Skip to main content
PLOS ONE logoLink to PLOS ONE
. 2023 Aug 3;18(8):e0289064. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0289064

Identification of genes critical for inducing ulcerative colitis and exploring their tumorigenic potential in human colorectal carcinoma

Ritwik Patra 1, Amit Kumar Dey 2, Suprabhat Mukherjee 1,*
Editor: Divijendra Natha Reddy Sirigiri3
PMCID: PMC10399749  PMID: 37535606

Abstract

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic relapsing inflammatory bowel disease leading to continuous mucosal inflammation in the rectum extending proximally towards the colon. Chronic and/or recurrent UC is one of the critical predisposing mediators of the oncogenesis of human colorectal carcinoma (CRC). Perturbations of the differential expression of the UC-critical genes exert an intense impact on the neoplastic transformation of the affected tissue(s). Herein, a comprehensive exploration of the UC-critical genes from the transcriptomic profiles of UC patients was conducted to study the differential expression, functional enrichment, genomic alterations, signal transduction pathways, and immune infiltration level encountered by these genes concerning the oncogenesis of CRC. The study reveals that WFDC2, TTLL12, THRA, and EPHB3 play crucial roles as UC-CRC critical genes and are positively correlated with the molecular transformation of UC to CRC. Taken together, these genes can be used as potential biomarkers and therapeutic targets for combating UC-induced human CRC.

Introduction

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is the chronic inflammatory manifestations of the human intestinal mucosa [1]. It is categorized into two main types such as ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD). UC is one of the major pathogenic hallmarks of disrupted colon health characterized by sustained mucosal inflammation starting from the mucosal lining of the rectum and approaching the colon proximally [2, 3]. While CD may occur in any part of the GI tract starting from the esophagus to the colon displaying extraintestinal inflammations [4]. Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is an added complication of inflamed gut and it usually resulted from gut dysbiosis [5, 6]. Considering the comparative impact of CD and IBS in disrupting the normal gut function, UC is considered as the principal contributor [2]. The pathophysiology of UC includes gut dysbiosis, formation of mucosal lesions, and dysregulated mucosal immunity with a surge of inflammatory mediators including TNF-α (tumor necrosis factor- α), IL-6 (interleukin-6), and PGE2 (prostaglandin E2) [2, 7, 8]. The proinflammatory cytokines signal the invasion of the immune cells at the inflamed site, accumulation of inflammatory mediators, exaggerated release of reactive oxygen species (ROS), diminution of the colon antioxidant capability, and the loss of intestine mucosal integrity [2, 7, 8]. Northern Europe has been reported for the highest prevalence of UC constituting 505-per-100,000 cases, while 248-per-100,000 for Canada and 214-per-100,000 cases for the USA [8]. However, the cases in the developing countries in the Middle East, Asia, and Latin America are also reported with fewer data than in Europe [8, 9]. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study of 2019 for IBD and cancer associated with colon and rectum are shown in S1 Fig in S1 File. Interestingly, occurrence of UC among the pediatric population is more extensive than the adult [10]. Patients having extensive UC display long-term persistence and relapsing episodes of inflammation have been correlated with a high risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) [11].

CRC is the third most common cancer of human and it is in the second position for cancer-associated deaths worldwide [12]. Meta-analyses on the prevalence of CRC demonstrated a cumulative probability of 3.7% of CRC among UC patients [13]. Patients having chronic UC for 10, 20, and 30 years were reported for developing CRC with a cumulative probability of 2%, 8%, and 18% respectively [13]. The pathogenesis of CRC is a multifactorial process [14]. It starts from no dysplasia to indefinite dysplasia, followed by low-grade dysplasia that further developed into high-grade dysplasia leading to carcinoma [14, 15]. The oncogenesis process involves various immunological, genetic, and epigenetic changes such as overexpression of oncogenes (e.g. EGFR, KRAS, Cyclin D1), and inactivation of tumor suppressor genes (e.g. RB1 and p53) and mutations (missense, frameshift deletion, truncating mutation) alongside genetic instability [15]. However, the actual mechanism of the neoplastic transformation of UC to CRC is unknown. Several studies have suggested alteration of the expression pattern, epigenetic regulation, mutations and immune-dysfunction in the gene clusters comprising COL11A1, GNG2, AGT, SAA1, ADCY5, LPAR1, NMU, IL8, CXCL12, GNAI1, CCR2, SFMBT2, LYN, PLCB1, NPSR1, WNT5A, CDC25B, CD44, RIPK2, and ASAP1 as influential determinants in the oncogenesis events of CRC [1618]. Intriguingly, TGF-β, RTK-RAS, Wnt, and TP53 signaling pathways were also reported to influence the transformation of the normal colon tissue to CRC [1620]. Therefore, exploring the new gene candidates playing a significant role in the occurrence of UC and neoplastic transformation are of major interest. The present study aims to explore the UC-critical genes from the mucosal transcriptomic profiles of pediatric and adult patients having limited to an extensive grade of UC. In addition, pathophysiological significance of these genes in the course of CRC were also deciphered using advanced bioinformatics and oncogenomics approaches.

Material and methods

Study population

In the present study, the gene expression microarray datasets were obtained from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database available in the National Centre for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/) [2124]. The GSE87473 dataset is used in this study containing the gene expression profile of the mucosal biopsies from the paediatric and/or adult patients diagnosed with moderately to severely active UC [25]. We selected 67 samples out of 127 total samples to create three groups viz., the control group comprising 21 samples from healthy/normal people, a pediatric group containing 19 samples of extensive UC patients below the age of 18 years, and an adult group (age ranging from 19 to 69 years) of 27 samples from extensive colitis patients. The extensive and limited colitis defines the severity of UC in the patients showing pancolitis in case of extensive UC and left-sided colitis for limited UC. The criteria for selecting samples were based on the patient’s age and the intensity of UC in patients. Adult patients having limited UC were not included in the study.

Data processing and analyses of the differentially expressed genes (DEGs)

The differentially expressed genes (DEGs) amongst the normal, pediatric, and adult samples having UC were explored using the GEO2R (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/geo2r/) [21]. GEO2R is a simple web interface based on the R-packages, useful in comparing the groups of samples to identify and visualize the DEGs [21]. The top 250 genes were obtained using log transformation of data and p-value threshold of >0.05 that are differentially expressed in the three groups viz, normal, pediatric UC, and adult UC. After that, a separate analysis was performed to compare the overexpressed and under-expressed genes among normal vs. UC, normal vs. pediatric UC, normal vs. adult UC, and adult UC vs. pediatric UC using volcano and mean-difference plots to filter the UC-critical genes and further study.

Functional enrichment and PPI

The functional annotation of the 250 DEGs including upregulated and downregulated ones were performed using the Database for Annotation, Visualization, and Integrated Discovery (DAVID) (https://david.ncifcrf.gov/home.jsp) online server [26]. In this study, the top 250 significant genes were used to determine the Gene Ontology (GO) which includes the biological process (BP), molecular function (MF), and the cellular component (CC). The Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) was used for the pathway enrichment analysis on DAVID. Further, the protein-protein interaction (PPI) network including both the physical and the functional networks was determined using the STRING (string-db.org) [27].

Screening of genes critical in the induction of UC

Based on the experiments/assessments described in the earlier section, a total of 24 UC-critical genes were selected based on their influential occurrence in the four major target groups such as normal vs. UC, normal vs. paediatric UC, normal vs. adult UC, and adult UC vs. paediatric UC for further studies. A total of six genes are selected from each group, of which three are selected from overexpressed genes and three from under-expressed genes. We have termed the genes that play crucial role in the induction and pathogenesis of ulcerative colitis as “colitis-critical genes.”

Oncogenomics and mutational study of UC-critical genes for human colorectal carcinoma

The oncogenomics study of the aforesaid UC-critical genes was performed using cBioPortal server (https://www.cbioportal.org/) [28]. It is an open-access portal for various oncogenomics and mutational studies. The TCGA PanCancer atlas study of colon adenocarcinoma, having 594 samples was used to analyse and visualize the oncoprint of the selected genes, determination of cancer type, plots for genomic alterations, mutation, survival, and also for exploring the alterations in molecular pathways. Furthermore, the mRNA expression data (log RNAseq data by RSEM) and protein level data (MS data by CPTAC) of the selected genes are collected for both altered and unaltered samples. They were subjected to the generation of a clustered heatmap using the ClusterViz server.

Gene expression, promoter methylation, proteomics study, and survival assay

Oncomine (https://www.oncomine.org/resource/main.html), a popular cancer microarray database, was selected for studying the transcriptional expression of the UC-critical genes using the TCGA CRC dataset and also compared with the normal tissue and different cancer subtypes [29]. Taking a clue from the differential expression of the critical genes for UC at mRNA level, the functional expression of these genes was explored by employing UALCAN server (http://ualcan.path.uab.edu/index.html) [30]. We analyzed the expression profile and promoter methylation of the UC-critical genes for colon adenocarcinoma involving various clinicopathological parameters to identify biomarkers and validate the gene of interest by studying the cancer OMICS data (TCGA, MET500, and CPTAC) The protein expression profile from the CPTAC dataset of colon cancer was also explored.

In order to predict the expression of the genes in cancer and normal tissue, we examined the antibody-based protein profiling using immunohistochemistry of thin tissue sections obtained from a normal subject and colorectal cancer patients using the Human Protein Atlas (https://www.proteinatlas.org) available online [31].

In addition, the survival assay of the genes of interest was determined by constructing a Kaplan Meier (KM) plot to assess the overall survival, disease-free survival, and disease-specific survival using the UCSC-Xena server (https://xena.ucsc.edu/).

Immune cell infiltration analysis

TIMER 2.0 (http://timer.cistrome.org/) is an open-access resource for studying immune behaviour and immune infiltration analyses of different cancers [32]. Expression profiles of immune infiltration-related parameters were studied by TIMER, CIBERSORT, quanTIseq, xCell, MCP-counter, and EPIC algorithms. The TCGA COAD mRNA expression data of UC-critical genes were obtained from the cBioPortal and subsequently utilized for the analysis of infiltration level and estimation.

Network enrichment analysis of UC-critical genes

The network enrichment of the expression profiles, KEGG prediction and GO functions of the UC-critical genes was explored by employing the NetworkAnalyst server (https://www.networkanalyst.ca/) [33]. Furthermore, PPI network (using STRING database), tissue-specific PPI (using DifferentialNet database), gene-miRNA interaction (in miRTarBase V8.0), protein-drug interaction (collected from DrugBank), and protein-chemicals interactions (from Comparative Toxicogenomics Database (CTD) were also studied.

Results

Screening and characterization of DEGs that play critical roles in inducing UC

The profile for the study of UC in the adult and paediatric patient population and the healthy samples obtained from the dataset GSE87473 were found to be statistically significant for cross-comparing. The age of the paediatric patients ranges from 6–17 years with a median value of 15 years, and the adult colitis patients were belonging to the age group of 19–69 years with a median age of 32 (S1 Table in S1 File).

The gene expression profile of each mucosal biopsy sample from the healthy normal, pediatric colitis patients, and adult colitis patients were found to be mean-centered and were cross comparable for the study (Fig 1A). The expression density curve shows the normalized distribution of samples over the three groups (Fig 1B), followed by a strong recommendation of the mean-variance trend for differential gene expression analysis (Fig 1C). The mean-variance trend represents the relationship between the gene expression and the mean-variance after fitting a linear model, where each point indicates the genes, and the red line is a mean-variance trend. Next, we explored the Venn diagram to determine the significant overlapping genes amongst the different sample groups included in this study (Fig 1D). While comparing the gene expression profiles for normal vs. pediatric UC, 1286 genes are common in this group and 488 genes in normal vs. adult UC. In the case of pediatric vs. adult analysis, the significant involvement of 1627 common genes were found for both the patient groups. Interestingly, 12836 genes were found to be overlapped among all the three study groups viz, normal vs. pediatric UC, adult UC vs normal, and pediatric UC vs adult UC.

Fig 1. Identification of the differentially expressed genes in the transcriptomic profile of ulcerative colitis (UC) tissue from patients of different age groups.

Fig 1

A. Boxplots representing the samples of dataset GSE87473, where green, blue, and red colours respectively depict the three groups of samples viz, normal, pediatric UC, and adult UC. B. Comparative expression density plots of the samples after log transformation of the data. C. Mean-variance trend plot projecting the variations in DEGs among the different samples. D. Venn diagram displaying the significant genes involved in inducing UC among pediatric vs adult, normal vs pediatric, and adult vs normal groups. E. Volcano plot and F. Mean-difference plots reflect the upregulated and downregulated genes influencing the induction of UC in the colon tissue of the groups of interest.

From these 12836 genes, we have screened out the top 250 genes based on the p-value of the relative abundance of the differentially expressed mRNAs’ most significant/influential genes amongst these three groups (S2 Table in S1 File). A clustered heatmap showing the expression of the top 250 genes among the normal, pediatric UC, and adult UC samples are shown in S2 Fig in S1 File. Next, to determine the alteration in expression levels of the DEGs, we used GEOquery and limma function of R packages to generate the volcano plots and mean-difference plots for normal vs UC, normal vs. pediatric UC, normal vs. adult UC, and pediatric UC vs. adult UC samples. The volcano plot depicts the upregulated (red) and downregulated (blue) genes based on the statistical significance (-log10 p-value) versus magnitude of change (log2 fold change) at an adjusted p-value cut-off of 0.05 (Fig 1E). Similarly, the mean-difference plot reveals the upregulated (red) and downregulated (blue) genes for the three groups based on the expression versus fold change (Fig 1F). Collectively, the aforesaid results indicated the significant roles of these genes in the occurrence of UC in humans.

Furthermore, the GO study for BP (Biological Pathways) shows the involvement of 234 genes out of the total 250 DEGs (95.1%), attributing higher DNA templated transcription, mRNA processing, peptidyl-serine phosphorylation, and RNA splicing as depicted in S3 Table in S1 File. The GO: MF analyses the broad-level molecular functions performed by the gene products of these DEGs. We have found the involvement of 231 genes (93.9%) in the GO: MF function, of which the most critical and enriched functions are protein binding, poly(A) RNA binding, protein serine/threonine kinase activity, and transcriptional regulatory region DNA binding. Similarly, the GO: CC reveals the cellular localization of the gene expression of these DEGs. In this, we found 129 genes (52.4%) expressed on the nucleus, and 47 genes (19.1%) expressed over the membrane. The KEGG pathway enrichment analyses the molecular interaction of these DEGs with the biologically important pathways of humans. We have found the involvement of 115 genes (46.7%), of which the connection of these genes is common in platelet activation, pathways in cancer, proteoglycans in cancer, and lysine degradation.

The PPI through STRING at a high confidence score of 0.7 (S3 Fig in S1 File) demonstrates 241 nodes and 153 edges with an average node degree of 1.27 and PPI enrichment p-value of 1.58e-06. The expected number of edges seems to be 112, with an average local clustering coefficient of 0.28.

The UC-critical DEGs were identified from the four major target groups that are normal vs UC patients containing samples from both paediatric and adult, normal vs. paediatric UC, normal vs. adult UC, and adult UC vs. paediatric UC groups each containing six significant DEGs as given in Table 1. The selection of the 24 UC-critical genes is based on selecting the three upregulated and downregulated genes from each group respectively using the volcano and mean-difference plots.

Table 1. Screening of top 24 genes from the expression profiles of 250 DEGs that play critical roles in the induction of UC.

Sample Type Gene Symbol Gene Name Expression status Fold Change (Log 2) p-value (-Log 10)
Normal vs Ulcerative colitis HNRNPK Heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein K Downregulated -0.146 3.165
TDG Thymine DNA glycosylase -0.211 3.175
PMPCB Peptidase, mitochondrial processing beta subunit -0.229 4.373
MAPK1 Mitogen-activated protein kinase 1 Upregulated 0.204 4.315
ZNF655 Zinc finger protein 655 0.495 3.546
CCL5 C-C motif chemokine ligand 5 0.296 6.322
Normal vs Paediatric UC HMGCS2 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-CoA synthase 2 Downregulated -0.868 13.426
SLC51A Solute carrier family 51 alpha subunit -0.905 19.075
CHP2 Calcineurin like EF-hand protein 2 -0.716 15.116
ERGIC1 Endoplasmic reticulum-golgi intermediate compartment 1 Upregulated 0.346 19.739
THRA Thyroid hormone receptor, alpha 0.136 8.724
EPHB3 EPH receptor B3 0.152 5.177
Normal vs Adult UC PTPN21 Protein tyrosine phosphatase, non-receptor type 21 Downregulated -0.199 9.993
DPP10 Dipeptidyl peptidase like 10 -0.639 18.581
PCK1 Phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase 1 -0.715 7.72
MMP3 Matrix metallopeptidase 3 Upregulated 0.992 15.979
DUOX2 Dual oxidase 2 0.918 18.440
HSPA6 Heat shock protein family A (Hsp70) member 6 0.196 5.389
Adult UC vs Paediatric UC PATL1 PAT1 homolog 1, processing body mRNA decay factor Downregulated -1.221 64.486
KMT2C Lysine methyltransferase 2C -1.103 63.024
MUC4 Mucin 4, cell surface associated -0.874 60.869
SCARB1 Scavenger receptor class B member 1 Upregulated 0.111 5.142
TTLL12 Tubulin tyrosine ligase like 12 0.281 22.481
WFDC2 WAP four-disulfide core domain 2 0.134 1.783

Genes playing critical role in developing UC also inducing the oncogenesis of CRC in human

UC is a degenerative inflammatory change in human gut mucosa and the positive correlation between UC and the occurrence of CRC has been enumerated in several literatures [11, 14, 34, 35]. Upon successful identification of the 24 UC-critical genes, we studied the oncogenic relevance of these genes in the context of neoplastic transformation of the affected tissue to CRC.

Structural and/or functional alteration in the UC/cancer critical genes is known to be the major cause behind the transcriptional abnormalities as well as dysregulation of vital signaling pathways that signal the induce/promote tumorigenesis leading to the transformation of UC to CRC. Herein, the oncogenomics of UC-critical genes revealed genetic alteration in 429 samples out of a total study sample of 594 (72%). The expression of genes was analysed both at mRNA and protein levels to generate the clustered heatmaps within an expression abundance scale between +3 to -3 with a mean-centered of 0 (Fig 2A and 2B).

Fig 2. Determination of the significance of the UC-critical genes in the neoplastic transformation of UC to CRC in humans.

Fig 2

Heatmaps illustrate the expression of UC-critical genes at A. Transcriptional (mRNA) level, B. Translational (protein) level. C. Types of alterations associated with the different colorectal cancer subtypes resulted from the altered expression of the 24 UC-critical genes. D. Oncoprint represents the different molecular alterations in each UC-critical gene concerning the development of CRC. Eventually, 8 genes out of 24 were found to have a higher impact on UC to CRC transition. E. Mutational counts in mRNA expression of i. DPP10, ii. PCK1, iii. MUC4, iv. HSPA6, v. WFDC2, vi. TTLL12, vii. THRA, and viii. EPHB3.

The UC-critical genes from our study infer an alteration frequency of 85.25% in the mucinous adenocarcinoma of the colon and rectum following 69.84% in colon adenocarcinoma and 69.68% for rectal adenocarcinoma (Fig 2C). These CRC subtypes mainly include multiple alterations, mutations, deep deletions, amplifications, structural variants, low and/or high mRNA, and protein expressions (S4 Table in S1 File). The oncoprint (Fig 2D) is the concise graphical summary of alterations associated with each UC-critical gene. We found the highest frequency of alterations among Mucin 4 (MUC4), Phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase 1 (PCK1), Dipeptidyl peptidase like 10 (DPP10), Tubulin tyrosine ligase like 12 (TTLL12), Thyroid hormone receptor, alpha (THRA), WAP four-disulfide core domain 2 (WFDC2), Erythropoietin-Producing Hepatoma (EPH) receptor B3 (EPHB3), and Heat shock protein family A (Hsp70) member 6 (HSPA6). The plot of mRNA expression of these genes for the mutation count shows a greater value in the colon and rectal adenocarcinoma. Herein, PCK1 and WFDC2 have more frequent amplifications, while MUC4, TTLL12, THRA, EPHB3, DPP10, and HSAP6 exhibit greater shallow deletions and missense mutations (Fig 2E). These genes could be interpreted as influential mediators of the oncogenesis of CRC.

Mutations in the genes critical for UC/UC-CRC and prediction of the relative influence of these mutations on the survivability of the affected subjects

The Wnt signaling pathway is a vital mediator of epithelial tissue repair and homeostasis, which plays an intrinsic role in UC and its alteration resulted in hyperactivation of the signaling pathway leading to carcinoma [36]. Previous studies reported that the Wnt signaling pathway is altered in over 92% of CRC cases, with the highest mutation in APC [37]. In support of the previous studies, our result indicates the alteration of APC (68%) induced by UC-critical genes (S4A Fig in S1 File). Similarly, for the RTK-RAS pathway, our data reveal an alteration of KRAS (41.1%), NRAS (12.1%), and BRAF by 13.3% (S4B Fig in S1 File). Previous studies have shown that KRAS and NRAS are mutated in 40% of cases of CRC, resulting in conformational changes inhibiting the GTPase activity of RAS-GAP [38]. The mutation in BRAF increases the kinase activity causing over-activation of RAS and amplification of the MAPK signaling pathway leading to the generation of CRC [38]. Similarly, in colon tissue, the TGF-β signaling cascade alleviates epithelial cell proliferation and induces apoptosis by binding ligands to the TGFBR2 receptors, followed by phosphorylation and downstream activation of SMAD proteins [39]. It is reported that mutations in SMAD protein, especially SMAD4, have a 30–40% chance of developing CRC [39]. Herein, the UC-critical genes altered the SMAD proteins (SMAD4 by 18.2%, SMAD2, and SMAD3 by 9.1% and 10.3%, respectively) and TGFBR2 (8.4%) and might elevate the cellular proliferation and transformation to CRC (S4C Fig in S1 File). Lastly, our study on alteration of the p53 pathway signifies alteration frequency of 55.7%, which infers loss of function of signaling cascade resulting in disrupting the cell cycle arrest, apoptosis, metastasis and promoting the progression of CRC (S4D Fig in S1 File).

We have examined the survival assay and the KM plots describing the effect of UC-critical genes on the survivability of the altered and unaltered groups. The overall survival of the altered group is lower than that of the unaltered group over time, with the least survival of 40% (S5A Fig in S1 File). The disease-specific survival is also lower for the altered group, with a minimum survival rate of 70% (S5B Fig in S1 File). However, in the case of disease-free survival, the unaltered group shows a significantly lower survival than the altered group (S5C Fig in S1 File). It clearly indicates that the alteration in UC-critical genes lowers the survival in CRC and is supported by the progression-free survival plot (S5D Fig in S1 File).

Expression of WFDC2, TTLL12, THRA, and EPHB3 genes and their epigenetic regulation preferentially promote the transformation of UC to CRC

We found highly significant transcriptional expression of WFDC2, TTLL12, THRA, and EPHB3 genes in CRC patients (237 samples). Previously, we noted that these genes exert significant impact over the genomic alterations and mutational count in CRC initiated from UC. Thus, WFDC2, TTLL12, THRA, and EPHB3 were termed as potential UC-CRC critical genes and were selected for further analysis. Low level of WFDC2, TTLL12, and THRA mRNAs and significantly high level of EPHB3 mRNA were detected in colon adenocarcinoma than normal tissue (Fig 3A). The expression profile of these UC-CRC critical genes for different subtypes of CRC showed overexpression of WFDC2 and EPHB3 across rectal mucinous carcinoma (Fig 3Bi and 3Biv) but decreased significantly for the mRNA expression of TTLL12 and THRA (Fig 3Bii and 3Biii).

Fig 3. Transcriptional and translational expression profiles of UC-CRC critical genes.

Fig 3

A. Box-plot depicts the mRNA level expression of WFDC2, TTLL12, THRA, and EPHB3 in normal and colon adenocarcinoma tissues. B. mRNA expression for different CRC subtypes for i. WFDC2, ii. TTLL12, iii. THRA and iv. EPHB3. C. Functional transcriptional expression of i. WFDC2, ii. TTLL12, iii. THRA, and iv. EPHB3 in different CRC stages. D. Level of promoter methylation over different cancer stages of i. WFDC2, ii. TTLL12, iii. THRA, and iv. EPHB3. E. Translational expression of i. WFDC2, ii. TTLL12, and iii. EPHB3 in normal and cancerous colon tissue.

Next, we studied the functional expression of the four UC-CRC critical genes concerning various clinicopathological parameters. The box-plot of the transcriptional expression profile of these genes showed a broad range of expression patterns in the different cancer stages than the normal samples (Fig 3C). However, the expression of WFDC2 was found to be downregulated in the cancer stages than that of normal tissues (Fig 3Ci). On the other hand, the expression of TTLL12, THRA, and EPHB3 was found to be upregulated in the cancerous tissue than normal. But the expression profiles revealed a gradual decrease in the level of mRNA and/or protein with the progression of cancer towards the advanced stages (Fig 3Cii–3Civ). The epigenetic regulation of the genes facilitated by promoter methylation, histone modification, and alteration in the miRNA regulation results in gene silencing and plays a vital role in the pathogenesis of CRC [40]. Herein, the box-plot of promoter methylation depicts the level of DNA methylation ranging from 0 (unmethylated) to 1 (fully methylated), where the cut-off range for hypermethylation and hypomethylation is 0.7–0.5 and 0.3–0.25 respectively (Fig 3D). With progressing cancer stages, WFDC2, TTLL12, and EPHB3 exhibit hypomethylation with the lowering of the level of promoter methylation. However, hypermethylation and elevation of THRA mRNA were recorded for advanced stages of CRC (Fig 3D).

The translational expression profiles of CRC-critical genes are represented by the box-plots with a z-value signifying the standard deviation from the median in the CRC samples (Fig 3E). The protein expression profile of WFDC2 suggested a significant reduction of the expression of this gene at the protein level in the primary tumor than that of the healthy normal tissue (Fig 3Ei). In contrast, an increased expression of TTLL12 and EPHB3 at the translational level was noted in the transformed tissue (Fig 3Eii and 3Eiii) and the same was also supported by the translational expression of WFDC2, TTLL12, THRA, and EPHB3 genes through immunohistochemistry (IHC) data (Fig 4A).

Fig 4. Determining the impact of UC-CRC critical genes on tissue level expression and survivability.

Fig 4

A. Immunohistochemistry of normal and colorectal cancer tissue depicting the tissue level expression of i. WFDC2, ii. TTLL12, iii. THRA and iv. EPHB3. KM plots depict the overall survival, disease-specific survival, and disease-free survival of B. WFDC2, C. TTLL12, D. THRA, E. EPHB3 mRNA. Red and blue colours respectively indicate the higher and lower expression.

KM plots reveal that higher expression of WFDC2 leads to a lower survival probability with a minimum survival rate of >50% for disease-specific and disease-free survival (Fig 4B). TTLL12 signifies poor survival at the lower expression in overall, disease-specific, and disease-free survival (Fig 4C). At a level of 50% survivability, higher expression of THRA indicates lower survival for both overall and disease-specific survival (Fig 4D). However, EPHB3 shows a poor prognosis at the lower expression for overall as well as disease-specific survival (Fig 4E). Collectively, lower expression of UC-CRC critical genes was associated with poor prognosis of CRC.

WFDC2, TTLL12, THRA, and EPHB3 genes promote infiltration of innate and adaptive immune cells around the transformed colon tissue

The relative level of infiltration and proportion of different infiltrating immune cells in the various individual samples are presented in Fig 5. The infiltration level of neutrophils was found highest in the samples following the abundance order neutrophil> NK-cells> macrophages/monocytes> CD8+ T cells (Fig 5A). Next, we compared the expression of the UC-CRC critical gene expression and immune cell assembly. The expression of WFDC2 was found to be positively correlated with the infiltration of CD4+ T cells and B cells while negatively correlated with the infiltration of neutrophils (Fig 5B). Infiltration of CD4+ T cells, macrophages, neutrophils, and NK cells all were positively correlated with the expression of TTLL12 and THRA (Fig 5C and 5D). Interestingly, EPHB3 showed a positive correlation with the infiltration of CD4+ T cells and macrophages, while a negative correlation with neutrophils was also noted (Fig 5E).

Fig 5. Prediction of the immune estimation and immune infiltration in human CRC.

Fig 5

A. Level of infiltration and relative abundance of different immune cells in the CRC tissue samples. Correlation between the translational expression of B. WFDC2, C. TTLL12, D. THRA, and E. EPHB3 and the level of immune infiltration in colon adenocarcinoma.

Interactome and signaling crosstalk of WFDC2, TTLL12, THRA, and EPHB3 facilitate proposition of new therapeutic targets for treating UC/UC-CRC

The KEGG pathways enrichment network demonstrates the involvement of pathways related to the Toll-like receptor (TLR) signaling pathway, TNF signaling pathway, chemokine signaling, and prion diseases (Fig 6Ai). The Reactome networks show the influence of phospho-PAL2 pathways and ERK2 activation with the UC-critical genes (Fig 6Aii). On the other hand, GO: BP shows significance over positive regulation of translation, cell-cell adhesion and migration, cell recognition, and protein transport (Fig 6Aiii). The cellular localization of the UC-critical gene expression was found primarily in the organelle and membrane-enclosed lumen (Fig 6Aiv).

Fig 6. Network enrichment analyses of UC and UC-CRC-critical genes.

Fig 6

A. Global enrichment network for UC-critical genes. i. KEGG pathways depicting the possible signaling cascades, ii. Reactome pathways represent the interaction and signaling-crosstalk amongst the signaling molecules. Analysis of Gene Ontology in iii. biological processes and iv. cellular component for predicting the types of biological events mediated by the genes of interest. B. Protein-protein interactions (PPI) network of UC-critical gene products depicting i. Generic PPI networks and ii. sigmoid colon tissue-specific PPI networks demonstrating the regulating microenvironment. Exploring the molecular regulators of UC-CRC critical genes. C. Analysis of gene-miRNA interaction network. D. Protein-drug and protein-chemical compounds interaction union network.

The PPI network for the UC-critical genes obtained through the STRING interactome shows 10 seed genes having 292 nodes and 304 edges (Fig 6Bi). However, the tissue-specific PPI network for colon sigmoid tissue collected from the DifferntialNet database showed the involvement of 14 significant genes connected by 310 nodes and 333 edges (Fig 6Bii).

We further extended our study to assess the gene-miRNA interaction and network association of protein-drug and/or chemical compounds for UC-CRC critical genes. The gene-miRNA interaction studied through miRTarBase database indicates 3 associated genes having 180 nodes and 182 edges of which hsa-mir-4731-5p, hsa-mir-5698, hsa-mir-6764-3p, hsa-mir-6824-3p, and hsa-mir-140-3p shows the highest betweenness. The term betweenness measures the number of shortest paths going through the nodes. Nodes that have the higher value of betweenness acts as important bottleneck in any network. They were designated as possible regulatory miRNA regulating the UC-CRC critical genes (Fig 6C). Moreover, the network union between the protein-drug interactions and protein-chemical compounds interactions displayed 126 nodes and 148 edges of which levothyroxine, liotrix, dextrothyroxine, {3,5-Dichloro-4-[4-Hydroxy-3-(Propan-2-Yl) phenoxy] phenyl} acetic Acid, NRP409, and KB2115 are actively interacting drugs with EPHB3. The chemical compounds belong to the various class of phenols, organophosphate and chlorides, carboxylic groups, and heavy metals (Fig 6D).

Discussion

Gut dysbiosis following disruption of immune-homeostasis resulting in the damages in the mucosal lining i.e. UC, induction of epithelial proliferation and dysplasia are the major contributors in inducing CRC [34, 41]. In this context, the present in-silico study aims to dissect out the mechanistic insights of the transformation of UC to CRC, with a particular emphasis on the identity of the crucial genes involved in this process. As shown in the available literatures, multiple genes have been found to play a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of UC and subsequent neoplastic transformation into CRC [18, 20]. For example, COL11A1, GNG2, AGT, SAA1, ADCY5, LPAR1, NMU, IL8, CXCL12, GNAI1, and CCR2 were hub genes and overexpressed in CRC while methylation of KCNJ12, VAV3-AS1, and EVC are associated with stratification of colon cancer stages [1618]. However, most of the studies are on the pathogenesis of either UC or CRC and therefore our understanding of the molecular linkage between UC-to-CRC is still under the shed. In this regard, we adopted modern omics approaches for identifying the new gene clusters associated with UC and UC to CRC progression. Our study started with an initial aim to explore the differential expression of UC-critical genes from microarray data available in GEO database on transcriptomic profiles of the mucosal biopsy of colon tissue from the different age groups of patients including paediatric and adult. We have detected differential expression of 250 in the three groups of study population viz, normal, paediatric UC, and adult UC (Fig 1, S2 Table in S1 File). Next, we analysed the GO functions for deciphering the molecular influence of these gene products which revealed that transcriptional regulations, mRNA splicing, and protein serine/threonine kinase activity mediated by these DEGs alongside perturbation in Wnt signaling, PI3K-Akt signaling pathway, and p53 signaling pathways most likely to contribute in the pathogenesis of UC. From the expression profiles of all the 250 genes, a total of 24 genes were eventually selected based on their relative expression profiles (Table 1, Fig 1). In fact, 12 upregulated genes and the same number of downregulated genes having an influential connection over the occurrence of UC in the selected study population (Table 1). These 24 genes were primarily considered as critical genes for the occurrence of UC and were investigated for their impact on transformation of UC to CRC.

We observed that alteration in the pattern of transcriptional and translational expression of the 24 genes do exhibit a strong influence in promoting the transformation of UC to different subtypes of CRC (Fig 2). Intriguingly, these genes were found manipulating the vital signaling pathways associated with the development of CRC. Herein, TLR- and TNF-α signaling pathways were inferred as the major signaling pathways triggered by the genes and induction of inflammatory responses through TLR/TNFR activation could be linked with the tumorigenesis process. The involvement of TLR- and TNF-α signaling pathways were shown to be involved in inducing initial level of inflammation in the oncogenesis events of CRC especially in nodal metastasis [4244] and these inferences corroborate with our observations. To better understand the direct alliance between the immune cells and transformation of UC to CRC, we have studied the possible level of the infiltrating immune cells in and around the transformed tissue. Neutrophils and NK cells were found as the major infiltrating leukocytes toward/around the tumor. Neutrophils are known to promote ROS generation and trigger leukocytes to generate anti-inflammatory responses, altering cell death and apoptosis, thus affecting the inflammatory and tissue-remodelling responses [45]. In contrast, the NK cells possess a cytolytic function and downregulate the production of IFN-γ and PD-1 to inhibit gut carcinogenesis [46]. However, clinical correlation studies need further extensive efforts to establish the beneficial and detrimental effects of the immune cell assembly around the cancerous tissue in the gut. Considering our observations, one can conclude that UC-critical genes viz. PCK1, WFDC2, MUC4, TTLL12, THRA, EPHB3, DPP10, and HSAP6 possesses a definite influence over the oncogenesis of colorectal carcinoma (Fig 2).

Hitherto, genomic alterations, dysregulation of signaling pathways, and recruitment of immune mediators by the UC-critical genes have been reported to be associated with the tumorigenesis of colon tissue [17, 20, 47]. However, a comprehensive study on the involvement of genes mediating oncogenesis, their mutation status, epigenetic regulation, and the linkages with the immune networks is not available to date. In this direction, examining the transcriptional expression and epigenetic regulations of the most influential UC-critical genes in CRC will further enlighten the understanding of the molecular trajectory of UC-to-CRC. Herein, we have found WFDC2, TTLL12, THRA, and EPHB3 as significant mediators for the transition of UC into CRC and are denoted as the vital UC-CRC-critical genes (Figs 35). WFDC2 encoded protein product is an essential constituent of the gut mucosa and it acts as a component of the extracellular matrix to prevent the invasion of harmful microorganisms [48]. Notably, this gene is associated with carcinogenesis in the lungs and ovary [49]. On the other side, TTLL12 has been reported to be a negative regulator of innate immune response in the gut that maintains immune homeostasis in the healthy gut [50]. Perturbation in the function of TTLL12 has been reported to promote tumorigenesis and metastasis in several cancers (pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, prostate, and ovarian cancer) other than CRC [51]. Similarly, no studies have documented this gene as a mediator of UC. THRA encodes the receptor for triiodothyronine (T3) in the gut [52], and malfunctioning of this gene is known to cause hyperplasia, hypertrophy, and loss of function, the cardinal signs of tumorigenesis [53]. While EPHB3 encodes the Eph receptor comprising the transmembrane tyrosine kinase receptors [54] and regulates the migration of cellular components of the human gut [55]. A study on EPHB3 knockout mice revealed a clear indication of its association with the induction of carcinogenesis [56]. This is the maiden report hypothesizing the role of WFDC2, TTLL12, THRA, and EPHB3 in the induction of UC and the subsequent development to CRC. Our data clearly indicate that higher transcriptional expression of WDFC2 and EPHB3 promote colorectal mucinous adenocarcinoma within UC tissue, whereas upregulation of THRA and TTLL12 mRNA signal rectal adenocarcinoma (Fig 3). It is further validated by the higher functional expression and promoter methylation over the different cancer stages as compared to the normal samples. Promoter hypermethylation causes transcriptional silencing of several tumor suppressor genes, while upon hypomethylation it activates the transcription of protooncogenes and other key protein coding genes that infers genomic instability and metastasis [57]. Moreover, the survival assay for the UC-CRC-critical genes infers poor prognosis of colorectal carcinoma (Fig 4B–4E). Recruitment of immune cells in and around the transformed colon tissue creates a tumor microenvironment that can be either tumor-inhibiting or promoting [46]. Intriguingly, immune cell assembly within/around the transformed tissue is known to be associated with the prognosis as well as survival of the patients, and such outcomes can be predicted by the immune infiltration scores. In this study, the immune infiltration of UC-CRC-critical genes discloses the positive correlation of CD4+ T cells while negatively correlated with CD8+ T cells for CRC (Fig 5). Amongst the various members of the adaptive immune cell repertoire reported for human CRC, CD4+ T cells and CD8+ T cells are known to possess anti-tumor immune responses [46]. They induce the cytolytic responses against the cancer cells, signaling B cell activation and alteration of the immune homeostasis of the tumor microenvironment [58]. B cells are reported to be linked with the antigen presentation, generation of antibodies, and various immunosuppressive responses [46]. Herein, expression of TTLL12, THRA, and EPHB3 mRNA was found to be associated with the infiltration of macrophages and NK cells at the tumor site (Fig 5). Macrophages are considered as the key regulators of the inflammatory consequences of human UC and CRC [59]. The immunoregulatory roles of macrophages are majorly executed via the phenotypic switching process namely macrophage polarization between the M1/pro-inflammatory and M2/anti-inflammatory subtypes [60, 61]. M2 macrophages alleviate the colonic inflammation and thereby inhibit metastasis while M1 macrophages do the reverse [59].

Finally, our study proposes WFDC2, TTLL12, THRA, and EPHB3 as the potential mediators of the oncogenic transformation of CRC from UC-associated inflamed colon tissue and these genes could be considered as significant biomarkers and/or therapeutic targets in diagnosing and treating UC-associated neoplastic transformation, especially CRC. The possible scheme for the transformation of the normal colon to CRC via UC guided by the aforesaid genes is depicted in Fig 7. Our findings are expected to deliver novel dimensions to the existing knowledge on the molecular transformation of UC to CRC and will open up new areas for further research and experimental validation.

Fig 7. Scheme depicting the molecular trajectory of the development of UC and UC to CRC.

Fig 7

Supporting information

S1 File. Contains all the supporting tables and figures.

(DOCX)

Acknowledgments

The effort of Nabarun Chandra Das in analysing the data by the software package R is gratefully acknowledged.

Data Availability

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available in the GEO repository (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/) at accession no. GSE87473. All other data are presented in the paper.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Kaplan GG. The global burden of IBD: from 2015 to 2025. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;12: 720–727. doi: 10.1038/nrgastro.2015.150 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Kobayashi T, Siegmund B, Le Berre C, Wei SC, Ferrante M, Shen B, et al. Ulcerative colitis. Nat Rev Dis Prim. 2020;6: 74. doi: 10.1038/s41572-020-0205-x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Patra R, Padma S, Mukherjee S. An improved method for experimental induction of Ulcerative colitis in Sprague Dawley rats. MethodsX. 2023; 102158. doi: 10.1016/j.mex.2023.102158 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Torres J, Mehandru S, Colombel J-F, Peyrin-Biroulet L. Crohn’s disease. Lancet. 2017;389: 1741–1755. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31711-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Black CJ, Ford AC. Global burden of irritable bowel syndrome: trends, predictions and risk factors. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020;17: 473–486. doi: 10.1038/s41575-020-0286-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Mukherjee S, Joardar N, Sengupta S, Babu SPS. Gut microbes as future therapeutics in treating inflammatory and infectious diseases: lessons from recent findings. J Nutr Biochem. 2018;61: 111–128. doi: 10.1016/j.jnutbio.2018.07.010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Ahmedy OA, Ibrahim SM, Salem HH, Kandil EA. Antiulcerogenic effect of melittin via mitigating TLR4/TRAF6 mediated NF-κB and p38MAPK pathways in acetic acid-induced ulcerative colitis in mice. Chem Biol Interact. 2020;331: 109276. doi: 10.1016/j.cbi.2020.109276 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Ungaro R, Mehandru S, Allen PB, Peyrin-Biroulet L, Colombel J-F. Ulcerative colitis. Lancet. 2017;389: 1756–1770. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32126-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Ng SC, Kaplan GG, Tang W, Banerjee R, Adigopula B, Underwood FE, et al. Population Density and Risk of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Prospective Population-Based Study in 13 Countries or Regions in Asia-Pacific. Am J Gastroenterol. 2019;114: 107–115. doi: 10.1038/s41395-018-0233-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Siow VS, Bhatt R, Mollen KP. Management of acute severe ulcerative colitis in children. Semin Pediatr Surg. 2017;26: 367–372. doi: 10.1053/j.sempedsurg.2017.10.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Hnatyszyn A, Hryhorowicz S, Kaczmarek-Ryś M, Lis E, Słomski R, Scott RJ, et al. Colorectal carcinoma in the course of inflammatory bowel diseases. Hered Cancer Clin Pract. 2019;17: 18. doi: 10.1186/s13053-019-0118-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fedewa SA, Ahnen DJ, Meester RGS, Barzi A, et al. Colorectal cancer statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67: 177–193. doi: 10.3322/caac.21395 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Eaden JA, Abrams KR, Mayberry JF. The risk of colorectal cancer in ulcerative colitis: a meta-analysis. Gut. 2001;48: 526–535. doi: 10.1136/gut.48.4.526 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Choi C-HR, Bakir I Al, Hart AL, Graham TA. Clonal evolution of colorectal cancer in IBD. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;14: 218–229. doi: 10.1038/nrgastro.2017.1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Itzkowitz SH, Yio X. Inflammation and Cancer IV. Colorectal cancer in inflammatory bowel disease: the role of inflammation. Am J Physiol Liver Physiol. 2004;287: G7–G17. doi: 10.1152/ajpgi.00079.2004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Zhang X, Wan S, Yu Y, Ruan W, Wang H, Xu L, et al. Identifying potential DNA methylation markers in early-stage colorectal Cancer. Genomics. 2020;112: 3365–3373. doi: 10.1016/j.ygeno.2020.06.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Patra R, Mukherjee S, Das NC. Exploring the differential expression and prognostic significance of the COL11A1 gene in human colorectal carcinoma: an integrated bioinformatics approach. Front Genet. 2021;12: 88. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2021.608313 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Liang B, Li C, Zhao J. Identification of key pathways and genes in colorectal cancer using bioinformatics analysis. Med Oncol. 2016;33: 111. doi: 10.1007/s12032-016-0829-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Zenonos K, Kyprianou K. RAS signaling pathways, mutations and their role in colorectal cancer. World J Gastrointest Oncol. 2013;5: 97–101. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v5.i5.97 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Al-Mustanjid M, Mahmud SMH, Royel MRI, Rahman MH, Islam T, Rahman MR, et al. Detection of molecular signatures and pathways shared in inflammatory bowel disease and colorectal cancer: A bioinformatics and systems biology approach. Genomics. 2020;112: 3416–3426. doi: 10.1016/j.ygeno.2020.06.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Barrett T, Wilhite SE, Ledoux P, Evangelista C, Kim IF, Tomashevsky M, et al. NCBI GEO: archive for functional genomics data sets—update. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41: D991–D995. doi: 10.1093/nar/gks1193 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Xue G, Hua L, Zhou N, Li J. Characteristics of immune cell infiltration and associated diagnostic biomarkers in ulcerative colitis: results from bioinformatics analysis. Bioengineered. 2021;12: 252–265. doi: 10.1080/21655979.2020.1863016 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Lu J, Wang Z, Maimaiti M, Hui W, Abudourexiti A, Gao F. Identification of diagnostic signatures in ulcerative colitis patients via bioinformatic analysis integrated with machine learning. Hum Cell. 2022;35: 179–188. doi: 10.1007/s13577-021-00641-w [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Zhang J, Wang X, Xu L, Zhang Z, Wang F, Tang X. Investigation of Potential Genetic Biomarkers and Molecular Mechanism of Ulcerative Colitis Utilizing Bioinformatics Analysis. Chiba T, editor. Biomed Res Int. 2020;2020: 4921387. doi: 10.1155/2020/4921387 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Li K, Strauss R, Ouahed J, Chan D, Telesco SE, Shouval DS, et al. Molecular Comparison of Adult and Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis Indicates Broad Similarity of Molecular Pathways in Disease Tissue. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2018;67: 45–52. doi: 10.1097/MPG.0000000000001898 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Jiao X, Sherman BT, Huang DW, Stephens R, Baseler MW, Lane HC, et al. DAVID-WS: a stateful web service to facilitate gene/protein list analysis. Bioinformatics. 2012/04/27. 2012;28: 1805–1806. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bts251 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Szklarczyk D, Gable AL, Nastou KC, Lyon D, Kirsch R, Pyysalo S, et al. The STRING database in 2021: customizable protein-protein networks, and functional characterization of user-uploaded gene/measurement sets. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021;49: D605–D612. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkaa1074 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Cerami E, Gao J, Dogrusoz U, Gross BE, Sumer SO, Aksoy BA, et al. The cBio Cancer Genomics Portal: An Open Platform for Exploring Multidimensional Cancer Genomics Data. Cancer Discov. 2012;2: 401 LP– 404. doi: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-12-0095 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Rhodes DR, Yu J, Shanker K, Deshpande N, Varambally R, Ghosh D, et al. ONCOMINE: a cancer microarray database and integrated data-mining platform. Neoplasia (New York, NY). 2004;6: 1. doi: 10.1016/s1476-5586(04)80047-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Chandrashekar DS, Bashel B, Balasubramanya SAH, Creighton CJ, Ponce-Rodriguez I, Chakravarthi BVSK, et al. UALCAN: a portal for facilitating tumor subgroup gene expression and survival analyses. Neoplasia. 2017;19: 649–658. doi: 10.1016/j.neo.2017.05.002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Uhlén M, Fagerberg L, Hallström BM, Lindskog C, Oksvold P, Mardinoglu A, et al. Proteomics. Tissue-based map of the human proteome. Science. 2015;347: 1260419. doi: 10.1126/science.1260419 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Li T, Fu J, Zeng Z, Cohen D, Li J, Chen Q, et al. TIMER2. 0 for analysis of tumor-infiltrating immune cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Zhou G, Soufan O, Ewald J, Hancock REW, Basu N, Xia J. NetworkAnalyst 3.0: a visual analytics platform for comprehensive gene expression profiling and meta-analysis. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019;47: W234–W241. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkz240 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Rogler G. Chronic ulcerative colitis and colorectal cancer. Cancer Lett. 2014;345: 235–241. doi: 10.1016/j.canlet.2013.07.032 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Yashiro M. Molecular Alterations of Colorectal Cancer with Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Dig Dis Sci. 2015;60: 2251–2263. doi: 10.1007/s10620-015-3646-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Moparthi L, Koch S. Wnt signaling in intestinal inflammation. Differentiation. 2019;108: 24–32. doi: 10.1016/j.diff.2019.01.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Schatoff EM, Leach BI, Dow LE. Wnt Signaling and Colorectal Cancer. Curr Colorectal Cancer Rep. 2017;13: 101–110. doi: 10.1007/s11888-017-0354-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Fearon ER. Molecular genetics of colorectal cancer. Annu Rev Pathol. 2011;6: 479–507. doi: 10.1146/annurev-pathol-011110-130235 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Koveitypour Z, Panahi F, Vakilian M, Peymani M, Forootan FS, Esfahani MHN, et al. Signaling pathways involved in colorectal cancer progression. Cell Biosci. 2019;9: 97. doi: 10.1186/s13578-019-0361-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Jung G, Hernández-Illán E, Moreira L, Balaguer F, Goel A. Epigenetics of colorectal cancer: biomarker and therapeutic potential. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020;17: 111–130. doi: 10.1038/s41575-019-0230-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Padma S, Patra R, Sen Gupta PS, Panda SK, Rana MK, Mukherjee S. Cell Surface Fibroblast Activation Protein-2 (Fap2) of Fusobacterium nucleatum as a Vaccine Candidate for Therapeutic Intervention of Human Colorectal Cancer: An Immunoinformatics Approach. Vaccines. 2023. doi: 10.3390/vaccines11030525 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Yesudhas D, Gosu V, Anwar MA, Choi S. Multiple Roles of Toll-Like Receptor 4 in Colorectal Cancer. Frontiers in Immunology. 2014. p. 334. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2014.00334 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Zhao P, Zhang Z. TNF-α promotes colon cancer cell migration and invasion by upregulating TROP-2. Oncol Lett. 2018;15: 3820–3827. doi: 10.3892/ol.2018.7735 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Patra R, Das NC, Mukherjee S. Toll-Like Receptors (TLRs) as Therapeutic Targets for Treating SARS-CoV-2: An Immunobiological Perspective. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2021;1352: 87–109. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-85109-5_6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Brostjan C, Oehler R. The role of neutrophil death in chronic inflammation and cancer. Cell Death Discov. 2020;6: 26. doi: 10.1038/s41420-020-0255-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Guo L, Wang C, Qiu X, Pu X, Chang P. Colorectal Cancer Immune Infiltrates: Significance in Patient Prognosis and Immunotherapeutic Efficacy. Frontiers in Immunology. 2020. p. 1052. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.01052 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Thorsteinsdottir S, Gudjonsson T, Nielsen OH, Vainer B, Seidelin JB. Pathogenesis and biomarkers of carcinogenesis in ulcerative colitis. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;8: 395–404. doi: 10.1038/nrgastro.2011.96 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Parikh K, Antanaviciute A, Fawkner-Corbett D, Jagielowicz M, Aulicino A, Lagerholm C, et al. Colonic epithelial cell diversity in health and inflammatory bowel disease. Nature. 2019;567: 49–55. doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-0992-y [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Bingle L, Cross SS, High AS, Wallace WA, Rassl D, Yuan G, et al. WFDC2 (HE4): a potential role in the innate immunity of the oral cavity and respiratory tract and the development of adenocarcinomas of the lung. Respir Res. 2006;7: 61. doi: 10.1186/1465-9921-7-61 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Ju L-G, Zhu Y, Lei P-J, Yan D, Zhu K, Wang X, et al. TTLL12 Inhibits the Activation of Cellular Antiviral Signaling through Interaction with VISA/MAVS. J Immunol. 2017;198: 1274 LP– 1284. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1601194 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Yang S, Liang Y, Qian H, Li Q. TTLL12 expression in ovarian cancer correlates with a poor outcome. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2020;13: 239–247. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Tylki-Szymańska A, Acuna-Hidalgo R, Krajewska-Walasek M, Lecka-Ambroziak A, Steehouwer M, Gilissen C, et al. Thyroid hormone resistance syndrome due to mutations in the thyroid hormone receptor α gene (<em>THRA</em>). J Med Genet. 2015;52: 312 LP– 316. doi: doi:10.1136/jmedgenet-2014-102936 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.van Mullem AA, Visser TJ, Peeters RP. Clinical Consequences of Mutations in Thyroid Hormone Receptor-α1. Eur Thyroid J. 2014;3: 17–24. doi: 10.1159/000360637 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Ji X-D, Li G, Feng Y-X, Zhao J-S, Li J-J, Sun Z-J, et al. EphB3 is overexpressed in non-small-cell lung cancer and promotes tumor metastasis by enhancing cell survival and migration. Cancer Res. 2011;71: 1156–1166. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-0717 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Islam S, Loizides AM, Fialkovich JJ, Grand RJ, Montgomery RK. Developmental expression of Eph and ephrin family genes in mammalian small intestine. Dig Dis Sci. 2010;55: 2478–2488. doi: 10.1007/s10620-009-1102-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Herath NI, Spanevello MD, Doecke JD, Smith FM, Pouponnot C, Boyd AW. Complex expression patterns of Eph receptor tyrosine kinases and their ephrin ligands in colorectal carcinogenesis. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48: 753–762. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2011.07.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Luczak MW, Jagodziński PP. The role of DNA methylation in cancer development. Folia Histochem Cytobiol. 2006;44: 143–154. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Borst J, Ahrends T, Bąbała N, Melief CJM, Kastenmüller W. CD4+ T cell help in cancer immunology and immunotherapy. Nat Rev Immunol. 2018;18: 635–647. doi: 10.1038/s41577-018-0044-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Cortese N, Soldani C, Franceschini B, Barbagallo M, Marchesi F, Torzilli G, et al. Macrophages in Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases. Cancers (Basel). 2019;11: 633. doi: 10.3390/cancers11050633 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Mukherjee S, Mukherjee S, Maiti TK, Bhattacharya S, Babu SPS. A novel ligand of Toll-like receptor 4 from the sheath of Wuchereria bancrofti Microfilaria induces proinflammatory response in macrophages. J Infect Dis. 2017;215: 954–965. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jix067 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Mukherjee S, Mukherjee S, Bhattacharya S, Sinha Babu SP. Surface proteins of Setaria cervi induce inflammation in macrophage through Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4)-mediated signalling pathway. Parasite Immunol. 2017;39. doi: 10.1111/pim.12389 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Divijendra Natha Reddy Sirigiri

15 Feb 2023

PONE-D-22-35370An oncogenomic trajectory study on the identification of ulcerative colitis-critical genes and their relative influence over the tumorigenesis of human colorectal carcinomaPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Mukherjee,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Apr 01 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Divijendra Natha Reddy Sirigiri

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: 1) It is a good piece of work. However, it needs major revision in terms of language (specially in title, introduction and methods section) , figures and claim to be the first one to report some genes expression to be critical in inducing colorectal cancer.

a) I tried to suggest or point out few suggestions for language - please see attachment. However, these are not the only one - please revise the manuscript so as to bring to highlight the outcomes in most impressive standard terminologies used in the field. If you want to coin a new term - please define it with criteria used to avoid any self implicating meaning because of the literary meaning of the word used. e.g. "colitis-critical genes". Please reframe it.

b) All the figures needs a major improvement in resolution so that they are optically readable. Please use standard methods to save and insert figures with recommended resolution / pixel/dpi.

2) Result section: The titles in the result section needs to be rewritten – each subtitle should highlight the findings from each analysis rather that stating the name or process of analysis in title. Also, it look like figure legends have become part of result section. Please separate this. Figure/s could be quoted upon stating a finding, even the outcome of more than one figure can be used to reach an impressive result or finding. This will help in formulating major impressive result titles.

3) For claims to be the first report in UC-critical genes as inducer of colorectal cancer e.g. PCK1, THRA also others too) - please do a through literature survey to make such claims, instead you could report the findings as it is - no harm in it.

4) You could take help from a colorectal cancer genomics expert.

Reviewer #2: In this research paper, authors identify set of DE genes pertaining to UC patients suing the publicly available micro array data, The work is nice , however there some concerns

1. The data set is microrarray. Of Late, RNA seq related gene expression data is being used for more than a decade. Although microarray data is reliable it is not being used for quite some time. Perhaps authors can use RNA seq data if available and see if they get consistent results at least with some of the DE genes

2. The data set used seems to be used in several other research papers. Authors should either s]cite(if relevant) or should make it very clear how this work is different from others.

3. The resolution of the figures as submitted is not great (difficult to see the text and labels and numbers on figures). Figure resolution could be improved.

4. Results and discussion could be more succinct without overlapping.

5. Several typos which could be sorted out

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Mohammed S Mustak

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-22-35370.docx

PLoS One. 2023 Aug 3;18(8):e0289064. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0289064.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


1 Apr 2023

Response to Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer #1:

1) It is a good piece of work. However, it needs major revision in terms of language (specially in title, introduction and methods section), figures and claim to be the first one to report some genes expression to be critical in inducing colorectal cancer.

Authors’ Responses: We expresses our grateful thanks to the learned reviewer for reviewing our manuscript and providing the positive feedback. We appreciate the valuable comments of the learned reviewer and we have addressed all the comments accordingly in the revised manuscript.

a) I tried to suggest or point out few suggestions for language - please see attachment. However, these are not the only one - please revise the manuscript so as to bring to highlight the outcomes in most impressive standard terminologies used in the field. If you want to coin a new term - please define it with criteria used to avoid any self-implicating meaning because of the literary meaning of the word used. e.g. "colitis-critical genes". Please reframe it.

Authors’ Responses: Gracious thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable comment. We have incorporated all the necessary changes as directed by the learned reviewer in the revised manuscript. The highlights of our novel outcomes are now clearly defined in the revised manuscript. We have termed the genes that play crucial role in the induction and pathogenesis of ulcerative colitis as “colitis-critical genes”. In cancer, many genes that are linked to the oncogenic transformation processes are commonly known as “cancer-critical genes”. Therefore, to present the significance of genes of our interests in the course of the pathogenesis of colitis, we termed them as “colitis-critical genes”.

b) All the figures needs a major improvement in resolution so that they are optically readable. Please use standard methods to save and insert figures with recommended resolution / pixel/dpi.

Authors’ Responses: We express our grateful thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable comment regarding the resolution of Figures. The figures have been revised for better visualisation and resolution in the revised manuscript.

2) Result section: The titles in the result section needs to be rewritten – each subtitle should highlight the findings from each analysis rather that stating the name or process of analysis in title. Also, it look like figure legends have become part of result section. Please separate this. Figure/s could be quoted upon stating a finding, even the outcome of more than one figure can be used to reach an impressive result or finding. This will help in formulating major impressive result titles.

Authors’ Responses: The authors express their grateful thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable feedback. We have modified the result section and subtitles of our findings and also modified the figure captions.

3) For claims to be the first report in UC-critical genes as inducer of colorectal cancer e.g., PCK1, THRA also others too) - please do a through literature survey to make such claims, instead you could report the findings as it is - no harm in it.

Authors’ Responses: We express our sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable feedback. We respect the comment of the learned reviewer. Herein, we have done thorough literature survey to assess the background studies as well as to find out the possible clinical correlation and supportive experimental evidence.

4) You could take help from a colorectal cancer genomics expert.

Authors’ Responses: We respect the comment of the learned reviewer and we took the advice from a renowned oncogeneticist Prof. Aditi Banerjee, University of Maryland.

Additional Comments:

Title:

An oncogenomic trajectory study on the identification of ulcerative colitis-critical genes

and their relative influence over the tumorigenesis of human colorectal carcinoma

OR-

Identification of genes critical for ulcerative colitis as inducer of tumorigenesis of colorectal carcinoma.

Or

Bioinformatics mining of ulcerative-colitis gene expression profiles to decipher the inducer-gene-signature of colorectal carcinoma.

Or you could try something else - if you really want to keep “oncogenomic trajectory” – however then the result section has to be explained in that fashion – which I find might be difficult –considering- in the interest of time.

Authors’ Responses: Gracious thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable comment. The title has been modified accordingly.

Language suggestion:

There is a scope for language improvement in the Abstract as well as title of the study, methods and results section: here are some suggestions.

Line 16-18

Line 20 – recognized – can be replaced with more appropriate terminology used in medical science

Line 42- the (not necessary) further - > @Transformation itself define the next change – therefore further is not necessary.

The following terms could be either defined first in the text or use the standard medical terms used in stating diagnostics stages of UC.

Authors’ Responses: Sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for the comments. We have corrected the sentence and similar cases throughout the text. All the corrections are shown in yellow highlight in the revised manuscript.

Line 55 – “extensive UC patients” - what do you mean by “extensive UC patients”? Similarly, “extensive colitis patients/samples” !!!

Line 58 – “limited UC” ? And “intensity of UC” - > one could state the degree of UC – or use any grading pattern/term used in UC diagnosis description.

Authors’ Responses: We express our grateful thanks to the learned reviewer for the comments. In the context of our study, the use of “extensive UC patients” and “limited UC patients” demonstrates the severity of disease in the patients that we have obtained from the patient data of our selected dataset GSE87473. Herein, the extensive and limited colitis defines the severity of UC in the patients showing pancolitis in case of extensive UC and left-sided colitis for limited UC. The same has been incorporated in the revised manuscript.

Line-66-67 – p-value adjustments – what do you mean by p-value adjustments?

Authors’ Responses: Gracious thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable comment. The p-value adjustment signifies the p-value obtained after adjustment of multiple testing. It mainly demonstrates the primary statistics for interpretation of the result and smaller the value the most reliable is the result.

How do you define UC-critical genes? What do you mean by “critical£ here? Do you want to say differentially regulated / or upregulated /downregulated genes – i.e. an expression profile signatory of a stage in UC marking the transformation into colorectal carcinoma? Once you define it use that term in the rest of the text.

Authors’ Responses: We express our sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for the comment. The UC-critical genes in our study are considered to be the genes that show prominent upregulation or downregulation in their expression in the context of ulcerative colitis (UC). Herein, the differentially expressed genes within the different groups of our interest viz., pediatric UC and adult UC were studied and their connection in the context of induction of colorectal cancer was investigated. The different differentially expressed genes selected were based on their expression pattern i.e., the top three upregulated and top three downregulated genes were selected from each group. The criteria of selection of UC-critical genes were well-defined within the revised manuscript.

Line -81- “Screening of UC-Critical Genes” -?

Authors’ Responses: Grateful thanks to the learned reviewer for the comment. Herein, the “screening of UC-critical genes” signifies the selection of various gene of interest critical in the induction of UC from the top 250 differentially expressed genes.

Line -89 – “across c-Bioportal” - using c-Bioportal.

Authors’ Responses: Sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for the comment. We have corrected the sentence and the corrections are shown in yellow highlight in the revised manuscript.

Line 103 – “taking a clue” – this clue could be explained technically – e.g. highly expressed genes / or differentially regulated genes or which observation made it as a clue – that could be explained in brief here.

Authors’ Responses: Grateful thanks to the learned reviewer for the comment. We have modified the same in the revised manuscript.

Line 115 – KM plot- mentioned for first time – therefore, use long form followed by bracket (KM)

Authors’ Responses: Sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for the comment. We have corrected the sentence and the corrections are shown in yellow highlight in revised manuscript.

Line 117 – immune cell infiltration analysis

Line- 132- characteristics of samples selected.

Line 500-501 – “as the potential oncogenic mediators of the oncogenic transformation of CRC from UC” // or// “as the potential oncogenic mediators of transformation of CRC from UC”.

Authors’ Responses: Sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for the comments. We have corrected the sentence and the corrections are shown in yellow highlight in revised manuscript.

Methods: Please revise for language- refer papers in these genera from previous PLOS one publications in 2022.

Authors’ Responses: Sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for the comment. We have corrected the language and other grammatical errors following the previous publication in PLOSONE (Xie et al., 2022).

Disease occurrence:

1) It would add more information if authors could also add data from their local geographies?

Authors’ Responses: We express our sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable feedback. We appreciate the comment of the learned reviewer regarding incorporation of cancer data from our local demographic conditions. We would like to inform the learned reviewer that in the present study we have analyzed the data that is available in the GEO database. Currently we are continuously working in this field to collective showcase the evidences of the transcriptomic profile of UC patients and also the UC associated colorectal cancer patients. But for now, we request the learned reviewer to kindly consider the limitation of this present study.

2) Add stats from VizHub – global disease burden study – you could use the figures generated form database.

Is there any data available on the diet of the patients?

Is there a possibility to trace from the database that you used?

Authors’ Responses: We express our sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable advice. We have incorporated the data obtained from VizHub on Global Disease Burden Study in the revised manuscript. We would like to inform the learned reviewer that there is no data available regarding the patients diet for our dataset selected for study.

Reviewer #2:

In this research paper, authors identify set of DE genes pertaining to UC patients suing the publicly available micro array data, The work is nice, however there some concerns

1. The data set is microrarray. Of Late, RNA seq related gene expression data is being used for more than a decade. Although microarray data is reliable it is not being used for quite some time. Perhaps authors can use RNA seq data if available and see if they get consistent results at least with some of the DE genes

Authors’ Responses: We express our sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for reviewing our manuscript and appreciating our work. We gratefully thank the learned reviewer for the valuable comments. In the present study, we have explored the microarray data for differentiating the different differentially expressed genes over the adult and paediatric UC patients in comparison to normal data. In the present time, both RNA seq and microarray data are widely used for analysing the transcriptomic profile of any study sample (serum, tissue, etc.). Microarray is a hybridization-based technique used to detect the presence of specific RNA within the sample while RNA seq used sequencing based technique to analyse the novel RNAs within the sample. We respect the comment of the learned reviewer regarding the cross-validation using RNA seq data, if available. But we would like to inform the learned reviewer that at the present time we are unable to found any RNA seq data similar to our research interest/design at GEO portal and requesting the learned reviewer to kindly consider our limitation regarding the availability of RNA seq data for the present time.

2. The data set used seems to be used in several other research papers. Authors should either s]cite(if relevant) or should make it very clear how this work is different from others.

Authors’ Responses: We express our sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable comment. Yes, we agreed with the learned reviewer that the dataset we used in our present study has already been used in several other research papers published online. We have cited them as per the relevance to our current study in the revised manuscript. We would like to enlighten the learned reviewer that our current study is completely independent, and novel as compared to the other studies. In all the previous studies, the dataset was only used to analyse the various parameters and inferences associated with ulcerative colitis (UC). For reference, Zhang et al., 2019, Xue et al., 2020, Lu et al., 2021 and Zhang et al., 2022 identified signature gene markers for the diagnosis and progression of UC. Here in the present study, we have screened the different UC-critical genes that are potential contributors in the neoplastic transformation of UC to colorectal cancer (CRC) and proliferating the immunopathogenesis of CRC.

3. The resolution of the figures as submitted is not great (difficult to see the text and labels and numbers on figures). Figure resolution could be improved.

Authors’ Responses: Sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable feedback. We have modified the figures for better resolution and clarity.

4. Results and discussion could be more succinct without overlapping.

Authors’ Responses: Sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable comment. We have modified the result and discussion portion in the revised manuscript.

5. Several typos which could be sorted out.

Authors’ Responses: Sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for the comment. We have carefully checked the manuscript for the grammatical and typos errors and all the corrections are made in the revised manuscript.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Reviewers Comments_PLOS ONE_1.0.docx

Decision Letter 1

Divijendra Natha Reddy Sirigiri

11 May 2023

PONE-D-22-35370R1Identification of genes critical for inducing ulcerative colitis in human and exploring their relative influence on the tumorigenesis of colorectal carcinomaPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Mukherjee,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

As per my understanding from one of the reviewers concerns, there are some issues still to be addressed. Please address them appropriately. 

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jun 25 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Divijendra Natha Reddy Sirigiri

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The study is good, and the manuscript is taking shape, however some issues needs to be addressed as follows so as to reach audience lucidly, please find my comments attached herewith -in a separate file.

Other than that a major revision is needed to address the resolution of figures. If a separate better quality image file is submitted to the journal, which is not attached with manuscript for review, then choose the correct file. Thank you.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: renamed_ec270.pdf

PLoS One. 2023 Aug 3;18(8):e0289064. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0289064.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1


25 Jun 2023

Reviewer #1:

The study is good, and the manuscript is taking shape, however some issues needs to be addressed as follows so as to reach audience lucidly, please find my comments attached herewith -in a separate file.

Other than that a major revision is needed to address the resolution of figures. If a separate better quality image file is submitted to the journal, which is not attached with manuscript for review, then choose the correct file. Thank you.

Response to the reviewer’s comment:

Grateful thanks to the learned reviewer for appreciating our revised work and for the valuable feedback. The figures provided are of high resolution of 600dpi and are attached separately with the revised manuscript.

1. Title: Identification of genes critical for inducing ulcerative colitis in human and exploring their relative influence tumorigenic potential on the tumorigenesis of in human colorectal carcinoma.

Authors’ response:

Sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for revising the title. We have incorporated the changes in the revised manuscript.

2. Figures (graphs/pictures) are still not in the best resolution. Labels and axis details are not clearly visible. I do not know if a separate PDF /or image file is submitted to the journal- where it is visible. Please check.

Authors’ response:

Sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable advice. We have incorporated the high-resolution clear figures separately with the revised manuscript.

3. Line-66-67 – p-value adjustments – what do you mean by p-value adjustments? Authors’ Responses: Gracious thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable comment. The p-value adjustment signifies the p-value obtained after adjustment of multiple testing. It mainly demonstrates the primary statistics for interpretation of the result and smaller the value the most reliable is the result.

Reviewer-response- It is well known and understood, what P-value signifies and how it is derived. However from your explanation or mention of “p-value adjustment” as you described as “p-value obtained after “adjustment of multiple testing” - generates or leads reader to confusion – by the word –“adjustment” – This needs to be explained and defined. How this adjustment is achieved in statistical terms? What are the statistical parameters of adjustment? Why was such an adjustment needed? Which “multiple testing” is eligible to adjustment? Perhaps, explain in methodology section -what is meant here by – multiple testing ?What is the threshold of adjustment from the actual value /number of observation?

Authors’ response:

Grateful thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable feedback. We have modified the manuscript by changing the word “p-value adjustment”. The explanation regarding the p-value adjustment is that it is obtained after adjustment of multiple testing. It is performed for reducing the occurrence of false positive results. The statistical method used here is Benjamini & Hochberg false discovery rate method as it provides a good balance between discovery of statistically significant genes and limitation of false positives results. The threshold value for the p-value used here is >0.05. We have incorporated all the necessary changes in the revised manuscript.

4. The criteria of selection of UC-critical genes:

Authors’ response:

Sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for the comment and the correction has been made within the revised manuscript.

5. Line 287- “generating” – developing - // Fuel -> inducing

Authors’ response:

Sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable correction. We have incorporated the changes in the re-revised manuscript.

6. 334-337 - Mutation in the alterations of UC-genes critical genes for UC/UC-CRC alter the activation of Wnt, RTK-RAS, TGF-β, and their impact on TP53 signaling and influence the survivability of the affected subjects : The results only demonstrate the associated mutations in Wnt, RTK-RAS and TGF-B in this condition, the relative alteration in the activation can only be speculated, therefore it can be only discussed in the discussion and can’t be mentioned in the result section title. However, it is appropriate to mention the mutations and the co-relation of mutation with the survival in the title. Please revise the statements accordingly. To show the alteration of activity in the function of Wnt, RTK-RAS, TGF-β needs to be demonstrated by functional cell based assays, therefore present accordingly.

Authors’ response:

Sincere thanks to the learned reviewer for valuable suggestion. We have modified the re-revised manuscript accordingly.

7. #386 -389 Transcriptional and translational expression, as well as epigenetic regulation, and proteomics of WFDC2, TTLL12, THRA, and EPHB3 genes preferentially promote the transformation of UC to CRC It could be better represented as following: => “Expression of WFDC2, TTLL12, HRA and EPHB3 genes and their epigenetic regulation preferentially promote the transformation of UC to CRC’’ (only if it is reflected in the presented data)

Authors’ response:

We express our grateful thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable suggestion. We have incorporated the changes in the re-revised manuscript.

8. #499 ->”betweenness” – explain the significance in biological term – rather than in Software terminology of a particular package.

Authors’ response:

Gracious thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable suggestion. The term betweenness is a scientific term for understanding how often a node occurs on all shortest paths between two nodes of an interacting network. It measures the number of shortest paths going through the nodes. Nodes that have the higher value of betweenness acts as important bottleneck in any network. We have incorporated the changes in the revised manuscript.

9. #524-525- “upregulation and downregulation of 250 genes” -> This statement could be reframed – stating how many upregulated and how many downregulated, respectively. Otherwise just state “differential expression of 250 genes was observed’’

Authors’ response:

We express our grateful thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable suggestion. We have incorporated the changes in the revised manuscript.

10. Immune cell infiltration : Infiltration of immune cells at the site of UC is expected, UC is the result of over-active /unguided neutrophile/macrophase activity. However, the findings of higher expression of the following genes , “PCK1, WFDC2, MUC4, TTLL12, THRA, EPHB3, DPP10, and HSAP6’’ ; do they show a gradient of expression in UC samples to increased /elevated expression in CRC samples ?

Authors’ response:

Grateful thanks to the learned reviewer. Yes, we do agree with the learned reviewer that the induction of UC leads to the infiltration of immune cells within the site of induction of inflammation resulting in the overactivation of neutrophil and macrophage activity. Previous studies have shown that expression of PCK1, WFDC2, MUC4, TTLL12, THRA, EPHB3, DPP10 and HSAP6 are correlated with the infiltration of immune cells across the tumor microenvironment for different types of cancer (Yu et al., 2023, He et al., 2022, Cappello et al., 2019, Das et al., 2016). These genes are also associated with the invasion of immune cells in the damaged tissue for ulcerative colitis. Our study has shown that the higher expression of these genes in respect to colorectal cancer patient shows an increase in infiltration of neutrophils, macrophages and NK cells within and around the tumor microenvironment (Figure 5A).

11. #587 – Eph : Please do mention complete name – when emphasizing on a particular protein.

Authors’ response:

We express grateful thanks to the learned reviewer for the valuable suggestion. We have incorporated the full form of EPHB3 Erythropoietin-Producing Hepatoma (EPH) receptor B3 in the revised manuscript.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Reviewers comment.docx

Decision Letter 2

Divijendra Natha Reddy Sirigiri

11 Jul 2023

Identification of genes critical for inducing ulcerative colitis and exploring their tumorigenic potential in human colorectal carcinoma

PONE-D-22-35370R2

Dear Dr. Mukherjee,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Divijendra Natha Reddy Sirigiri

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Divijendra Natha Reddy Sirigiri

26 Jul 2023

PONE-D-22-35370R2

Identification of genes critical for inducing ulcerative colitis and exploring their tumorigenic potential in human colorectal carcinoma

Dear Dr. Mukherjee:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Divijendra Natha Reddy Sirigiri

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 File. Contains all the supporting tables and figures.

    (DOCX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: PONE-D-22-35370.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Reviewers Comments_PLOS ONE_1.0.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: renamed_ec270.pdf

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Reviewers comment.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available in the GEO repository (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/) at accession no. GSE87473. All other data are presented in the paper.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES