Skip to main content
Download PDF
  • Research Note
  • Open access
  • Published:

Bacterial endotoxin lipopolysaccharides regulate gene expression in human colon cancer cells

BMC Research Notes volume 16, Article number: 216 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Objective

Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) is a major cell wall component of gram-negative bacteria. Colon bacteria contribute to LPS which promotes colon cancer metastasis. The objective of this study was to survey the effect of LPS on cell viability and gene expression of 55 molecular targets in human colon cancer cells.

Results

LPS did not affect the viability of COLO 225 cells under the culture conditions but affected the expression of a number of genes important in inflammatory responses and cancer development. LPS increased TTP family, GLUT family and DGAT1 mRNA levels but decreased DGAT2a and DGAT2b expression in the human colon cancer cells. LPS also increased COX2, CXCL1, ELK1, ICAM1, TNFSF10 and ZFAND5 but decreased BCL2L1, CYP19A1 and E2F1 mRNA levels in the colon cancer cells. These data suggest that LPS has profound effects on gene expression in human colon cancer cells.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Colon cancer is one of the deadliest diseases in the World. The risk of developing colorectal cancer is approximately 4.0% for men and women in 2021 during the lifetime (https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/colon-rectal-cancer/about/key-statistics.html). It is urgently needed to fully understand the mechanism of developing colon cancer and explore ways to ease the burden of the healthcare crisis.

Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) is a major cell wall component of gram-negative bacteria. Intact LPS is made up of three structural components [1]: a hydrophobic lipid section; a hydrophilic core polysaccharide chain, and a repeating hydrophilic O-antigenic oligosaccharide side chain. LPS is a heat-stable endotoxin which normally protects gram-negative bacteria against bile salts and lipophilic antibiotics.

LPS was proposed to have antitumor effect in several experimental models [2]. A number of studies explored the effect of LPS on gene expression in colon cancer cells, but they were focused on a few targets in the reported research. LPS induced TGFβ and HGF production [3], promoted NFkB (NFkappaB) activation [4] and increased the migratory capacity [5] in colon cancer cells.

The objective of this study was to survey the effect of LPS on cell viability and gene expression of 55 molecular targets in human colon cancer cells. The 55 molecular targets belong to several important pathways, whose expression is affected by the plant toxin gossypol in cancer cells [6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14] and macrophages [15, 16] or regulated by ZFP36/TTP in tumor cells [17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25] and macrophages [26, 27], as well as cinnamon polyphenol extract [28, 29] (Table 1). The results showed that LPS had minimal effect on cell viability but had a profound effect on gene expression at the mRNA levels in the human colon cancer cells.

Table 1 Basal mRNA level, reference mRNA and LPS effects on gene expression
Full size table

Main text

Methods

Human colon cancer cells (COLO 205) were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium (Gibco) containing 10% (v:v) fetal bovine serum, 0.1 million units/L penicillin, 100 mg/L streptomycin, and 2 mmol/L l-glutamine at 37 °C with 5% CO2. Cancer cells (0.5 mL) were subcultured at 1 × 105 cells/mL density and treated for 2 and 24 h with 0–1000 ng/mL of LPS extracted from E. coli serotype K235 and purified by gel filtration (Sigma, St. Louis. MO) (“0” treatment represents the control with 1% DMSO in all treatments). Cell cytotoxicity was determined by spectrophotometer at A570 nm using the MTT based-In Vitro Toxicology Assay Kit (Sigma) [30].

The effect of LPS on gene expression was evaluated by quantitative real-time PCR analysis (qPCR). Fifty-five genes were selected for qPCR analysis (Table 1). Human colon cancer cells in triplicate were treated with LPS for 8 h. RNA isolation and cDNA synthesis were performed as described [31]. The SYBR Green qPCR assays were described previously [32, 33]. BCL2 mRNA was selected as the internal reference based on our previously analysis [14] and date presented in the “Results” section. The 2−ΔCT and 2−ΔΔCT method of relative quantification was used to determine the fold change in expression [34]. The data represent the mean and standard deviation (the number of independent qPCR data ‘n’ is indicted in the tables and figure legends).

Results

Effect of LPS on cell viability

MTT method assessed cell cytotoxicity of human colon cancer cells (COLO 225) after the cells were treated with up to 1000 ng/mL of LPS for 2 and 24 h. MTT assay did not show significant effect of LPS on the viability of the human colon cancer cells under the culture conditions (Data not shown).

Basal expression level

To provide a basis for gene expression comparison in the colon cancer cells, the relative mRNA levels of 55 genes were estimated by SYBR Green qPCR assay. The qPCR assay showed that the cycle of threshold (CT) of BCL2 mRNA was 29.68 ± 1.02 (mean ± standard deviation, n = 18, means the calculation was performed from 18 independent qPCR data) (Table 1). GAPDH and RPL32 mRNA levels were the most abundant with 29- and 34-fold of BCL2 mRNA, respectively. INOS mRNA was undetectable. AHRR1, COX1, CYCLIND1, GLUT4, ICAM1, IL10, IL12, RAB24, VEGF and ZFP36L2 mRNA levels were detected with less than 5% of BCL2 mRNA in the colon cancer cells (Table 1).

Selection of reference mRNA

The ideal reference gene for qPCR assay is stably expressed under the experimental conditions. This can be estimated by the standard deviations among the treatments. The less of standard deviation of CT among the LPS treatments indicates the more stable expression of the gene. The CT value of BCL2 mRNA was 29.02 ± 1.16 (mean ± standard deviation, n = 24), one of the least varied mRNAs (Table 1). GAPDH and RPL32 mRNAs are widely used as references for qPCR assays in other mammalian cells such as adipocytes and macrophages [28, 29, 35, 36], but GAPDH and RPL32 mRNA levels had much larger standard deviations (ΔCT was 3.15 and 3.10, respectively) and the most abundantly expressed with 15.5- and 16.4-fold of BCL2 mRNA, respectively in the human colon cancer cells (Table 1). The large standard deviations and high expression levels of GAPDH and RPL32 mRNAs made them not good internal references for qPCR assays in the human colon cancer cells. BCL2 was among the least regulated genes by LPS and therefore suitable as the internal reference for the qPCR analyses.

Effect of LPS on overall gene expression

To provide a general idea how these genes were expressed in the cultured colon cancer cells with or without LPS treatment, the pooled qPCR data were analyzed using BCL2 mRNA as the internal reference and DMSO treatment as the sample control. LPS upregulated the expression of three mRNAs with at least twofold of the control but decreased the expression of 16 mRNAs with less than 50% of the control. The up-regulated 3 mRNAs were CYCLIND1, CYP19A1 and IL12 (Table 1). The down-regulated 17 mRNAs were AHRR1, CLAUDIN1, COX1, COX2, CXCL1, DGAT1, DGAT2a, FAS, GAPDH, GLUT1, GLUT4, ICAM1, INSR, NFKB, RAB24 and ZFP36L2 (Table 1). However, it is worth mentioning that the expression patterns based on pooled data from various concentrations may not completely in agreement with those of the detailed analysis of pair-wised comparison between the treatment and DMSO control as detailed below.

Effect of LPS on gossypol-reported gene expression

Several genes were shown previously to be regulated by plant toxin gossypol in cancer cells and macrophages. Here, we analyzed the expression of the same group of genes including BNIP3, CYP19A1, FAS, HuA, P53, PPARR and TNFSF10 genes under various concentrations of LPS in the colon cancer cell line using BCL2 as the internal reference gene [31]. In general, this group of genes were expressed lower than BCL2 except BINP3 and TNFSF10 (Table 1). LPS increased mRNA levels of P53, PPARR and TNFSF10 genes but decreased that of CYP19A1 gene (Fig. 1A). The effects of bacterial endotoxin LPS on the expression of this group of genes were different from those of the plant toxin gossypol which inhibited the expression of all these genes except PPARR gene to a large extent in the same human colon cancer cells [31].

Fig. 1
figure 1

Effect of LPS on the expression of gossypol-regulated genes as well as DGAT and GLUT family genes

Full size image

Effect of LPS on DGAT gene expression

Diacylglycerol acyltransferases (DGATs) catalyze the rate-limiting step of triacylglycerol biosynthesis by esterifying sn-1,2-diacylglycerol with a long-chain fatty acyl-CoA. DGAT2 mRNA is the major DGAT mRNA in mouse adipocytes and macrophages [33, 37], but DGAT1 mRNA was the major form in the human colon cancer cells (Table 1). LPS treatment under higher concentration increased DGAT1 mRNA levels but decreased DGAT2a and DGAT2b expression in the human colon cancer cells (Fig. 1B).

Effect of LPS on GLUT gene expression

Glucose transporter (GLUT) family proteins are responsible for glucose uptake in mammalian cells. GLUT1 mRNA was the major form of GLUT mRNAs but GLUT4 mRNA was barely detected in the colon cancer cells (Table 1). LPS treatment significantly increased GLUT2 and GLUT3 mRNA levels but only high concentration of LPS at 1000 ng/mL increased GLUT1 mRNA level (Fig. 1C).

Effect of LPS on TTP and TTP-mediated gene expression

Tristetraprolin (TTP/ZFP36) family proteins control the mRNA stability of some cytokines [38]. qPCR showed that TTP and ZFP36L1 genes were expressed in similar levels but ZFP36L2 mRNA was barely detectable in the colon cancer cells (Table 1). ZFP36, ZFP36L1 and ZFP36L2 mRNA levels were generally increased in the colon cancer cells by high concentration of LPS treatment (Fig. 2A).

Fig. 2
figure 2

Effect of LPS on TTP and IL, proinflammatory and other family gene expression

Full size image

Effect of LPS on proinflammatory gene expression

TTP family proteins down-regulate the stability of several proinflammatory cytokine and enzyme mRNAs including those coding for tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα) [39], granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor/colony-stimulating factor 2 (GM-CSF/CSF2) [40] and cyclooxygenase 2/prostaglandin-endoperoxide synthase 2 (COX2/PTGS2) [24]. qPCR showed that all the tested proinflammatory mRNAs except TNFSF10 mRNA were expressed much lower than that of TTP in the colon cancer cells (Table 1). LPS increased COX2 and TNFSF10 mRNA levels but did not exhibit significant effect on HuA, LEPTIN and TNF mRNA levels in the human colon cancer cells (Fig. 2B). COX1 and VEGF mRNA levels were too low to be reliable (Table 1).

Effect of LPS on IL gene expression

TTP family proteins also regulate the stability of several interleukin (IL) mRNAs coding for IL2 [41], IL6 [42], IL8 [43], IL10 [44], IL12 [45], IL16 [23] and IL17 [46]. SYBR Green qPCR showed that IL10 and IL12 mRNAs were barely expressed and IL2 mRNA was low, whereas the other ILs were expressed in similar levels to TTP, which were several fold higher than IL2 mRNA in the human colon cancer cells (Table 1). The qPCR assays showed that LPS did not have significant effect on IL mRNA levels in the colon cancer cells (Fig. 2C).

Effect of LPS on TTP-targeted other gene expression

A number of other TTP-mediated mRNAs have been reported in the literature. The basal levels of some mRNAs were higher than that of TTP mRNA (BCL2L1, CSNK2A1, HIF1a and ZFAND5) but the others were lower than that of TTP mRNA (AHRR1, CXCL1, E2F1, ELK1, HMOX1 and ICAM1) (Table 1). qPCR showed that LPS increased CXCL1, ELK1, ICAM1 and ZFAND5 mRNA levels, but decreased BCL2L1 and E2F1 mRNA levels in the colon cancer cells (Fig. 2D).

Discussion

Colon bacteria contribute to a large quantity of LPS which could promote colon cancer metastasis. In this study, we surveyed the effect of LPS on cell viability and expression of 55 genes at the mRNA levels in human colon cancer cells. The data confirmed that BCL2 was the most stable mRNA among the 55 mRNAs and suitable as the reference mRNA for qPCR analyses in human colon cancer cells [31]. We observed that LPS did not affect the viability of the cells but affected the expression of a number of genes important in inflammatory responses and cancer development under the culture conditions.

The following findings are worthy of discussion. (1) High concentration of LPS increased TTP family gene expression in the human colon cancer cells, in agreement with the previous results using mouse macrophages [29, 47]. (2) LPS increased GLUT1, GLUT2 and GLUT3 mRNA levels in the human colon cancer cells, suggesting that LPS maybe able to increase glucose transport into the cancer cells since GLUT family proteins are responsible for glucose uptake in mammalian cells [27, 33]. (3) LPS treatment under higher concentration increased DGAT1 mRNA levels (the major form of DGATs) but decreased DGAT2a and DGAT2b expression in the human colon cancer cells, suggesting that LPS has limited effect on triacylglycerol biosynthesis in the colon cancer cells. (4) LPS increased COX2 mRNA levels in this study, in contrast to a previous study [48], which might be due to the cell type (COLO 225 vs. Coco-2) and/or detection methods (qPCR vs. western blot) used in the two studies. 5) LPS did not show any significant effect on HIF1a gene expression in COLO 225 cells, similar to those using MC-38 mouse colon cancer cells [49]. 6) LPS did not have significant effect on IL gene expression in this study, similar to those showing that LPS does not increase IL6, IL8 and IL15 expression in two human colon cancer cell lines [3], but differ from two reports about LPS effect on IL6 and IL8 mRNA levels in HT-29 cells [50, 51].

Limitations

A few limitations of this study are worthy of mentioning. First, the data were generated from one colon cancer cell line (COLO 225). It could be valuable to expand the research with other cancer cell lines. Second, the dosage effect of LPS on mRNA levels was not strong and the standard deviations were large in some assays probably due to extremely sensitive qPCR assays. Third, it could be great to confirm mRNA data at the protein level. Finally, there is no functional analysis of LPS on intermediate steps between mRNA changes and cell viability. It is author’s aim to present initial observations rather than in-depth study in this manuscript. Hopefully, more detailed studies could be performed when more resources are available for this type of study.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets generated during the current study are available in the NIH Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) Database, accession number GSE200980 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE200980. Materials are available from the author upon request.

References

  1. Rietschel ET, Kirikae T, Schade FU, Mamat U, Schmidt G, Loppnow H, Ulmer AJ, Zähringer U, Seydel U, Di Padova F, et al. Bacterial endotoxin: molecular relationships of structure to activity and function. FASEB J. 1994;8(2):217–25.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lejeune P, Reisser D, Onier N, Lagadec P, Lindley I, Jeannin JF. Interleukin-8 has antitumor effects in the rat which are not associated with polymorphonuclear leukocyte cytotoxicity. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 1994;38(3):167–70.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Yoshioka T, Morimoto Y, Iwagaki H, Itoh H, Saito S, Kobayashi N, Yagi T, Tanaka N. Bacterial lipopolysaccharide induces transforming growth factor beta and hepatocyte growth factor through toll-like receptor 2 in cultured human colon cancer cells. J Int Med Res. 2001;29(5):409–20.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Ikebe M, Kitaura Y, Nakamura M, Tanaka H, Yamasaki A, Nagai S, Wada J, Yanai K, Koga K, Sato N, et al. Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) increases the invasive ability of pancreatic cancer cells through the TLR4/MyD88 signaling pathway. J Surg Oncol. 2009;100(8):725–31.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Liu WT, Jing YY, Yan F, Han ZP, Lai FB, Zeng JX, Yu GF, Fan QM, Li R, Zhao QD, et al. LPS-induced CXCR4-dependent migratory properties and a mesenchymal-like phenotype of colorectal cancer cells. Cell Adh Migr. 2017;11(1):13–23.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Yuan Y, Tang AJ, Castoreno AB, Kuo SY, Wang Q, Kuballa P, Xavier R, Shamji AF, Schreiber SL, Wagner BK. Gossypol and an HMT G9a inhibitor act in synergy to induce cell death in pancreatic cancer cells. Cell Death Dis. 2013;4: e690.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Barba-Barajas M, Hernandez-Flores G, Lerma-Diaz JM, Ortiz-Lazareno PC, Dominguez-Rodriguez JR, de Barba-Barajas LCR, Jave-Suarez LF, Aguilar-Lemarroy AC, Guevara-Barraza MG, et al. Gossypol induced apoptosis of polymorphonuclear leukocytes and monocytes: involvement of mitochondrial pathway and reactive oxygen species. Immunopharmacol Immunotoxicol. 2009;31(2):320–30.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Chang JS, Hsu YL, Kuo PL, Chiang LC, Lin CC. Upregulation of Fas/Fas ligand-mediated apoptosis by gossypol in an immortalized human alveolar lung cancer cell line. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 2004;31(10):716–22.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Dong Y, Mao B, Li L, Guan H, Su Y, Li X, Lian Q, Huang P, Ge RS. Gossypol enantiomers potently inhibit human placental 3beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase 1 and aromatase activities. Fitoterapia. 2015;109:132–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Huang YW, Wang LS, Chang HL, Ye W, Dowd MK, Wan PJ, Lin YC. Molecular mechanisms of (-)-gossypol-induced apoptosis in human prostate cancer cells. Anticancer Res. 2006;26(3A):1925–33.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kitada S, Kress CL, Krajewska M, Jia L, Pellecchia M, Reed JC. Bcl-2 antagonist apogossypol (NSC736630) displays single-agent activity in Bcl-2-transgenic mice and has superior efficacy with less toxicity compared with gossypol (NSC19048). Blood. 2008;111(6):3211–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ligueros M, Jeoung D, Tang B, Hochhauser D, Reidenberg MM, Sonenberg M. Gossypol inhibition of mitosis, cyclin D1 and Rb protein in human mammary cancer cells and cyclin-D1 transfected human fibrosarcoma cells. BrJCancer. 1997;76(1):21–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Yeow WS, Baras A, Chua A, Nguyen DM, Sehgal SS, Schrump DS, Nguyen DM. Gossypol, a phytochemical with BH3-mimetic property, sensitizes cultured thoracic cancer cells to Apo2 ligand/tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006;132(6):1356–62.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Cao H, Sethumadhavan K. Identification of Bcl2 as a stably expressed qPCR reference gene for human colon cancer cells treated with cottonseed-derived gossypol and bioactive extracts and bacteria-derived lipopolysaccharides. Molecules. 2022;27(21):7560.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Cao H, Sethumadhavan K. Gossypol but not cottonseed extracts or lipopolysaccharides stimulates HuR gene expression in mouse cells. J Funct Foods. 2019;59:25–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Cao H, Sethumadhavan K. Plant polyphenol gossypol induced cell death and its association with gene expression in mouse macrophages. Biomolecules. 2023;13(4):624.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Essafi-Benkhadir K, Onesto C, Stebe E, Moroni C, Pages G. Tristetraprolin inhibits ras-dependent tumor vascularization by inducing VEGF mRNA degradation. Mol Biol Cell. 2007;18(11):4648–58.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Florkowska M, Tymoszuk P, Balwierz A, Skucha A, Kochan J, Wawro M, Stalinska K, Kasza A. EGF activates TTP expression by activation of ELK-1 and EGR-1 transcription factors. BMC MolBiol. 2012;13:8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Kim HK, Kim CW, Vo MT, Lee HH, Lee JY, Yoon NA, Lee CY, Moon CH, Min YJ, Park JW, et al. Expression of proviral integration site for Moloney murine leukemia virus 1 (Pim-1) is post-transcriptionally regulated by tristetraprolin in cancer cells. JBiolChem. 2012;287(34):28770–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Lee HH, Lee SR, Leem SH. Tristetraprolin regulates prostate cancer cell growth through suppression of E2F1. J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2014;24(2):287–94.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Lee HH, Kim WT, Kim DH, Park JW, Kang TH, Chung JW, Leem SH. Tristetraprolin suppresses AHRR expression through mRNA destabilization. FEBS Lett. 2013;587(10):1518–23.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Lee WH, Lee HH, Vo MT, Kim HJ, Ko MS, Im YC, Min YJ, Lee BJ, Cho WJ, Park JW. Casein kinase 2 regulates the mRNA-destabilizing activity of tristetraprolin. J Biol Chem. 2011;286(24):21577–87.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Milke L, Schulz K, Weigert A, Sha W, Schmid T, Brune B. Depletion of tristetraprolin in breast cancer cells increases interleukin-16 expression and promotes tumor infiltration with monocytes/macrophages. Carcinogenesis. 2013;34(4):850–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Sawaoka H, Dixon DA, Oates JA, Boutaud O. Tristetraprolin binds to the 3’-untranslated region of cyclooxygenase-2 mRNA. A polyadenylation variant in a cancer cell line lacks the binding site. J Biol Chem. 2003;278(16):13928–35.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Sharma A, Bhat AA, Krishnan M, Singh AB, Dhawan P. Trichostatin-A modulates claudin-1 mRNA stability through the modulation of Hu antigen R and tristetraprolin in colon cancer cells. Carcinogenesis. 2013;34(11):2610–21.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Cao H, Polansky MM, Anderson RA. Cinnamon extract and polyphenols affect the expression of tristetraprolin, insulin receptor, and glucose transporter 4 in mouse 3T3-L1 adipocytes. Arch Biochem Biophys. 2007;459(2):214–22.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Cao H, Urban JF Jr, Anderson RA. Cinnamon polyphenol extract affects immune responses by regulating anti- and proinflammatory and glucose transporter gene expression in mouse macrophages. J Nutr. 2008;138(5):833–40.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Cao H, Sethumadhavan K, Li K, Boue SM, Anderson RA. Cinnamon polyphenol extract and insulin regulate diacylglycerol acyltransferase gene expression in mouse adipocytes and macrophages. Plant Foods Hum Nutr. 2019;74(1):115–21.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Cao H, Urban JF Jr, Anderson RA. Cinnamon polyphenol extract affects immune responses by regulating anti- and proinflammatory and glucose transporter gene expression in mouse macrophages. J Nutr. 2008;138(5):833–40.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Cao H, Sethumadhavan K, Bland JM. Isolation of cottonseed extracts that affect human cancer cell growth. SciRep. 2018;8(1):10458.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Cao H, Sethumadhavan K, Cao F, Wang TTY. Gossypol decreased cell viability and down-regulated the expression of a number of genes in human colon cancer cells. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):5922.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Cao H, Shockey JM. Comparison of TaqMan and SYBR Green qPCR methods for quantitative gene expression in tung tree tissues. J Agric Food Chem. 2012;60(50):12296–303.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Cao H, Cao F, Roussel AM, Anderson RA. Quantitative PCR for glucose transporter and tristetraprolin family gene expression in cultured mouse adipocytes and macrophages. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Anim. 2013;49(10):759–70.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Livak KJ, Schmittgen TD. Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2(-Delta Delta C(T)) method. Methods. 2001;25(4):402–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Cao H, Graves DJ, Anderson RA. Cinnamon extract regulates glucose transporter and insulin-signaling gene expression in mouse adipocytes. Phytomedicine. 2010;17(13):1027–32.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Cao H, Urban JF Jr, Anderson RA. Insulin increases tristetraprolin and decreases VEGF gene expression in mouse 3T3-L1 adipocytes. Obesity. 2008;16(6):1208–18.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Cao H. Identification of the major diacylglycerol acyltransferase mRNA in mouse adipocytes and macrophages. BMC Biochem. 2018;19(11):1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Blackshear PJ. Tristetraprolin and other CCCH tandem zinc-finger proteins in the regulation of mRNA turnover. Biochem Soc Trans. 2002;30(6):945–52.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Carballo E, Lai WS, Blackshear PJ. Feedback inhibition of macrophage tumor necrosis factor-alpha production by tristetraprolin. Science. 1998;281(5379):1001–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Carballo E, Lai WS, Blackshear PJ. Evidence that tristetraprolin is a physiological regulator of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor messenger RNA deadenylation and stability. Blood. 2000;95(6):1891–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Ogilvie RL, Abelson M, Hau HH, Vlasova I, Blackshear PJ, Bohjanen PR. Tristetraprolin down-regulates IL-2 gene expression through AU-rich element-mediated mRNA decay. JImmunol. 2005;174(2):953–61.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Hochdorfer T, Tiedje C, Stumpo DJ, Blackshear PJ, Gaestel M, Huber M. LPS-induced production of TNF-alpha and IL-6 in mast cells is dependent on p38 but independent of TTP. Cell Signal. 2013;25(6):1339–47.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Balakathiresan NS, Bhattacharyya S, Gutti U, Long RP, Jozwik C, Huang W, Srivastava M, Pollard HB, Biswas R. Tristetraprolin regulates IL-8 mRNA stability in cystic fibrosis lung epithelial cells. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2009;296(6):L1012–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Gaba A, Grivennikov SI, Do MV, Stumpo DJ, Blackshear PJ, Karin M. Cutting edge: IL-10-mediated tristetraprolin induction is part of a feedback loop that controls macrophage STAT3 activation and cytokine production. J Immunol. 2012;189(5):2089–93.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Gu L, Ning H, Qian X, Huang Q, Hou R, Almourani R, Fu M, Blackshear PJ, Liu J. Suppression of IL-12 production by tristetraprolin through blocking NF-kcyB nuclear translocation. J Immunol. 2013;191(7):3922–30.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Datta S, Novotny M, Pavicic PG Jr, Zhao C, Herjan T, Hartupee J, Hamilton T. IL-17 regulates CXCL1 mRNA stability via an AUUUA/tristetraprolin-independent sequence. J Immunol. 2010;184(3):1484–91.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Cao H, Tuttle JS, Blackshear PJ. Immunological characterization of tristetraprolin as a low abundance, inducible, stable cytosolic protein. JBiolChem. 2004;279(20):21489–99.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Arbabi S, Rosengart MR, Garcia I, Jelacic S, Maier RV. Epithelial cyclooxygenase-2 expression: a model for pathogenesis of colon cancer. J SurgRes. 2001;97(1):60–4.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Muller-Edenborn K, Leger K, Glaus Garzon JF, Oertli C, Mirsaidi A, Richards PJ, Rehrauer H, Spielmann P, Hoogewijs D, Borsig L, et al. Hypoxia attenuates the proinflammatory response in colon cancer cells by regulating IkappaB. Oncotarget. 2015;6(24):20288–301.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Qi HM, Zhu TM, Wang J. Regulation of immune suppressive cytokines by TLR4 activation in colon cancer cells. Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai KeZa Zhi. 2009;12(4):413–5.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Tang X, Zhu Y. TLR4 signaling promotes immune escape of human colon cancer cells by inducing immunosuppressive cytokines and apoptosis resistance. OncolRes. 2012;20(1):15–24.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Cao H. Bacterial endotoxin lipopolysaccharides regulate gene expression in human colon cancer cells. In: American Chemical Society National Meeting: 08/23/2022 2022; McCormick Place Convention Center, Chicago, IL: American Chemical Society; 2022: PAPER ID: 3739772.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to express great appreciation to Dr. Kandan Sethumadhavan for technical assistance. The preliminary work of this study was presented at the 2022 American Chemical Society National Meeting in Chicago, IL [52].

Funding

This work was supported by the USDA-ARS Quality and Utilization of Agricultural Products National Program 306 through ARS Research Projects 6054-41000-103-00-D and 6054-41000-113-00-D. Mention of trade names or commercial products in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Southern Regional Research Center, 1100 Allen Toussaint Boulevard, New Orleans, LA, 70124, USA

    Heping Cao

Authors
  1. Heping Cao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

HC designed and performed the experiments, analyzed the data and wrote the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Heping Cao.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cao, H. Bacterial endotoxin lipopolysaccharides regulate gene expression in human colon cancer cells. BMC Res Notes 16, 216 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-023-06506-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-023-06506-9

Keywords

BMC Research Notes

ISSN: 1756-0500

Contact us