Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Low CHD5 expression activates the DNA damage response and predicts poor outcome in patients undergoing adjuvant therapy for resected pancreatic cancer

Abstract

The DNA damage response (DDR) promotes genome integrity and serves as a cancer barrier in precancerous lesions but paradoxically may promote cancer survival. Genes that activate the DDR when dysregulated could function as useful biomarkers for outcome in cancer patients. Using a siRNA screen in human pancreatic cancer cells, we identified the CHD5 tumor suppressor as a gene, which, when silenced, activates the DDR. We evaluated the relationship of CHD5 expression with DDR activation in human pancreatic cancer cells and the association of CHD5 expression in 80 patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) by immunohistochemical analysis with clinical outcome. CHD5 depletion and low CHD5 expression in human pancreatic cancer cells lead to increased H2AX-Ser139 and CHK2-Thr68 phosphorylation and accumulation into nuclear foci. On Kaplan–Meier log-rank survival analysis, patients with low CHD5 expression had a median recurrence-free survival (RFS) of 5.3 vs 15.4 months for patients with high CHD5 expression (P=0.03). In 59 patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy, low CHD5 expression was associated with decreased RFS (4.5 vs 16.3 months; P=0.001) and overall survival (OS) (7.2 vs 21.6 months; P=0.003). On multivariate Cox regression analysis, low CHD5 expression remained associated with worse OS (HR: 3.187 (95% CI: 1.49–6.81); P=0.003) in patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy. Thus, low CHD5 expression activates the DDR and predicts for worse OS in patients with resected PAC receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Our findings support a model in which dysregulated expression of tumor suppressor genes that induce DDR activation can be utilized as biomarkers for poor outcome.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Xu J, Ward E . Cancer statistics, 2010. Cancer J Clin 2010; 60: 277–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Neoptolemos JP, Stocken DD, Bassi C, Ghaneh P, Cunningham D, Goldstein D et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil plus folinic acid vs gemcitabine following pancreatic cancer resection: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2010; 304: 1073–1081.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Oettle H, Post S, Neuhaus P, Gellert K, Langrehr J, Ridwelski K et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine vs observation in patients undergoing curative-intent resection of pancreatic cancer: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2007; 297: 267–277.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Regine WF, Winter KA, Abrams RA, Safran H, Hoffman JP, Konski A et al. Fluorouracil vs gemcitabine chemotherapy before and after fluorouracil-based chemoradiation following resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2008; 299: 1019–1026.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Iacobuzio-Donahue CA, Fu B, Yachida S, Luo M, Abe H, Henderson CM et al. DPC4 gene status of the primary carcinoma correlates with patterns of failure in patients with pancreatic cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 1806–1813.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Colbert LE, Fisher SB, Hardy CW, Hall WA, Saka B, Shelton JW et al. Pronecrotic mixed lineage kinase domain-like protein expression is a prognostic biomarker in patients with early-stage resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Cancer 2013; 119: 3148–3155.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Fisher SB, Patel SH, Bagci P, Kooby DA, El-Rayes BF, Staley CA 3rd et al. An analysis of human equilibrative nucleoside transporter-1, ribonucleoside reductase subunit M1, ribonucleoside reductase subunit M2, and excision repair cross-complementing gene-1 expression in patients with resected pancreas adenocarcinoma: Implications for adjuvant treatment. Cancer 2012; 14: 514–522.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Maithel SK, Coban I, Kneuertz PJ, Kooby DA, El-Rayes BF, Kauh JS et al. Differential expression of ERCC1 in pancreas adenocarcinoma: high tumor expression is associated with earlier recurrence and shortened survival after resection. AnnSurg Oncol 2011; 18: 2699–2705.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bartkova J, Horejsi Z, Koed K, Kramer A, Tort F, Zieger K et al. DNA damage response as a candidate anti-cancer barrier in early human tumorigenesis. Nature 2005; 434: 864–870.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Gorgoulis VG, Vassiliou LV, Karakaidos P, Zacharatos P, Kotsinas A, Liloglou T et al. Activation of the DNA damage checkpoint and genomic instability in human precancerous lesions. Nature 2005; 434: 907–913.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Forbes S, Clements J, Dawson E, Bamford S, Webb T, Dogan A et al. Cosmic 2005. Br J Cancer 2006; 94: 318–322.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Bagchi A, Papazoglu C, Wu Y, Capurso D, Brodt M, Francis D et al. CHD5 is a tumor suppressor at human 1p36. Cell 2007; 128: 459–475.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Robbins CM, Tembe WA, Baker A, Sinari S, Moses TY, Beckstrom-Sternberg S et al. Copy number and targeted mutational analysis reveals novel somatic events in metastatic prostate tumors. Genome Res 2011; 21: 47–55.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Law ME, Templeton KL, Kitange G, Smith J, Misra A, Feuerstein BG et al. Molecular cytogenetic analysis of chromosomes 1 and 19 in glioma cell lines. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 2005; 160: 1–14.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Wang X, Lau KK, So LK, Lam YW . CHD5 is down-regulated through promoter hypermethylation in gastric cancer. J Biomed Sci 2009; 16: 95.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Gorringe KL, Choong DY, Williams LH, Ramakrishna M, Sridhar A, Qiu W et al. Mutation and methylation analysis of the chromodomain-helicase-DNA binding 5 gene in ovarian cancer. Neoplasia 2008; 10: 1253–1258.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Mulero-Navarro S, Esteller M . Chromatin remodeling factor CHD5 is silenced by promoter CpG island hypermethylation in human cancer. Epigenetics 2008; 3: 210–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ng D, Yang XR, Tucker MA, Goldstein AM . Mutation screening of CHD5 in melanoma-prone families linked to 1p36 revealed no deleterious coding or splice site changes. BMC Res Note 2008; 1: 86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Okawa ER, Gotoh T, Manne J, Igarashi J, Fujita T, Silverman KA et al. Expression and sequence analysis of candidates for the 1p36.31 tumor suppressor gene deleted in neuroblastomas. Oncogene 2008; 27: 803–810.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Mokarram P, Kumar K, Brim H, Naghibalhossaini F, Saberi-firoozi M, Nouraie M et al. Distinct high-profile methylated genes in colorectal cancer. PloS ONE 2009; 4: e7012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Wu X, Zhu Z, Li W, Fu X, Su D, Fu L et al. Chromodomain helicase DNA binding protein 5 plays a tumor suppressor role in human breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2012; 14: R73.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Zhao R, Yan Q, Lv J, Huang H, Zheng W, Zhang B et al. CHD5, a tumor suppressor that is epigenetically silenced in lung cancer. Lung Cancer 2012; 76: 324–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Fujita T, Igarashi J, Okawa ER, Gotoh T, Manne J, Kolla V et al. CHD5, a tumor suppressor gene deleted from 1p36.31 in neuroblastomas. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008; 100: 940–949.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Wang L, He S, Tu Y, Ji P, Zong J, Zhang J et al. Downregulation of chromatin remodeling factor CHD5 is associated with a poor prognosis in human glioma. J Clin Neurosci 2013; 20: 958–963.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Paul S, Kuo A, Schalch T, Vogel H, Joshua-Tor L, McCombie WR et al. Chd5 requires PHD-mediated histone 3 binding for tumor suppression. Cell Reports 2013; 3: 992–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Matsuoka S, Ballif BA, Smogorzewska A, McDonald ER 3rd, Hurov KE, Luo J et al. ATM and ATR substrate analysis reveals extensive protein networks responsive to DNA damage. Science 2007; 316: 1160–1166.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Garcia I, Mayol G, Rodriguez E, Sunol M, Gershon TR, Rios J et al. Expression of the neuron-specific protein CHD5 is an independent marker of outcome in neuroblastoma. Mol Cancer 2010; 9: 277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wong RR, Chan LK, Tsang TP, Lee CW, Cheung TH, Yim SF et al. CHD5 Downregulation Associated with Poor Prognosis in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer. Gynec Obstet Invest 2011; 72: 203–207.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Koyama H, Zhuang T, Light JE, Kolla V, Higashi M, McGrady PW et al. Mechanisms of CHD5 Inactivation in neuroblastomas. Clin Cancer Res 2012; 18: 1588–1597.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Maupin KA, Sinha A, Eugster E, Miller J, Ross J, Paulino V et al. Glycogene expression alterations associated with pancreatic cancer epithelial-mesenchymal transition in complementary model systems. PloS One 2010; 5: e13002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Pei H, Li L, Fridley BL, Jenkins GD, Kalari KR, Lingle W et al. FKBP51 affects cancer cell response to chemotherapy by negatively regulating Akt. Cancer Cell 2009; 16: 259–266.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Wang J, Chen H, Fu S, Xu ZM, Sun KL, Fu WN . The involvement of CHD5 hypermethylation in laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Oral Oncol 2011; 47: 601–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Du X, Wu T, Lu J, Zang L, Song N, Yang T et al. Decreased expression of chromodomain helicase DNA-binding protein 5 is an unfavorable prognostic marker in patients with primary gallbladder carcinoma. Clin Transl Oncol 2012; 15: 198–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank members of the Yu lab for helpful discussion. This work is supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under Award Numbers ULl TR000454 to LEC and SBF and TLlTR000456 to LEC, PanCAN/AACR 16982 to DSY, DOD/PRCRP CA110535 to DSY and Georgia Cancer Coalition 11072 to DSY.

Disclaimer

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D S Yu.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Supplementary Information accompanies this paper on the Oncogene website

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hall, W., Petrova, A., Colbert, L. et al. Low CHD5 expression activates the DNA damage response and predicts poor outcome in patients undergoing adjuvant therapy for resected pancreatic cancer. Oncogene 33, 5450–5456 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1038/onc.2013.488

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/onc.2013.488

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links