Zhang Qi, Lin Ze-Nan, Chen Jie, Zheng Wen-Xu
Institute of Pathology and Neuropathology, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen 72076, Germany.
University Eye Hospital, Center for Ophthalmology, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen 72076, Germany.
Int J Ophthalmol. 2021 Jan 18;14(1):32-41. doi: 10.18240/ijo.2021.01.05. eCollection 2021.
To present the multi-omics landscape of cutaneous melanoma (CM) and uveal melanoma (UM) from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA).
The differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between CM and UM were found and integrated into a gene ontology enrichment analysis. Besides, the differentially expressed miRNAs were also identified. We also compared the methylation level of CM with UM and identified the differentially methylated regions to integrate with the DEGs to display the relationship between the gene expression and DNA methylation. The differentially expressed transcription factors (TFs) were identified.
Though CM had more mutational burden than UM, they shared several similarities such as the same rankings in diverse variant types. Except GNAQ and GNA11, the other top 18 mutated genes of the combined group were mostly detected in CM instead of UM. On the transcriptomic level, 4610 DEGs were found and integrated into a gene ontology enrichment analysis. We also identified 485 differentially expressed miRNAs. The methylation analysis showed that UM had a significantly higher methylation level than CM. The integration of differentially methylated regions and DEGs demonstrated that most DEGs were downregulated in UM and the hypo- and hypermethylation presented no obvious difference within these DEGs. Finally, 116 hypermethylated TFs and 114 hypomethylated TFs were identified as differentially expressed TFs in CM when compared with UM.
This multi-omics study on comparing CM with UM confirms that they differ in all analyzed levels. Of notice, the results also offer new insights with implications for elucidating certain unclear problems such as the distinct role of epithelial mesenchymal transition in two melanomas, the different metastatic routes of CM and UM and the liver tropism of metastatic UM.
展示来自癌症基因组图谱(TCGA)的皮肤黑色素瘤(CM)和葡萄膜黑色素瘤(UM)的多组学概况。
找出CM和UM之间的差异表达基因(DEG),并将其整合到基因本体富集分析中。此外,还鉴定了差异表达的miRNA。我们还比较了CM和UM的甲基化水平,鉴定出差异甲基化区域,并将其与DEG整合,以显示基因表达与DNA甲基化之间的关系。鉴定出差异表达的转录因子(TF)。
虽然CM的突变负担比UM更重,但它们有一些相似之处,比如在不同变异类型中的排名相同。除了GNAQ和GNA11,联合组中其他前18个突变基因大多在CM中检测到,而非UM。在转录组水平上,发现了4610个DEG,并将其整合到基因本体富集分析中。我们还鉴定出485个差异表达的miRNA。甲基化分析表明,UM的甲基化水平显著高于CM。差异甲基化区域与DEG的整合表明,大多数DEG在UM中下调,并且在这些DEG中低甲基化和高甲基化没有明显差异。最后,与UM相比,116个高甲基化TF和114个低甲基化TF被鉴定为CM中差异表达的TF。
这项比较CM和UM的多组学研究证实,它们在所有分析水平上都存在差异。值得注意的是,研究结果也为阐明某些尚不清楚的问题提供了新的见解,如上皮间质转化在两种黑色素瘤中的不同作用、CM和UM不同的转移途径以及转移性UM的肝嗜性。