Prognostic value of Ephrin A receptors in 3554 breast cancer patients: microarray data with 20 years of follow-up

Objective: Ephrin A (EphA) receptors are involved in tumorigenesis, metastasis, and angiogenesis, making them attractive candidates for new anti-cancer therapies. Here, we investigated the prognostic value of EphA receptor expression in breast cancer (BC). Methods: We analyzed EphA mRNA levels and survival information through the "Kaplan-Meier plotter" database. In total, we included 3554 breast cancer patients with a median follow-up of 20 years. A 95% confidence interval (CI) and Hazard ratio (HR) were used to assess the overall relative risk of BC outcome. Results: Our results showed that EphA1 (HR= 0.67, 95% CI: 0.6–0.75, p = 6.3 × 10−12), EphA2 (HR= 0.79, 95% CI: 0.7–0.89, p = 5.2 × 10−5), EphA3 (HR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.69–0.87, p = 1.7 × 10−5), EphA4 (HR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.61–0.86, p = 3 × 10−4), EphA5 (HR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.57–0.82, p = 4.3 × 10−5), EphA6 (HR = 0.8, 95% CI: 0.66–0.98, p = 0.027), EphA8 (HR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.44–0.62, p = 2.6 × 10−14) and EphA10 (HR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.5–0.68, p = 3.6 × 10−11) were correlated with better relapse-free survival (RFS), while EphA7 (HR = 1.19, 95% CI: 1.02–1.4, p = 0.031) was correlated with a worse RFS in breast cancer patients. Conclusions: Our analyisis demonstrate that profiling EphA receptor mRNA expression in BC patients has prognostic value.

Breast cancer; Ephrin A receptors; Prognosis; Kaplan-Meier plotter; Hazard ratio (HR)

[1] Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2021. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2021; 71: 7–33.

[2] Hortobagyi GN. Breast cancer: 45 years of research and progress. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2020; 38: 2454–2462.

[3] Pasquale EB. Eph receptors and ephrins in cancer: bidirectional signalling and beyond. Nature Reviews Cancer. 2010; 10: 165– 180.

[4] Kou CJ, Kandpal RP. Differential expression patterns of Eph receptors and ephrin ligands in human cancers. BioMed Research International. 2018; 2018: 1–23.

[5] Gyorffy B, Surowiak P, Budczies J, Lanczky A. Online survival analysis software to assess the prognostic value of biomarkers using transcriptomic data in non-small-cell lung cancer. PLoS ONE. 2013; 8: e82241.

[6] Pénzváltó Z, Lánczky A, Lénárt J, Meggyesházi N, Krenács T, Szoboszlai N, et al. MEK1 is associated with carboplatin resistance and is a prognostic biomarker in epithelial ovarian cancer. BMC Can- cer. 2014; 14: 837.

[7] Gyorffy B, Bottai G, Lehmann-Che J, Keri G, Orfi L, Iwamoto T, et al. TP53 mutation-correlated genes predict the risk of tumor re- lapse and identify MPS1 as a potential therapeutic kinase in TP53- mutated breast cancers. Molecular Oncology. 2014; 8: 508–519.

[8] Pongor L, Kormos M, Hatzis C, Pusztai L, Szabó A, Győrffy B. A genome-wide approach to link genotype to clinical outcome by utilizing next generation sequencing and gene chip data of 6697 breast cancer patients. Genome Medicine. 2015; 7: 104.

[9] Györffy B, Lanczky A, Eklund AC, Denkert C, Budczies J, Li Q, et al. An online survival analysis tool to rapidly assess the effect of 22,277 genes on breast cancer prognosis using microarray data of 1809 patients. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 2010; 123: 725–731.

[10] Győrffy B, Lánczky A, Szállási Z. Implementing an online tool for genome-wide validation of survival-associated biomarkers in ovarian-cancer using microarray data from 1287 patients. Endocrine-Related Cancer. 2012; 19: 197–208.

[11] Edgar R. Gene expression omnibus: NCBI gene expression and hybridization array data repository. Nucleic Acids Research. 2002; 30: 207–210.

[12] Barrett T, Wilhite SE, Ledoux P, Evangelista C, Kim IF, Toma- shevsky M, et al. NCBI GEO: archive for functional genomics data sets—update. Nucleic Acids Research. 2013; 41: D991–D995.

[13] Brantley-Sieders DM. Clinical relevance of Ephs and ephrins in cancer: lessons from breast, colorectal, and lung cancer profiling. Seminars in Cell & Developmental Biology. 2012; 23: 102–108.

[14] Arvanitis D, Davy A. Eph/ephrin signaling: networks. Genes & Development. 2008; 22: 416–429.

[15] Ivanov A, Romanovsky A. Putative dual role of ephrin-Eph re- ceptor interactions in inflammation. International Union of Bio- chemistry and Molecular Biology: Life. 2006; 58: 389–394.

[16] Sugiyama N, Gucciardo E, Tatti O, Varjosalo M, Hyytiäinen M, Gstaiger M, et al. EphA2 cleavage by MT1-MMP triggers single cancer cell invasion via homotypic cell repulsion. Journal of Cell Biology. 2013; 201: 467–484.

[17] Nikas I, Ryu HS, Theocharis S. Viewing the Eph receptors with a focus on breast cancer heterogeneity. Cancer Letters. 2018; 434: 160–171.

[18] Anderton M, van der Meulen E, Blumenthal MJ, Schafer G. The role of the Eph receptor family in tumorigenesis. Cancers. 2021; 13: 206.

[19] Ireton R, Chen J. EphA2 receptor tyrosine kinase as a promising target for cancer therapeutics. Current Cancer Drug Targets. 2005; 5: 149–157.

[20] Brantley-Sieders DM, Zhuang G, Hicks D, Fang WB, Hwang Y, Cates JMM, et al. The receptor tyrosine kinase EphA2 promotes mammary adenocarcinoma tumorigenesis and metastatic progression in mice by amplifying ErbB2 signaling. Journal of Clinical In- vestigation. 2008; 118: 64–78.

[21] Carles-Kinch K, Kilpatrick KE, Stewart JC, Kinch MS. Antibody targeting of the EphA2 tyrosine kinase inhibits malignant cell behavior. Cancer Research. 2002; 62: 2840–2847.

[22] Gökmen-Polar Y, Toroni RA, Hocevar BA, Badve S, Zhao Q, Shen C, et al. Dual targeting of EphA2 and ER restores tamoxifen sensi- tivity in ER/EphA2-positive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 2011; 127: 375–384.

[23] Lu M, Miller KD, Gokmen-Polar Y, Jeng MH, Kinch MS. EphA2 overexpression decreases estrogen dependence and tamoxifen sensitivity. Cancer Research. 2003; 63: 3425–3429.

[24] Zhuang G, Brantley-Sieders DM, Vaught D, Yu J, Xie L, Wells S, et al. Elevation of receptor tyrosine kinase EphA2 mediates resistance to trastuzumab therapy. Cancer Research. 2010; 70: 299–308.

[25] Fournier MV, Martin KJ, Kenny PA, Xhaja K, Bosch I, Yaswen P, et al. Gene expression signature in organized and growth-arrested mammary acini predicts good outcome in breast cancer. Cancer Research. 2006; 66: 7095–7102.

[26] Martin KJ, Patrick DR, Bissell MJ, Fournier MV. Prognostic breast cancer signature identified from 3D culture model accu- rately predicts clinical outcome across independent datasets. PLoS ONE. 2008; 3: e2994.

[27] Wykosky J, Debinski W. The EphA2 receptor and EphrinA1 lig- and in solid tumors: function and therapeutic targeting. Molecular Cancer Research. 2008; 6: 1795–1806.

[28] Macrae M, Neve RM, Rodriguez-Viciana P, Haqq C, Yeh J, Chen C, et al. A conditional feedback loop regulates Ras activity through EphA2. Cancer Cell. 2005; 8: 111–118.

[29] Menges CW, McCance DJ. Constitutive activation of the Raf- MAPK pathway causes negative feedback inhibition of Ras-PI3K- AKT and cellular arrest through the EphA2 receptor. Oncogene. 2008; 27: 2934–2940.

[30] Miao H, Li D, Mukherjee A, Guo H, Petty A, Cutter J, et al. EphA2 Mediates ligand-dependent inhibition and ligand-independent promotion of cell migration and invasion via a reciprocal regu- latory loop with AKT. Cancer Cell. 2009; 16: 9–20.

[31] Pasquale EB. Eph-ephrin bidirectional signaling in physiology and disease. Cell. 2008; 133: 38–52.

[32] Fu D, Wang Z, Wang B, Chen L, Yang W, Shen Z, et al. Frequent epigenetic inactivation of the receptor tyrosine kinase EphA5 by promoter methylation in human breast cancer. Human Pathology. 2010; 41: 48–58.

[33] Jeong HM, Kim RN, Kwon MJ, Oh E, Han J, Lee SK, et al. Targeted exome sequencing of Korean triple-negative breast cancer reveals homozygous deletions associated with poor prognosis of adju- vant chemotherapy-treated patients. Oncotarget. 2017; 8: 61538– 61550.

[34] Brantley-Sieders DM, Jiang A, Sarma K, Badu-Nkansah A, Walter DL, Shyr Y, et al. Eph/ephrin profiling in human breast cancer re- veals significant associations between expression level and clinical outcome. PLoS ONE. 2011; 6: e24426.

[35] Fox BP, Kandpal RP. Invasiveness of breast carcinoma cells and transcript profile: Eph receptors and ephrin ligands as molecular markers of potential diagnostic and prognostic application. Bio- chemical and Biophysical Research Communications. 2004; 318: 882–892.

[36] Husa A, Magić Ž, Larsson M, Fornander T, Pérez-Tenorio G. EPH/ephrin profile and EPHB2 expression predicts patient sur- vival in breast cancer. Oncotarget. 2016; 7: 21362–21380.

[37] Sun Y, Qian J, Lu M, Xu H. Lower and reduced expression of EphA4 is associated with advanced TNM stage, lymph node metas- tasis, and poor survival in breast carcinoma. Pathology Interna- tional. 2016; 66: 506–510.

[38] Noren NK, Pasquale EB. Eph receptor-ephrin bidirectional sig- nals that target Ras and Rho proteins. Cellular Signalling. 2004; 16: 655–666.

[39] Larsen AB, Pedersen MW, Stockhausen M, Grandal MV, Deurs BV, Poulsen HS. Activation of the EGFR gene target EphA2 inhibits epidermal growth factor-induced cancer cell motility. Molecular Cancer Research. 2007; 5: 283–293.

[40] Himanen J, Saha N, Nikolov DB. Cell-cell signaling via Eph receptors and ephrins. Current Opinion in Cell Biology. 2007; 19: 534–542.

[41] Bonifaci N, Gorski B, Masojc B, Wokolorczyk D, Jakubowska A, Debniak T, et al. Exploring the link between germline and somatic genetic alterations in breast carcinogenesis. PLoS ONE. 2010; 5: e14078.

[42] Lodola A, Giorgio C, Incerti M, Zanotti I, Tognolini M. Targeting Eph/ehrin system in cancer therapy. European Journal of Medic- inal Chemistry. 2017; 142: 152–162.

[43] Genander M, Frisén J. Ephrins and Eph receptors in stem cells and cancer. Current Opinion in Cell Biology. 2010; 22: 611–616.

[44] Pasquale EB. Eph receptor signalling casts a wide net on cell behaviour. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology. 2005; 6: 462– 475.

[45] Klein R. Bidirectional modulation of synaptic functions by Eph/ephrin signaling. Nature Neuroscience. 2009; 12: 15–20.