Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2021 Sep 29;16(9):e0253877. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253877

Suppressor effect of catechol-O-methyltransferase gene in prostate cancer

Yutaka Hashimoto 1,2,#, Marisa Shiina 1,2,#, Shigekatsu Maekawa 1,2,#, Taku Kato 1,2, Varahram Shahryari 1, Priyanka Kulkarni 1,2, Pritha Dasgupta 1,2, Soichiro Yamamura 1,2, Sharanjot Saini 1,2, Z Laura Tabatabai 3, Rajvir Dahiya 1,2, Yuichiro Tanaka 1,2,*
Editor: Zoran Culig4
PMCID: PMC8480839  PMID: 34587154

Abstract

Catechol-estrogens can cause genetic mutations and to counteract their oncogenicity, the catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) gene is capable of neutralizing these reactive compounds. In this study, we determined the functional effects and regulation of COMT in prostate cancer. Both the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and immunohistochemical analysis of clinical specimens demonstrated a reduction of COMT expression in prostate cancer. Also, western analyses of prostate cancer cell lines show COMT levels to be minimal in DuPro and DU145 and thus, these cells were used for further analyses. Re-expression of COMT led to suppressed migration ability (wound healing assay) and enhanced apoptosis (flow cytometric analyses), and when challenged with 4-hydroxyestradiol, a marked reduction of cell proliferation (MTT assay) was observed. Xenograft growth in athymic mice also resulted in inhibition due to COMT. As a mechanism, western analyses show cleaved CASP3 and BID were increased whereas XIAP and cIAP2 were reduced due to COMT. As COMT expression is low in prostate cancer, its regulation was determined. Databases identified several miRNAs capable of binding COMT and of these, miR-195 was observed to be increased in prostate cancer according to TCGA. Real-time PCR validated upregulation of miR-195 in clinical prostate cancer specimens as well as DuPro and DU145 and interestingly, luciferase reporter showed miR-195 capable of binding COMT and overexpressing miR-195 could reduce COMT in cells. These results demonstrate COMT to play a protective role by activating the apoptosis pathway and for miR-195 to regulate its expression. COMT may thus be a potential biomarker and gene of interest for therapeutic development for prostate cancer.

Introduction

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed malignancy and the second leading cause of cancer death among aging men in the United States [1]. There will be an estimated 248,530 new cases and 34,130 deaths due to prostate cancer in the year 2021. This cancer is a disease of aging as 0.2% of persons will develop invasive prostate cancer before the age of 50, but drastically increases to 1.8% for those aged 50 to 59, 5.0% aged 60 to 69, and 8.7% aged 70 years and older. During their lifetime, 12.1% of men are likely to be diagnosed with prostate cancer [1].

The catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) gene is expressed in various cells of the body. COMT is involved in the inactivation of catecholamines such as dopamine, epinephrine, and norepinephrine by attaching a methyl group from the coenzyme S-adenosyl-L-methionine, to the hydroxyl group of the catechol, forming a methoxy compound [2]. However, aside from their function to degrade neurotransmitters, COMT also takes part in preventing the carcinogenesis process by inactivating reactive catechol compounds such as those formed during estrogen metabolism.

Estrogens are implicated in the prostatic carcinogenesis process. The normal prostate expresses aromatase that converts androgen to estrogen within the stroma but during malignancy, expression is increased in prostate cancer cells and thus, can lead to enhanced biosynthesis of estrogens in the local environment of the prostate [3]. Also, animal studies show evidence for a neoplastic role of estrogens in prostate carcinogenesis [4–7]. Estrogen on its own however, is considered weakly mutagenic or carcinogenic [8] and a more pronounced tumorigenic effect comes from its property to undergo oxidative pathways in cells to form highly reactive catechol metabolites such as hydroxyestrogen via cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes. These hydroxyestrogens undergo further oxidation to form semi-quinones and quinones and studies have shown these to react with DNA to form both stable adducts which remain in the DNA unless removed by repair; and larger amounts of depurinating adducts, which detach from DNA leaving behind apurinic sites [9–12]. Errors in the repair of these sites can then lead to critical mutations that initiate cancer. These types of mutations have been shown to occur for both estrone and estradiol [9–15]. Thus, agents produced in the estrogen metabolic pathway are demonstrated to be mutagenic. In prostate, formation of these estrogen metabolites and its role in cancer is supported by estradiol metabolites and DNA adducts found in urine [16,17].

Neutralization of metabolites such as hydroxyestrogen is thus critical to protect prostate cells from mutations and tumorigenesis. For this, COMT is the main cellular enzyme that quenches hydroxyestrogens and does so by conversion into inert methoxy compounds as mentioned above [18]. As a result, formation of highly reactive species and damaging catechol-quinones is prevented. These methoxyestrogens also have little or no affinity for estrogen receptors and have no estrogenic effects on target tissues [19].

The COMT gene is thus shown to play a suppressive role in cancer. However, in prostate, how COMT affects the carcinogenesis process is not understood as gene function studies are limited. In this report, we characterized the functional role and regulation of the COMT gene in prostate cancer cells. Our results are the first to show that the COMT gene plays a protective role in prostate cancer through the apoptosis pathway and that COMT is regulated by miRNA.

Materials and methods

Tissue specimens and sectioning

Two cohorts of samples of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH, n = 19 for immunohistochemistry (IHC) and n = 24 for miRNA PCR) and prostate cancer (n = 22 for IHC and n = 32 for miRNA PCR) were obtained from the Department of Anatomy and Pathology at the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Health Care System (SFVAHCS). Specimens are formalin‐fixed, paraffin‐embedded (FFPE) and de‐identified data attached to patients who went through prostatectomy were obtained. Patients characteristics are shown in Tables 1 and 2 for IHC and miRNA analyses, respectively. FFPE specimens were sliced into 5 μm sections and placed onto mounting slides using a microtome (Leica Biosystems, Buffalo Grove, IL) for further analyses as described below. This study was approved by the Clinical Research Office of the SFVAHCS and the Institutional Review Board of the University of California at San Francisco (UCSF).

Table 1. Patient characteristics of cohort of specimens at SFVAHCS for IHC analyses.

Variables BPH (n = 19) Ca (n = 22)
Age (median ± SD) 69±7.06 64.5±7.39
Pre-operative PSA (mg/l) (median ± SD) - 5.1±4.68
Gleason Score
<7 - 12
= 7 - 9
>7 - 1
T stage
≤2 - 17
>2 - 3
No record - 2

Table 2. Patient characteristics of cohort of specimens at SFVAHCS for miRNA PCR analyses.

Variables BPH (n = 24) Ca (n = 32)
Age (median ± SD) 66.5±5.97 64.5±7.53
Pre-operative PSA (mg/l) (median ± SD) - 6.0±15.78
Gleason Score
<7 - 16
= 7 - 11
>7 - 4
No record 1
T stage
≤2 - 17
>2 - 11
No record 4

Cell lines and reagents

Human prostate cancer cell lines from brain metastatic DU145, bone metastatic PC3, lymph metastatic LNCaP, and non-malignant prostate epithelial cell line PWR-1E were purchased from American Type Culture Collection (Manassas, VA). DuPro cells derived from PC3 were also utilized [20] and obtained from collaborator Dr. R. Dahiya. Keratinocyte serum-free medium, bovine pituitary extract and human recombinant epidermal growth factor were purchased from Invitrogen (Carlsbad, CA). RPMI 1640, Opti-minimum essential medium and penicillin/streptomycin were obtained from Thermo Fisher Scientific, (Waltham, MA). Fetal bovine serum (FBS) was a product of Atlanta Biologicals (Lawrenceville, GA).

Cell culture

DU145, DuPro,LNCaP, and PC3 cells were cultured in RPMI 1640 medium supplemented with 10% FBS and 1% penicillin/streptomycin. PWR-1E cells were cultured in keratinocyte growth medium supplemented with 5 ng/mL human recombinant epidermal growth factor, 0.05 mg/ml bovine pituitary extract and 1% penicillin/streptomycin. All cell lines were maintained at 37°C in a humidified atmosphere composed of 5% CO2 and 95% air.

Immunohistochemical analysis

Immunostaining of COMT was performed on specimens of BPH and prostate cancer (patient characteristics in Table 1). Slides consisting of tissue sections underwent the protocol of the UltraVision Detection System (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) according to manufacturer’s instructions. After 12‐hour incubation with rabbit monoclonal antibody for COMT (1:500 dilution, #ab185954, Abcam, Cambridge, MA), 3, 3′‐diaminobenzidine (DAB) was added as chromogen followed by counterstaining with hematoxylin. Cellular expression levels were analyzed by the intensity of positive cells using Fiji ImageJ [21]. The IHC images of normal prostate tissues were obtained from the Protein Atlas database (http://www.proteinatlas.org) [22].

RNA extraction and quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction

Tissue sections on slides (patient characteristics in Table 2) were scraped and from these and cell lines, total RNA was extracted using the miRNeasy kits (Qiagen, Valencia, CA) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. RNA was then reverse-transcribed into complementary DNA (cDNA) using iScript™ RT Supermix for RT-qPCR (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA). Levels of RNA expression were determined by quantitative real-time PCR analysis with the Applied Biosystems QuantStudio 7 System using TaqMan Universal PCR master mix according to the manufacturer’s protocol (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA). PCR parameters for cycling were as follows: 95°C for 20 seconds, then 40 cycles of 95°C for 3 seconds and 60°C for 30 seconds. All reactions were done in a 10 μL reaction volume in triplicate. The data were analyzed using the delta-delta Ct method to calculate the fold-change. TaqMan probes (ThermoFisher Scientific, CA) and primers for COMT (assay ID: Hs00984972_g1), miR-15a (assay ID:000389), miR-16 (assay ID:000391), miR-195 (assay ID:477957), U48 (assay ID:001006), and GAPDH (assay ID: Hs02758991_g1) were obtained from Life technologies and Thermo Scientific. U48 and GAPDH were used as internal control.

Western blot analysis

Whole cell extracts from cultured cells were prepared using RIPA Lysis and Extraction Buffer containing Halt™ Protease and Phosphatase Inhibitor Cocktail (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Rockford, IL). Protein quantification was done using a BCA protein assay kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Samples were prepared with NuPAGE LDS sample buffer and NuPAGE® Sample Reducing Agent. Total protein (20–35 μg) was loaded onto NuPAGE® Novex 4–12% Bis-Tris Plus Gels with MES SDS Running Buffer with NuPAGE® Antioxidant and separated by XCell SureLock™ Mini-Cell Electrophoresis System (Thermo Fisher Scientific). Protein was transferred to iBlot® 2 Dry Blotting System and immunoblotting were carried out according to standard protocols. Monoclonal antibody against COMT was purchased from Abcam (#ab185954), whereas antibody for CASP3, cleaved CASP3, cleaved BID, XIAP, and cIAP2 were purchased from Cell Signaling Technology (Danvers, MA). Monoclonal antibody against β-Actin (Cell Signaling Technology) and GAPDH (Santa Cruz) were used to confirm equal loading. Protein complexes were visualized with Image Studio™ Software (LI-COR, Lincoln, NE) using the Odyssey® CLx Imaging System (LI-COR). The raw blotting images are available in S1 Fig.

Stable and transient transfections

Stable COMT-expressing DuPro cells were created. Cells were transfected with pCMV6-ENTRY vector expressing the C-terminally Myc and Flag-tagged human COMT cDNA or empty pCMV6-ENTRY vector as a control (OriGene Techologies, Rockville, MD) using FuGENE® HD Transfection Reagent (Promega, Madison, WI) according to the manufacturer’s protocol. Clones were selected using 500 μg/ml of Geneticin® Selective Antibiotic (G418 Sulfate) (Thermo Fisher Scientific). Colonies resistant to G418 appeared within 2 weeks and colonies were picked and then expanded for another 3 weeks to make stable clone stock cells.

DU145 cells on the other hand, underwent transient transfections with COMT expressing plasmid (OriGene). Transfections were performed using FuGENE HD transfection reagent (Roche) according to the manufacturer’s protocol. COMT knockdown was also performed. Three unique 27mer siRNA COMT duplexes (10 nM; OriGene Technologies, #SR319770) were transfected using lipofectamine 2000 transfection reagent in LNCaP cells and compared to control cells. Additionally, for overexpression of miR-195, mimic (25nM; Thermo Fisher Scientific, ID: AM10827) was transfected using JetPrime transfection reagent (Polyplus, Illkirch, France).

Wound-healing assay

Migration ability of cells were measured by wound-healing assay. Cells were plated in 24-well plates containing inserts from CytoSelect Wound-Healing Assays (Cell Biolabs, San Diego CA) and monolayers allowed to form. The width of the initial gap (0 hour) and the residual gap 24 hours after wounding were calculated from photomicrographs taken using a Nikon Eclipse TS100 microscope (Technical Instruments, Burlingame CA). The wound areas and closures were measured using Photoshop Elements 15 (Adobe, San Jose CA).

Apoptosis determination

Apoptosis was analyzed with an annexin V-fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)/propidium iodide (PI) staining system obtained from BD Biosciences (San Diego, CA). Briefly, prostate cells were harvested and resuspended in binding buffer at a concentration of 1 × 106 cells/ml. For each assay, 1 × 105 cells were incubated with annexin V-FITC and PI in the dark for 15 min at room temperature. After adding 400 μl of binding buffer, samples were analyzed using the BD FACSVerse flow cytometer (BD Biosciences, San Jose, CA).

Estrogen metabolite treatment and cell proliferation assay

After plating COMT-expressing and control cells into 96-well plates at a density of 1 × 103 cells per well, growing cells were treated with 4-hydroxyestradiol (Millipore Sigma, St. Louis, MO) diluted in ethanol at concentration of 25 μM. After 24 hours, effects of metabolite on proliferation rates was determined using CellTiter Glo assay (Promega). At the desired time point, the number of viable cells were determined by adding CellTiter Glo Solution reagent to each well and measuring the luminescence by Victor X5 reader (PerkinElmer, Waltham MA). Results were expressed as relative cell number compared to DMSO control.

In vivo tumor growth

All animal care was in accordance with the guidelines and this study was approved by the IACUC (Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee) for experimentation at the San Francisco Veterans Affairs animal facility which is accredited through AAALAS (American Association for Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Science). Animal users completed training programs to handle and work with mice prior to animal experiments. A subcutaneous xenograft mouse model was utilized. DuPro cells (5 x 106) stably transfected with COMT or empty pCMV6-ENTRY vector established above were suspended in 100 μL Matrigel (Corning, Corning, NY) and subcutaneously injected into the backside flank of five-week-old male nude mice (strain BALB/c nu/nu; Charles River Laboratories, Wilmington, MA). Four animals were used per treatment group and tumor growth was examined after 21 days. Tumor volume was calculated on the basis of width (x) and length (y) using the formula: x2y/2, where x<y.

Luciferase assay

Reporter vectors were constructed by ligation of annealed custom oligonucleotides containing the putative target binding sites of S-COMT 3’-UTR into pmiR-GLO reporter vector (Promega). The binding site was searched using TargetScan. 293T cells were transfected with pmiR-GLO vector containing the COMT 3’-UTR sequences (oligo seq) and miR-195 mimic (ID: AM10827) with lipofectamine 2000 reagent. Target site deletion was used as control. Luciferase activity was measured 48 hours after transfection using a Dual-Luciferase Reporter Assay System (Promega). Relative luciferase activity was calculated by normalizing to renilla luminescence.

Statistical analysis

Values are presented as the mean ± standard deviation (SD) based on results obtained from at least three independent experiments. For in vivo studies, results are based on four animals per group. The relationship between variables was analyzed using the non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test, two-tailed Student’s t-test, Dunnett’s test, or one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Overall survival time endpoints were defined from the time of surgery until time of death or last follow-up. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve was used to compute cut-off value for patient’s survival time analysis and log rank test was used to calculate p-values in overall survival time analyses. All analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA) or R [23].

Results

COMT expression in prostate cancer patients and cell lines

Expression levels of COMT were initially evaluated in prostate cancer cases and non-cancerous controls by utilizing the TCGA database (The data is available at ‘http://firebrowse.org’). Analysis of 51 controls and 499 cases show that levels are generally lower in tumors although significance was not achieved (p = 0.2, Fig 1A). However, when evaluated by progression, higher stages (>T3, n = 290) had significantly lower levels compared to T2 (n = 185, p = 0.007, Fig 1B) and higher Gleason score (≥GS4+3; n = 294) showed slightly lower expression than lower Gleason (≤GS3+4; n = 188) although not significant (p = 0.2, Fig 1C). Interestingly when determining survival probability, low expressing patients (n = 171) had significantly reduced survival rates compared to those with high expression (n = 311) (p = 0.0026, Fig 1D). Levels of COMT protein were also lower in prostate cancer compared to BPH as determined by immunohistochemical analysis of clinical specimens (p = 0.004, Fig 1E). Positive COMT expression was observed in luminal cells and basal region in normal and BPH samples (S2 and S3 Figs). Cell lines were then evaluated for expression. As shown in Fig 1F, levels of COMT RNA were reduced in AR negative DU145, DuPro and PC3 cells compared to normal PWR-1E cells (p<0.001) although was higher in AR positive LNCaP cells. Western analyses also showed protein levels to be reduced or minimal in AR negative but not AR positive cells (Fig 1G). These results indicate that non-malignant tissues such as normal and BPH show higher COMT expression level with AR negative prostate cancer cells having reduced COMT levels.

Fig 1. COMT is downregulated in advanced prostate cancer tissues and cell lines.

Fig 1

Analysis of TCGA data show (A) COMT levels to be lower in cancerous (n = 499) versus normal (n = 51) tissues (p = 0.2), (B) COMT levels to be lower in higher stages (T3+T4, n = 290 versus T2, n = 185) of cancer (p = 0.007), and (C) COMT levels to be lower in higher Gleason score group (≥GS4+3, n = 294 versus ≤GS3+4, n = 188) of cancer (p = 0.2) (D) Kaplan-Meier curves show lower levels (n = 171) of COMT to lead to poorer overall survival compared to the group showing higher levels (n = 311) (Log rank test: p = 0.0026). (E) COMT protein by immunohistochemical analysis in clinical specimens. Left: Example of clinical specimen staining. Numbers above images reflect intensity of staining. Right: Staining is lower in specimens of prostate cancer (n = 22) compared to BPH (n = 19). (F-G) COMT expression is downregulated in AR negative prostate cancer cell lines (DU145, DuPro, and PC3) compared to AR positive PWR-1E and LNCaP cells. Cells were grown in culture dishes for 48 hours. (F) Relative mRNA levels of COMT in cell lines as determined by real-time PCR. Expression levels are normalized to PWR-1E. The p-values are based on Dunnett’s multiple comparison test (shown for each comparison) following one-way ANOVA test (p-value shown below graph title). (G) Representative immunoblot displaying COMT protein expression in cell lines. β-actin was used as loading control. The middle bar in the boxplot shows median and lower and higher whiskers shows 10th and 90th percentile, respectively. Data are presented as mean ± SD. The p-values are based on Mann-Whitney U-test in A-C and E.

Effect of COMT on cell growth properties

We observed reduced levels of COMT in DuPro and DU145 cells and tested if COMT overexpression impacts the properties of these cells. DuPro stably expressing COMT were developed and DU145 transiently expressing COMT were utilized and protein levels of COMT in these cells were confirmed to be increased. On the other hand, COMT expression levels were observed to be low or absent in mock and vector controls (Fig 2A). Expression of COMT led to inhibition of migration ability of cells as determined by wound healing assay. Rate of closures compared to control due to COMT were 0.727 for DuPro (p = 0.0003, Fig 2B) and 0.537 for DU145 after 24 hours (p<0.0001, Fig 2B). Also, COMT significantly induced apoptosis after 48 hours as total levels were 3.5% versus 18.0% in DuPro (p = 0.0045) and 6.4% versus 16.4% in DU145 (p = 0.0003) for pCMV versus COMT-expressing cells, respectively (Fig 2C). Additionally, since COMT is capable of reducing oncogenic catechol compounds, we determined COMT effects on cells in the presence of 4-hydroxyestradiol. As shown in Fig 2D, COMT dramatically reduced proliferation of cells by 94% in DuPro (p = 0.0005) and 35% in DU145 (p = 0.0114) after 24 hours. These results thus indicate COMT to play a role in impeding cell progression properties. In contrast, COMT knockdown using siRNAs confirmed that COMT downregulation increased migration capability and decreased cell apoptosis (S4 Fig).

Fig 2. Re-expression and tumor suppressive effect of COMT on cells.

Fig 2

(A) Ectopic expression of COMT. DuPro cells stably transfected and DU145 cells transiently transfected with either COMT or empty vector (pCMV) along with mock were grown for 48 hours and underwent western analyses. β-actin was used as loading control. (B) Cell migration as measured by wound healing assay. CytoSelect Wound Healing assay was used, and closure measured after 24 hours. Left: Representative images of wound healing assay are shown. Right: Migration expressed as relative closure rate of wound normalized to pCMV. (C) COMT expression upregulates apoptosis. Stable COMT-expressing DuPro and transiently COMT-expressing DU145 cells along with vector controls were grown for 72 hours and apoptosis was measured by flow cytometric analyses. Left: Representative quadrant dot plot showing cell population in early (bottom right quadrant) and late (top right quadrant) apoptotic states for each treatment. Right: Total apoptosis %. (D) COMT expression attenuates 4-hydroxyestradiol stimulated proliferation. Stable COMT-expressing DuPro and transient COMT expressing DU145 were treated with 4-hydroxyestradiol at a dosage of 25 μM for 24 hours, and cell proliferation was analyzed by the MTS proliferation assay. Results are normalized to DMSO control. Data are presented as mean ± SD. All p-values are based on paired t-test.

COMT effect on tumor formation in vivo

The effects of COMT overexpression on cells in vitro were corroborated using murine xenograft model by injecting stable COMT-expressing and vector control DuPro cells subcutaneously. In concordance, COMT expression abrogated xenograft tumor formation and this inhibition continued throughout the experimental period of three weeks. In contrast, tumors in pCMV mice were visible by week 1 and growth was markedly enhanced by week 3 as the average tumor volume grew to 457 mm3 in controls whereas in comparison, stable COMT cells grew to only 5.6 mm3 in mice (p<0.0049) (Fig 3). Thus, prostate cancer cell xenograft growth in vivo is repressed due to COMT.

Fig 3. Expression of S-COMT suppresses xenograft growth of cells in vivo.

Fig 3

Four athymic nude mice were injected subcutaneously with stable S-COMT (left flank) or pCMV-transfected (right flank) DuPro cells and growth determined over time. (A) Tumors extracted from mice after 21 days. (B) Tumor size (mm3) over time. Data are presented as mean ± SD. The p-value is based on paired t-test.

COMT affects apoptosis-related genes

Enhancement of apoptosis due to COMT in Fig 2C implies the involvement of pathway genes. CASP3 and BID are known to increase apoptosis whereas XIAP and cIAP2 are known to prevent apoptosis [23]. Expression levels of these genes were thus determined in COMT-expressing DuPro cells. Western analyses show cleaved CASP3 and BID to be upregulated with XIAP and cIAP2 being downregulated due to COMT compared to pCMV control (Fig 4). It is thus apparent that these genes mediate COMT effects on apoptosis in prostate cancer cells.

Fig 4. COMT affects apoptosis related genes in cells.

Fig 4

Stable COMT-expressing and vector control DuPro cells were grown and expression of genes were determined by western analyses. Cleaved CASP3 and BID were observed to be increased whereas XIAP and cIAP2 genes were reduced. β-actin and GAPDH was used as loading control.

COMT regulation by miR-195

Since COMT levels are reduced in prostate cancer as shown in Fig 1, we then evaluated its regulation through miRNA. Bioinformatics databases miRDB, miRmap, miRWalk and TargetScan were utilized and common to these were 9 miRNAs capable of binding COMT (Fig 5A). Of these, five miRNAs (miR-15a, miR-16, miR-195, miR-497, miR-939) were upregulated in cancer compared to normal prostate according to TCGA database (Fig 5B). We validated three of these miRNAs (miR-15a, miR-16, miR-195) in cells by real-time PCR and found miR-195 to be highly expressed in both parental DuPro (p = 0.0008) and DU145 (p = 0.01) compared to normal PWR-1E cells (Fig 5C). miR-497 and miR-939 were excluded since sample medians of these miRNAs showed low RPM (<50) in TCGA. Analysis on clinical specimens also show significantly higher miR-195 expression in prostate cancer compared to BPH tissues (p<0.0001, Fig 5D). Further, regression analysis between COMT and miR-195 in TCGA show a significant R value of -0.16 (p = 0.0005, Fig 5E).

Fig 5. Associations between COMT and miRNA.

Fig 5

(A) Venn diagram consisting of four databases (miRDB, miRmap, miRWalk, TargetScan) indicating 9 possible miRNAs capable of binding COMT gene. (B) Of candidate miRNAs identified by all four databases to bind COMT, five showed oncogenic effect according to TCGA. (C) Of these five, miR-195 is the only miRNA determined to be upregulated in both parental DuPro and DU145 compared to PWR-1E cells. MiR-497 and miR-939 were not analyzed due to low RPM (<50) in TCGA. The p-values are based on Dunnett’s multiple comparison test (shown for each comparison) following one-way ANOVA test (p-value shown below graph title). (D) miR-195 was also upregulated in clinical specimens of prostate cancer (n = 32) compared to BPH (n = 24) as determined by real-time PCR. (E) Spearman nonparametric correlation analysis between COMT versus miR-195 expression in TCGA. The slope shows simple linear regression Data are presented as mean ± SD. The p-values are based on Mann-Whitney U-test in B and D.

We next carried out luciferase reporter assays to determine direct binding between miR-195 and COMT. Reporter vectors consisting of the miR-195 binding site and its deletion on the COMT 3’-UTR were created (Fig 6A). As shown in Fig 6B, in the presence of miR-195 mimic, the reporter vector harboring the miR-195 binding site had reduced activities compared to those with deletion vectors (p = 0.0036). We also overexpressed miR-195 using mimic in PWR-1E, LNCaP and PC3 cells and confirmed miR-195 could decrease COMT expression (Fig 6C). These results thus indicate miR-195 to interact and regulate COMT expression levels in prostate normal epithelial and cancer cells. Additionally, we found higher miR-195 expression levels could relate to poorer overall survival in prostate cancer patients according to TCGA (p = 0.013, Fig 6D) and is consistent with reduced COMT expression levels leading to lower overall survival rate in the same cohort (Fig 1D).

Fig 6. Regulation of COMT by miR-195.

Fig 6

(A) MiR-195 binding site on the COMT gene 3’-UTR were predicted by TargetScan. (B) Luciferase assay show miRNA-195 capable of targeting COMT. Luciferase activity of constructs of COMT sequences consisting of miR-195 binding site or its deletion were compared in the presence of miR-195 mimics. (C) Overexpressing miR-195 with mimic decreased COMT expression in PWR-1E, LNCaP and PC3 cells by western blot. β-actin used as loading control. (D) Overall survival analysis of miR-195 shows significantly poor survival rate in miR-195 high expression group (Log rank test: p = 0.013). Data are presented as mean ± SD. The p-value is based on paired t-test in B.

Discussion

The bioactivation of estrogens into catechol-estrogens such as hydroxy-estrogens through CYPs have been shown to increase proliferation of cells [24,25] and associate with tumors including prostate [9,26]. These forms of estrogen can subsequently lead to the formation of semi-quinones and quinones that are known to react with DNA [27,28]. Damaging reactive oxygen species are also produced in this process and not only do they cause oxidative DNA damage but also promote neoplastic transformation of initiated cells [29]. Further, hydroxyestradiol has been observed to induce CYP1B1-mediated oncogenicity [30], suggesting a feedback loop. Therefore, elimination of catechol-estrogens in cells of the body is important to prevent the carcinogenesis process and the COMT enzyme is responsible for this defense. We observed COMT in the cytoplasm and nucleus of normal and inflamed prostate glandular cells. Nuclear COMT was frequently observed in inflamed prostate epithelial cells in BPH samples, and COMT was also localized in the basal cells. Interestingly in mouse model, basal cells were reported capable of transforming into luminal cells by inflammation and lead the prostate carcinogenesis process [30]. Another report also demonstrated the ability of basal cells to transform into human prostate adenocarcinoma. These transformed cells can arise via phenotypically luminal cancer cells [31]. Thus, nuclear COMT might be induced by excess catechol-estrogens in basal cells and protect from basal cell originated carcinogenesis as well as in luminal cells.

Proper levels of COMT would thus be essential to prevent the damaging effects of catechol-estrogens in the cells of the prostate. This property is supported by the lower levels of COMT observed in prostate cancer compared to normal regions according to TCGA though a trend (p = 0.2; Fig 1A) but significantly compared to BPH in our clinical specimens (p = 0.004; Fig 1E). In fact, categorization based on progression in TCGA show advanced stages to be significantly downregulated for COMT (p = 0.007) and lower expression resulted in poorer overall survival. In agreement with our results, Singh et al [32] observes COMT to be expressed in benign prostate. This trend of expression is also shown in other cancers. In kidney, both tissues and cell lines have much lower COMT levels in cancer compared to normal counterparts [33]. In breast, Singh et al [34] observed cancer cases to have lower expression of COMT RNA compared to control tissue. For ovary, cancer lines had much lower COMT protein expression compared to ovarian surface epithelial cells [35]. Also, lower COMT expression led to reduced survival time and overall survival for patients with pancreatic cancer [36].

In addition to expression levels in tissue, COMT was also observed downregulated in AR negative cell lines and especially DuPro and DU145 which were minimal to undetectable. Thus, these cell lines are ideal to determine functional effects of COMT by gene re-expression, which has never been previously reported. By expressing COMT protein in cells, we observed reduced migration ability and increased apoptosis of these cancer lines. Also, proliferation was decreased when challenged with mutagenic 4-hydroxyestradiol. A similar effect was observed in vivo as COMT-expressing cells inhibited xenograft tumor growth. In concordance, by silencing COMT in LNCaP cells, we observed decreased apoptosis and accelerated migration capability and a recent report by Tolba et al [37] also showed COMT silencing could enhance proliferation of PC3 cells. This tumor suppressive effect of COMT is also shown in other cancers such as pancreatic [36] and colorectal [38]; and in a prior study done in our laboratory, COMT significantly reduced proliferation of renal cancer cells treated with 4-hydroxyestradiol as compared to vector control [33]. These pro-apoptotic and anti-proliferative effects of COMT could therefore contribute to reducing cancer cell growth.

COMT was thus observed to increase apoptosis of cells. This apoptotic activity was associated with a perceived increase in cleaved CASP3 and BID and is further supported by a decrease of anti-apoptotic XIAP and cIAP2. In other cancers, COMT has also been shown to have a pro-apoptotic effect although the genes involved differ. Wu et al [36] found COMT overexpression to cause enhanced apoptosis of gemcitabine-treated pancreatic cancer cells and this was due to enhanced levels of pro-apoptotic Bim and Bax, but reduced anti-apoptotic p-Bad. In 4-hydroxyestradiol stimulated renal cancer cells, COMT caused increased apoptosis along with increased GADD45a levels [33]. Aside from apoptosis-related genes, COMT can play a protective role by affecting other pathway genes such as ER-α, p21cip1, p27kip1, NF-κB (P65) and CYP19A1 in prostate cancer [37], cause a reduction in p-AKT, mutant p53, and cyclin D1 but an increase in p-GSK3-b, PTEN and E-cadherin in pancreatic cancer cells [36], and cause inhibition of p-AKT but increased PTEN, p53, p27, and E-Cadherin in colorectal cancer cells [38].

Lastly, we determined the regulation of COMT in cells. miRNAs are known to inhibit gene expression post-transcriptionally by binding to the 3’UTR of mRNAs [39] and after a search of databases and evaluating several miRNAs, we found miR-195 to be capable of binding to and downregulating COMT. In concordance, miR-195 was observed to be upregulated in prostate cancer compared to both normal according to TCGA, and to BPH in our clinical specimens wherein COMT was downregulated in cancer. These results thus indicate miR-195 to interact and regulate COMT expression levels. Studies on miRNA regulation of COMT is highly limited in cancer and in the only known report, a polymorphism in the 3’UTR region of COMT could significantly reduce the binding of miR-22 in colon cancer cells [40].

Conclusions

In summary, our results are the first to show the COMT gene to trigger cell death in prostate cancer by enhancing apoptosis through its pathway genes. Also, that COMT is regulated by miR-195. We conclude that COMT plays a protective role in prostate cancer cells and thus, could be a potential gene of interest for therapeutic development for this cancer as well as a possible biomarker.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Raw images.

(PDF)

S2 Fig. COMT expression was detected in human normal prostate glandular cells.

(PDF)

S3 Fig. The magnified IHC images in Fig 1D.

(PDF)

S4 Fig. COMT knockdown reduced apoptosis and increased migration in LNCaP cell.

(PDF)

Acknowledgments

We appreciate Dr. Shahana Majid for her support and assistance with this study.

Data Availability

• TCGA PRAD miRNA and RNA sequencing data used in this study are available at the FireBrowse website (http://firebrowse.org). The direct links are below: - miRNA data: http://gdac.broadinstitute.org/runs/stddata__2016_01_28/data/PRAD/20160128/gdac.broadinstitute.org_PRAD.Merge_mirnaseq__illuminahiseq_mirnaseq__bcgsc_ca__Level_3__miR_gene_expression__data.Level_3.2016012800.0.0.tar.gz - mRNA data: http://gdac.broadinstitute.org/runs/stddata__2016_01_28/data/PRAD/20160128/gdac.broadinstitute.org_PRAD.Merge_rnaseqv2__illuminahiseq_rnaseqv2__unc_edu__Level_3__RSEM_genes_normalized__data.Level_3.2016012800.0.0.tar.gz - Clinical data: http://gdac.broadinstitute.org/runs/stddata__2016_01_28/data/PRAD/20160128/gdac.broadinstitute.org_PRAD.Merge_Clinical.Level_1.2016012800.0.0.tar.gz Downloading data from this site constitutes agreement to TCGA data usage policy https://broadinstitute.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/GDAC/pages/844333156/Data+Usage+Policy • COMT IHC data with normal prostate epithelial tissues are available at the Protein Atlas database (http://www.proteinatlas.org). The direct links are below: -COMT IHC data with normal prostate epithelial tissues https://www.proteinatlas.org/ENSG00000093010-COMT/tissue/prostate#.

Funding Statement

YT, I01BX000726, Department of Veterans Affairs. RD, 1K6-BX004473, Department of Veterans Affairs. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer Statistics, 2021. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(1):7–33. Epub 2021/01/13. doi: 10.3322/caac.21654 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Guldberg HC, Marsden CA. Catechol-O-methyl transferase: pharmacological aspects and physiological role. Pharmacol Rev. 1975;27(2):135–206. Epub 1975/06/01. . [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Ellem SJ, Risbridger GP. Aromatase and regulating the estrogen:androgen ratio in the prostate gland. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2010;118(4–5):246–51. Epub 2009/11/10. doi: 10.1016/j.jsbmb.2009.10.015 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Noble RL. The development of prostatic adenocarcinoma in Nb rats following prolonged sex hormone administration. Cancer Res. 1977;37(6):1929–33. . [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Leav I, Ho SM, Ofner P, Merk FB, Kwan PW, Damassa D. Biochemical alterations in sex hormone-induced hyperplasia and dysplasia of the dorsolateral prostates of Noble rats. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1988;80(13):1045–53. doi: 10.1093/jnci/80.13.1045 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Bosland MC, Ford H, Horton L. Induction at high incidence of ductal prostate adenocarcinomas in NBL/Cr and Sprague-Dawley Hsd:SD rats treated with a combination of testosterone and estradiol-17 beta or diethylstilbestrol. Carcinogenesis. 1995;16(6):1311–7. doi: 10.1093/carcin/16.6.1311 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Yuen MT, Leung LK, Wang J, Wong YC, Chan FL. Enhanced induction of prostatic dysplasia and carcinoma in Noble rat model by combination of neonatal estrogen exposure and hormonal treatments at adulthood. Int J Oncol. 2005;27(6):1685–95. . [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Liehr JG. Is estradiol a genotoxic mutagenic carcinogen? Endocr Rev. 2000;21(1):40–54. Epub 2000/03/04. doi: 10.1210/edrv.21.1.0386 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Cavalieri EL, Stack DE, Devanesan PD, Todorovic R, Dwivedy I, Higginbotham S, et al. Molecular origin of cancer: catechol estrogen-3,4-quinones as endogenous tumor initiators. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997;94(20):10937–42. doi: 10.1073/pnas.94.20.10937 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC23537. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Li KM, Todorovic R, Devanesan P, Higginbotham S, Kofeler H, Ramanathan R, et al. Metabolism and DNA binding studies of 4-hydroxyestradiol and estradiol-3,4-quinone in vitro and in female ACI rat mammary gland in vivo. Carcinogenesis. 2004;25(2):289–97. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgg191 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Stack DE, Byun J, Gross ML, Rogan EG, Cavalieri EL. Molecular characteristics of catechol estrogen quinones in reactions with deoxyribonucleosides. Chem Res Toxicol. 1996;9(5):851–9. doi: 10.1021/tx960002q . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Zahid M, Kohli E, Saeed M, Rogan E, Cavalieri E. The greater reactivity of estradiol-3,4-quinone vs estradiol-2,3-quinone with DNA in the formation of depurinating adducts: implications for tumor-initiating activity. Chem Res Toxicol. 2006;19(1):164–72. doi: 10.1021/tx050229y . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Dwivedy I, Devanesan P, Cremonesi P, Rogan E, Cavalieri E. Synthesis and characterization of estrogen 2,3- and 3,4-quinones. Comparison of DNA adducts formed by the quinones versus horseradish peroxidase-activated catechol estrogens. Chem Res Toxicol. 1992;5(6):828–33. doi: 10.1021/tx00030a016 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Saeed M, Zahid M, Gunselman SJ, Rogan E, Cavalieri E. Slow loss of deoxyribose from the N7deoxyguanosine adducts of estradiol-3,4-quinone and hexestrol-3’,4’-quinone. Implications for mutagenic activity. Steroids. 2005;70(1):29–35. doi: 10.1016/j.steroids.2004.09.011 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Saeed M, Rogan E, Fernandez SV, Sheriff F, Russo J, Cavalieri E. Formation of depurinating N3Adenine and N7Guanine adducts by MCF-10F cells cultured in the presence of 4-hydroxyestradiol. Int J Cancer. 2007;120(8):1821–4. doi: 10.1002/ijc.22399 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Muti P, Westerlind K, Wu T, Grimaldi T, De Berry J 3rd, Schunemann H, et al. Urinary estrogen metabolites and prostate cancer: a case-control study in the United States. Cancer Causes Control. 2002;13(10):947–55. doi: 10.1023/a:1021986811425 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Yang L, Gaikwad NW, Meza J, Cavalieri EL, Muti P, Trock B, et al. Novel biomarkers for risk of prostate cancer: results from a case-control study. Prostate. 2009;69(1):41–8. doi: 10.1002/pros.20850 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2588647. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Mannisto PT, Kaakkola S. Catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT): biochemistry, molecular biology, pharmacology, and clinical efficacy of the new selective COMT inhibitors. Pharmacol Rev. 1999;51(4):593–628. . [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Merriam GR, MacLusky NJ, Picard MK, Naftolin F. Comparative properties of the catechol estrogens, I: methylation by catechol-O-methyltransferase and binding to cytosol estrogen receptors. Steroids. 1980;36(1):1–11. doi: 10.1016/0039-128x(80)90062-8 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Gingrich JR, Tucker JA, Walther PJ, Day JW, Poulton SH, Webb KS. Establishment and characterization of a new human prostatic carcinoma cell line (DuPro-1). J Urol. 1991;146(3):915–9. Epub 1991/09/01. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)37960-0 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Crowe AR, Yue W. Semi-quantitative Determination of Protein Expression using Immunohistochemistry Staining and Analysis: An Integrated Protocol. Bio Protoc. 2019;9(24). Epub 2019/12/24. doi: 10.21769/BioProtoc.3465; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6924920. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Uhlen M, Fagerberg L, Hallstrom BM, Lindskog C, Oksvold P, Mardinoglu A, et al. Proteomics. Tissue-based map of the human proteome. Science. 2015;347(6220):1260419. Epub 2015/01/24. doi: 10.1126/science.1260419. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Team RC. R: A language and environment for statistical computing.: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2018. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Chiesa IJ, Castillo LF, Luthy IA. Contribution of alpha2-adrenoceptors to the mitogenic effect of catecholestrogen in human breast cancer MCF-7 cells. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2008;110(1–2):170–5. doi: 10.1016/j.jsbmb.2008.03.035 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Landeros RV, Jobe SO, Aranda-Pino G, Lopez GE, Zheng J, Magness RR. Convergent ERK1/2, p38 and JNK mitogen activated protein kinases (MAPKs) signalling mediate catecholoestradiol-induced proliferation of ovine uterine artery endothelial cells. J Physiol. 2017;595(14):4663–76. doi: 10.1113/JP274119 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5509880. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Cavalieri EL, Devanesan P, Bosland MC, Badawi AF, Rogan EG. Catechol estrogen metabolites and conjugates in different regions of the prostate of Noble rats treated with 4-hydroxyestradiol: implications for estrogen-induced initiation of prostate cancer. Carcinogenesis. 2002;23(2):329–33. doi: 10.1093/carcin/23.2.329 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Liehr JG. Dual role of oestrogens as hormones and pro-carcinogens: tumour initiation by metabolic activation of oestrogens. Eur J Cancer Prev. 1997;6(1):3–10. doi: 10.1097/00008469-199702000-00002 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Thibodeau PA, Paquette B. DNA damage induced by catecholestrogens in the presence of copper (II): generation of reactive oxygen species and enhancement by NADH. Free Radic Biol Med. 1999;27(11–12):1367–77. doi: 10.1016/s0891-5849(99)00183-5 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Park SA, Na HK, Kim EH, Cha YN, Surh YJ. 4-hydroxyestradiol induces anchorage-independent growth of human mammary epithelial cells via activation of IkappaB kinase: potential role of reactive oxygen species. Cancer Res. 2009;69(6):2416–24. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-2177 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Kwon YJ, Baek HS, Ye DJ, Shin S, Kim D, Chun YJ. CYP1B1 Enhances Cell Proliferation and Metastasis through Induction of EMT and Activation of Wnt/beta-Catenin Signaling via Sp1 Upregulation. PLoS One. 2016;11(3):e0151598. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0151598; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4794175. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Stoyanova T, Cooper AR, Drake JM, Liu X, Armstrong AJ, Pienta KJ, et al. Prostate cancer originating in basal cells progresses to adenocarcinoma propagated by luminal-like cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110(50):20111–6. Epub 2013/11/28. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1320565110 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3864278. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Singh PB, Ragavan N, Ashton KM, Basu P, Nadeem SM, Nicholson CM, et al. Quantified gene expression levels for phase I/II metabolizing enzyme and estrogen receptor levels in benign prostate from cohorts designated as high-risk (UK) versus low-risk (India) for adenocarcinoma at this organ site: a preliminary study. Asian J Androl. 2010;12(2):203–14. doi: 10.1038/aja.2009.71 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3739086. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Chang I, Liu J, Majid S, Saini S, Zaman MS, Yamamura S, et al. Catechol-O-methyltransferase-mediated metabolism of 4-hydroxyestradiol inhibits the growth of human renal cancer cells through the apoptotic pathway. Carcinogenesis. 2012;33(2):420–6. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgr294 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Singh S, Chakravarti D, Edney JA, Hollins RR, Johnson PJ, West WW, et al. Relative imbalances in the expression of estrogen-metabolizing enzymes in the breast tissue of women with breast carcinoma. Oncol Rep. 2005;14(4):1091–6. . [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Li HH, Zhao YJ, Li Y, Dai CF, Jobe SO, Yang XS, et al. Estradiol 17beta and its metabolites stimulate cell proliferation and antagonize ascorbic acid-suppressed cell proliferation in human ovarian cancer cells. Reprod Sci. 2014;21(1):102–11. doi: 10.1177/1933719113492211 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3857769. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Wu W, Wu Q, Hong X, Zhou L, Zhang J, You L, et al. Catechol-O-methyltransferase, a new target for pancreatic cancer therapy. Cancer Sci. 2015;106(5):576–83. doi: 10.1111/cas.12648 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4452158. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Tolba MF, Omar HA, Hersi F, Nunes ACF, Noreddin AM. The impact of Catechol-O-methyl transferase knockdown on the cell proliferation of hormone-responsive cancers. Mol Cell Endocrinol. 2019;488:79–88. Epub 2019/03/25. doi: 10.1016/j.mce.2019.03.007 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Wu W, Wu Q, Hong X, Xiong G, Xiao Y, Zhou J, et al. Catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibits colorectal cancer cell proliferation and invasion. Arch Med Res. 2015;46(1):17–23. doi: 10.1016/j.arcmed.2014.12.004 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Fabian MR, Sonenberg N, Filipowicz W. Regulation of mRNA translation and stability by microRNAs. Annu Rev Biochem. 2010;79:351–79. Epub 2010/06/11. doi: 10.1146/annurev-biochem-060308-103103 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Li S, Chen Y, Xie L, Meng Y, Zhu L, Chu H, et al. Sex hormones and genetic variants in hormone metabolic pathways associated with the risk of colorectal cancer. Environ Int. 2020;137:105543. Epub 2020/02/15. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2020.105543. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Zoran Culig

3 Feb 2021

PONE-D-20-40576

Suppressor effect of catechol-O-methyltransferase gene in prostate cancer

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Tanaka,

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 Mar 15 2021 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: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Zoran Culig

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments:

The authors should repeat the key experiments in androgen receptor-positive cells and improve quality of images in the manuscript. They should also clarify whether overexpression of COMT has functional implicatons. 

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

2.) PLOS ONE now requires that authors provide the original uncropped and unadjusted images underlying all blot or gel results reported in a submission’s figures or Supporting Information files. This policy and the journal’s other requirements for blot/gel reporting and figure preparation are described in detail at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-blot-and-gel-reporting-requirements and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-preparing-figures-from-image-files. When you submit your revised manuscript, please ensure that your figures adhere fully to these guidelines and provide the original underlying images for all blot or gel data reported in your submission. See the following link for instructions on providing the original image data: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-original-images-for-blots-and-gels.

In your cover letter, please note whether your blot/gel image data are in Supporting Information or posted at a public data repository, provide the repository URL if relevant, and provide specific details as to which raw blot/gel images, if any, are not available. Email us at plosone@plos.org if you have any questions.

3.) We note that you have stated that you will provide repository information for your data at acceptance. Should your manuscript be accepted for publication, we will hold it until you provide the relevant accession numbers or DOIs necessary to access your data. If you wish to make changes to your Data Availability statement, please describe these changes in your cover letter and we will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide.

4.) Thank you for submitting the above manuscript to PLOS ONE. During our internal evaluation of the manuscript, we found significant text overlap between your submission and the following previously published works, some of which you are an author.

- https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.2315

- https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.9470

We would like to make you aware that copying extracts from previous publications, especially outside the methods section, word-for-word is unacceptable. In addition, the reproduction of text from published reports has implications for the copyright that may apply to the publications.

Please revise the manuscript to rephrase the duplicated text, cite your sources, and provide details as to how the current manuscript advances on previous work. Please note that further consideration is dependent on the submission of a manuscript that addresses these concerns about the overlap in text with published work.

We will carefully review your manuscript upon resubmission, so please ensure that your revision is thorough.

[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: Partly

Reviewer #2: No

**********

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: Yes

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: The manuscript by Hashimoto and colleagues describes suppressive effect of catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) gene in prostate cancer. The TCGA and immunohistochemical analysis showed COMT down-regulation in prostate cancer and cancer cell lines. Transfection of COMT suppressed prostate cancer cell migration and enhanced apoptosis as well as suppressed proliferation in culture in the presence of 4-hydroxyestradiol and in xenograft tumors. Mechanistic analysis discovered regulation of COMT by miR-195. These findings are novel and have potential clinical relevance. However, the authors will need to address following concerns.

1. In Fig. 2A, is the COMT overexpression level physiologically relevant?

2. Does COMT knockdown affect proliferation, migration, and/or apoptosis of prostatic cells?

3. In this study, AR-negative cells were used. However, prostate cancer cells in the clinical specimens are in general AR-positive. The authors should also use AR-positive prostate cancer cells.

4. In Fig. 6B, the authors showed miR-195 suppression of COMT expression via its 3’-UTR using luciferase assay. It will be more convincing to show that miR-195 knockdown and/or overexpression can indeed modulate the endogenous COMT expression.

Reviewer #2: The manuscript by Hashimoto et al explores expression of COMT in prostate cancer and BPH and a further mechanism for silencing of COMT in prostate cancer due to miR-195.

Introduction:

First sentence “…for men during senescence…” - rephrase as “with aging” or “among aging men” or something similar, for clarity.

Materials and Methods:

Include a reference for DuPro cells in the materials and methods as this is not a commonly used line.

Please include IHC assay positive and negative controls (cells or tissues validated via a different means to contain and not contain COMT).

Results:

Figure 1 – it would also be of interest to see COMT analyzed in relation to Gleason grade.

It’s unclear why BPH was used as a comparison to prostate cancer. Benign, normal appearing prostate in cases with prostate cancer would have been more informative, and should be included if possible. The IHC images provided in Figure 1D are not at a high enough power (along with low resolution images) to see what the staining pattern is. It looks like possibly some (or all?) of the staining is basal cell staining which obviously would not be applicable to prostate cancer, but it’s impossible to tell with the images presented. Higher power images should be included. Ideally, IHC images of normal prostate (e.g. normal appearing benign regions from radical prostatectomy) should be included.

If forced expression on COMT triggers apoptosis, this alone could explain the reduced migration and lack of growth in xenograft studies. It’s not really “suppression of tumor growth” so much as triggering of cell death? Please revise the conclusions based on these assays accordingly.

Line 344/345 – change “significantly oncogenic” to upregulated in cancer compared to normal prostate (or something similar, for clarity).

Conclusions (also in abstract) – why would COMT be a “therapeutic target” in prostate cancer if it is absent in prostate cancer?

**********

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: 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.

PLoS One. 2021 Sep 29;16(9):e0253877. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253877.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


23 Apr 2021

Point by point response to reviewer’s comments

Additional Editor Comments: The authors should repeat the key experiments in androgen receptor-positive cells and improve quality of images in the manuscript. They should also clarify whether overexpression of COMT has functional implications.

Response: We evaluated COMT levels in AR+ LNCaP cells and observed positive COMT expression (Figure 1F,G). Since COMT was expressed, we therefore performed COMT knockdown instead and after evaluating functional effects, we observed results that were consistent with COMT overexpression (Figure S2). We also added better quality images of immunohistochemical results (Figure 1E) and provide an expanded region of staining in Figure S1.

Reviewer #1

Comment 1: In Fig. 2A, is the COMT overexpression level physiologically relevant?

Response: We also performed COMT knockdown in LNCaP cells to evaluate physiological relevance, see S2 Figure.

Comment 2: Does COMT knockdown affect proliferation, migration, and/or apoptosis of prostatic cells?

Response: We added new S2 Figure that investigated the impact COMT knockdown has on apoptosis and migration of LNCaP cells.

Comment 3: In this study, AR-negative cells were used. However, prostate cancer cells in the clinical specimens are in general AR-positive. The authors should also use AR-positive prostate cancer cells.

Response: We have measured COMT levels in AR+ PCa cells (LNCaP) and they showed positive COMT expression. For this reason, we could not perform overexpression using AR+ cells. Thus in these LNCaP cells, we now show effects of COMT silencing on functional effects in S2 Figure.

Comment 4: In Fig. 6B, the authors showed miR-195 suppression of COMT expression via its 3’-UTR using luciferase assay. It will be more convincing to show that miR-195 knockdown and/or overexpression can indeed modulate the endogenous COMT expression.

Response: We performed miR-195 overexpression by using miR-195 mimic in PWR1E, LNCaP and PC3 cells and confirmed that miR-195 mimic could decrease COMT expression, see Figure 6C.

Reviewer #2

Comment 1: First sentence “…for men during senescence…” - rephrase as “with aging” or “among aging men” or something similar, for clarity.

Response: We thank this comment. We edited lines 44-49 since the editorial office also requested some modification on these sentences.

Comment 2: Include a reference for DuPro cells in the materials and methods as this is not a commonly used line.

Response: A new reference entitled, “Establishment and characterization of a new human prostatic carcinoma cell line (DuPro-1)”, was added as ref. #20 in this version. See line 103.

Comment 3: Please include IHC assay positive and negative controls (cells or tissues validated via a different means to contain and not contain COMT).

Response: Thank you very much for pointing this out. We did not clearly mention but we used same antibody (Abcam, #ab185954) for western blotting and IHC. Thus, each negative and positive control would be DU145 and PWR1E in Fig 1G. The detailed product information was added in lines 120 and 150 to reconcile the confusion. Also, I would like to point out that picture #1 in Fig 1E was replaced with the sample that shows the highest COMT expression level in BPH samples. This picture #1 is an example of positive COMT staining with a score value of 38.6 whereas picture #4 is an example of negative staining with a score value of 0. We performed IHC because detecting protein is informative whereas measuring longer mRNAs are challenging using FFPE samples.

Comment 4: Figure 1 – it would also be of interest to see COMT analyzed in relation to Gleason grade.

Response: We added a new boxplot in Fig 1C. We divided into ≤GS3+4 versus ≥GS4+3 which gave a more even n size using TCGA PRAD samples. We found that COMT expression levels are slightly reduced in higher GS compared to lower GS group.

Comment 5: It’s unclear why BPH was used as a comparison to prostate cancer. Benign, normal appearing prostate in cases with prostate cancer would have been more informative, and should be included if possible. The IHC images provided in Figure 1D are not at a high enough power (along with low resolution images) to see what the staining pattern is. It looks like possibly some (or all?) of the staining is basal cell staining which obviously would not be applicable to prostate cancer, but it’s impossible to tell with the images presented. Higher power images should be included. Ideally, IHC images of normal prostate (e.g. normal appearing benign regions from radical prostatectomy) should be included.

Response: As per reviewer’s comment, we replaced images with higher resolution images and observed COMT staining in luminal cells and basal region. and rephrased the sentence (line 239). Also, magnified images are included in Figure S1. Since the merged PDF file is using lower resolution, please click the link “Click here to access/download;Figure;FigX.tif” at the corner of figure page and the original higher resolution files will appear. Unfortunately, normal region FFPE samples were not available and these are the pictures that we have.

Comment 6: If forced expression on COMT triggers apoptosis, this alone could explain the reduced migration and lack of growth in xenograft studies. It’s not really “suppression of tumor growth” so much as triggering of cell death? Please revise the conclusions based on these assays accordingly.

Response: Thank you very much for this comment. We modified sentences, see line 430.

Comment 7: Line 344/345 – change “significantly oncogenic” to upregulated in cancer compared to normal prostate (or something similar, for clarity).

Response: We replace this phrase along with reviewer’s comment. See line 333.

Comment 7: Conclusions (also in abstract) – why would COMT be a “therapeutic target” in prostate cancer if it is absent in prostate cancer?

Response: Appreciated for pointing this error out. We removed “target” and replace with possible gene for therapeutic development. See line 41 and 432.

Attachment

Submitted filename: response.docx

Decision Letter 1

Zoran Culig

16 Jun 2021

PONE-D-20-40576R1

Suppressor effect of catechol-O-methyltransferase gene in prostate cancer

PLOS ONEPlease ensure that your decision is justified on PLOS ONE’s publication criteria and not, for example, on novelty or perceived impact.

For Lab, Study and Registered Report Protocols: These article types are not expected to include results but may include pilot data. 

=======================

Dear Dr. Tanaka,

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.

==============================

​

=======The authors should pay attention to images as stated in one of our reviews. Otherwise, the paper contains several improvements. 

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jul 31 2021 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: http://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,

Zoran Culig

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

[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: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: (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: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #2: 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

Reviewer #2: 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 authors have addressed previous critiques adequately and provided additional data. The authors have improved the manuscript in the revision.

Reviewer #2: The response to this reviewer's comments are very much appreciated however there is one critical point that has not been adequately addressed. The IHC images shown in Fig. 1E and S1 (which is labeled as S2 in the figure) are much clearer (thank you) but appear to demonstrate that COMT may be limited to prostate atrophy and basal cells and is completely absent in normal luminal prostate epithelium and prostate cancer. The cancer region magnified in Fig S1 does not demonstrate any cancer cell staining. The authors need to provide IHC evidence that COMT is actually expressed in normal appearing luminal epithelium and (presumably to a lesser extent) in prostate cancer cells if that is indeed the case as much of the premise of this manuscript is based on this.

**********

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

Reviewer #2: 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.

PLoS One. 2021 Sep 29;16(9):e0253877. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253877.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1


9 Jul 2021

Reviewer #2:

COMMENT: The response to this reviewer's comments are very much appreciated however there is one critical point that has not been adequately addressed. The IHC images shown in Fig. 1E and S1 (which is labeled as S2 in the figure) are much clearer (thank you) but appear to demonstrate that COMT may be limited to prostate atrophy and basal cells and is completely absent in normal luminal prostate epithelium and prostate cancer. The cancer region magnified in Fig S1 does not demonstrate any cancer cell staining. The authors need to provide IHC evidence that COMT is actually expressed in normal appearing luminal epithelium and (presumably to a lesser extent) in prostate cancer cells if that is indeed the case as much of the premise of this manuscript is based on this.

RESPONSE: Thank you very much for your comment. As mentioned before, we have only samples donated from patients who went through radical prostatectomy. Thus, we could not obtain the normal tissue samples. Instead, we provided the link and a picture from the database Human Protein Atlas that displays human normal prostate tissues stained with COMT antibodies. COMT expression was detected in the cytoplasm and nucleus of glandular cells (luminal and basal cells). We now add arrows in Figure S1 which point to COMT-positivity in luminal cells, as seen in tissues in Protein Atlas. In the Discussion section, we discuss this matter and also add references that demonstrate basal cell transformation to be involved in prostate carcinogenesis (lines 385-393).

Attachment

Submitted filename: comment2 - final.docx

Decision Letter 2

Zoran Culig

2 Aug 2021

Suppressor effect of catechol-O-methyltransferase gene in prostate cancer

PONE-D-20-40576R2

Dear Dr. Tanaka,

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,

Zoran Culig

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Zoran Culig

20 Sep 2021

PONE-D-20-40576R2

Suppressor effect of catechol-O-methyltransferase gene in prostate cancer

Dear Dr. Tanaka:

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. Zoran Culig

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 Fig. Raw images.

    (PDF)

    S2 Fig. COMT expression was detected in human normal prostate glandular cells.

    (PDF)

    S3 Fig. The magnified IHC images in Fig 1D.

    (PDF)

    S4 Fig. COMT knockdown reduced apoptosis and increased migration in LNCaP cell.

    (PDF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: response.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: comment2 - final.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    • TCGA PRAD miRNA and RNA sequencing data used in this study are available at the FireBrowse website (http://firebrowse.org). The direct links are below: - miRNA data: http://gdac.broadinstitute.org/runs/stddata__2016_01_28/data/PRAD/20160128/gdac.broadinstitute.org_PRAD.Merge_mirnaseq__illuminahiseq_mirnaseq__bcgsc_ca__Level_3__miR_gene_expression__data.Level_3.2016012800.0.0.tar.gz - mRNA data: http://gdac.broadinstitute.org/runs/stddata__2016_01_28/data/PRAD/20160128/gdac.broadinstitute.org_PRAD.Merge_rnaseqv2__illuminahiseq_rnaseqv2__unc_edu__Level_3__RSEM_genes_normalized__data.Level_3.2016012800.0.0.tar.gz - Clinical data: http://gdac.broadinstitute.org/runs/stddata__2016_01_28/data/PRAD/20160128/gdac.broadinstitute.org_PRAD.Merge_Clinical.Level_1.2016012800.0.0.tar.gz Downloading data from this site constitutes agreement to TCGA data usage policy https://broadinstitute.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/GDAC/pages/844333156/Data+Usage+Policy • COMT IHC data with normal prostate epithelial tissues are available at the Protein Atlas database (http://www.proteinatlas.org). The direct links are below: -COMT IHC data with normal prostate epithelial tissues https://www.proteinatlas.org/ENSG00000093010-COMT/tissue/prostate#.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES