (45, 46, 47)
, endometrium (48)
, liver
(49
, 50) , lung (43
, 47)
, kidney (47
, 49)
, stomach (46
, 49)
, and hair follicles
(51)
. In addition, the wide variation in expression of
GSTs A1, A4, and A5 suggest that they are subject to inducibility
beyond the ranges of normal phenotypic expression. Our results also
show the complexity of alpha class GSTs in pancreas, a complexity that
also exists in other human tissues (27
, 28)
and the
significance of which remains to be determined. Despite the wide range
of variation of expression of GSTs, the effect of minor regulatory
elements on expression (e.g., that of GSTM3) are discernible
by "normalizing" protein levels to those of the least variable
component of the phenotype, GSTP1. This may be a useful approach to
examine other factors responsible for GST induction in vivo.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
1 Supported in part by Grant RO1-CA58697 from the
National Cancer Institute/NIH. ![]()
2 To whom requests for reprints should be
addressed, at Division of Molecular Epidemiology, HFT 100, National
Center for Toxicological Research, Jefferson, AR 72079-9502. Phone:
(870) 543-7596; Fax: (870) 543-7773; E-mail: bcoles{at}nctr.fda.gov ![]()
3 The abbreviations used are: GST, glutathione
S-transferase; HPLC, high-pressure liquid
chromatography. ![]()
Received 7/19/99. Accepted 12/ 2/99.
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-class isoenzymes against lipid peroxidation. Arch. Biochem. Biophys., 299: 232-241, 1992.[Medline]
-class glutathione S-transferase levels in human blood plasma. Carcinogenesis (Lond.), 15: 1073-1075, 1994.
and
, glutathione, and aldehyde dehydrogenase. Cancer Lett., 128: 105-112, 1998.[Medline]
class isoenzymes in human colorectal and gastric cancers. Carcinogenesis (Lond.), 20: 1453-1457, 1999.This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
F. Gemignani, S. Landi, N. Szeszenia-Dabrowska, D. Zaridze, J. Lissowska, P. Rudnai, E. Fabianova, D. Mates, L. Foretova, V. Janout, et al. Development of lung cancer before the age of 50: the role of xenobiotic metabolizing genes Carcinogenesis, June 1, 2007; 28(6): 1287 - 1293. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. K. Dasgupta, P. J. Adamson, F. E. Davies, S. Rollinson, P. L. Roddam, A. J. Ashcroft, A. M. Dring, J. A. L. Fenton, J. A. Child, J. M. Allan, et al. Polymorphic variation in GSTP1 modulates outcome following therapy for multiple myeloma Blood, October 1, 2003; 102(7): 2345 - 2350. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Ahsan and A. G. Rundle Measures of genotype versus gene products: promise and pitfalls in cancer prevention Carcinogenesis, September 1, 2003; 24(9): 1429 - 1434. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. J. Duell, E. A. Holly, P. M. Bracci, M. Liu, J. K. Wiencke, and K. T. Kelsey A Population-Based, Case-Control Study of Polymorphisms in Carcinogen-Metabolizing Genes, Smoking, and Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Risk J Natl Cancer Inst, February 20, 2002; 94(4): 297 - 306. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Loktionov, M. A. Watson, M. Gunter, W. S.L. Stebbings, C. T.M. Speakman, and S. A. Bingham Glutathione-S-transferase gene polymorphisms in colorectal cancer patients: interaction between GSTM1 and GSTM3 allele variants as a risk-modulating factor Carcinogenesis, July 1, 2001; 22(7): 1053 - 1060. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Cancer Research | Clinical Cancer Research |
| Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention | Molecular Cancer Therapeutics |
| Molecular Cancer Research | Cancer Prevention Research |
| Cancer Prevention Journals Portal | Cancer Reviews Online |
| Annual Meeting Education Book | Cell Growth & Differentiation |