SATB1 Protein Is Associated with a More Aggressive Phenotype of Sporadic Colorectal Cancer


Background: Experimental studies have shown that cyclo-oxygenase-2 (Cox2) is related to the development and progression of tumors, since this enzyme is induced and expressed by cells such as macrophages, osteoblasts, “activated” endothelial cells, and tumor cells. The activity in tumors includes proliferation, cell transformation, tumor growth, invasion and metastasis and may play an important role in carcinogenesis of the canine osteosarcoma, since it has high expression in tissue fragments. The combination of selective Cox2 inhibitors and other treatment modalities is the basis for a new anti-cancer therapy strategy. This in vitro study exposed primary cells of five different canine osteosarcoma cultures to selective Cox2 inhibitor at increasing concentrations and times. Results: For Cox2 negative cultures, despite the absence of differences, greater sensitivity of cells to treatment was observed. For Cox2 positive cultures, a higher number of necrotic cells were observed (P ≤ 0.05), when compared with negative cultures. For exposure times with Celecoxib doses, no difference (P > 0.05) was found between the three times analyzed for living, apoptotic and apop- totic/necrotic cells. There are similarities in the values of 24 h and 48 h, with slight reduction of living cells, increasing those undergoing apoptosis and apoptosis/necrosis. There was significance for necrosis (P ≤ 0.05). In 72 hours, a significant difference was observed between the other two previous values (P ≤ 0.05). It was found for the group of 100 μM?L?1, that there was a numerically greater signaling for apoptosis and lower (P = 0.08) for necrosis, and this point was the onset of the pharmacodynamic phenomenon, with drop in the values for living cells and increased number of necrotic cells, with a tendency (P = 0.08) for reducing the percentage of necrotic cells for the group of 100 μM?L?1 when compared to that of 10 μM?L?1. Conclusions: For Cox2 positive and negative cultures, there was difference for necrotic cells and there was no difference between Cox2 positive and Cox2 negative groups in relation to the percentage of living cells and apoptotic and apoptotic/necrotic cells. At time of 72 hours, higher percentage of living cells, lower percentage of apoptotic cells and increased percentage of necrotic cells in relation to groups of 24 and 48 hours were observed. A tendency for reducing the percentage of necrotic cells for the group of 100 μM?L?1 when compared to that of the group of 10 μM?L?1 was observed.


Share and Cite:

A. Davelaar, A. Rygiel, M. Timmer, L. Kodach, C. Noesel, P. Fockens and K. Krishnadath, "SATB1 Protein Is Associated with a More Aggressive Phenotype of Sporadic Colorectal Cancer," Open Journal of Pathology, Vol. 3 No. 4, 2013, pp. 156-165. doi: 10.4236/ojpathology.2013.34029.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] D. McCormick, P. J. Kibbe and S. W. Morgan, “Colon Cancer: Prevention, Diagnosis, Treatment,” Gastroenterology Nursing, Vol. 25, No. 5, 2002, pp. 204-211.
[2] W. J. Meng, H. Yan, B. Zhou, W. Zhang, X. H. Kong, R. Wang, et al., “Correlation of SATB1 Overexpression with the Progression of Human Rectal Cancer,” International Journal of Colorectal Disease, Vol. 27, No. 2, 2012, pp. 143-150.
[3] B. Nodin, H. Johannesson, S. Wangefjord, D. P. O’Connor, K. E. Lindquist, M. Uhlén, et al., “Molecular Correlates and Prognostic Significance of SATB1 Expression in Colorectal Cancer,” Diagnostic Pathology, Vol. 7, No. 115, 2012, p. 115.
[4] J. Zhang, B. Zhang, X. Zhang, Y. Sun, X. Wei, M. A. McNutt, et al., “SATB1 Expression Is Associated with Biologic Behavior in Colorectal Carcinoma in Vitro and in Vivo,” PLoS One, Vol. 8, No. 1, 2013, in press.
[5] J. D. Alvarez, D. H. Yasui, H. Niida, T. Joh, D. Y. Loh and T. Kohwi-Shigematsu, “The MAR-Binding Protein SATB1 Orchestrates Temporal and Spatial Expression of Multiple Genes during T-Cell Development,” Genes & Development, Vol. 14, No. 5, 2000, pp. 521-535.
[6] S. Cai, H. J. Han and T. Kohwi-Shigematsu, “Tissue-Specific Nuclear Architecture and Gene Expression Regulated by SATB1,” Nature Genetics, Vol. 34, 2003, pp. 42-51.
[7] D. Yasui, M. Miyano, S. Cai, P. Varga-Weisz and T. Kohwi-Shigematsu, “SATB1 Targets Chromatin Remodelling to Regulate Genes over Long Distances,” Nature, Vol. 419, 2002, pp. 641-645.
[8] H. J. Han, J. Russo, Y. Kohwi and T. Kohwi-Shigematsu, “SATB1 Reprogrammes Gene Expression to Promote Breast Tumour Growth and Metastasis,” Nature, Vol. 452, 2008, pp. 187-193.
[9] C. Cheng, X. Lu, G. Wang, L. Zheng, X. Shu, S. Zhu, et al., “Expression of SATB1 and Heparanase in Gastric Cancer and Its Relationship to Clinicopathologic Features,” APMIS, Vol. 118, No. 11, 2010, pp. 855-863.
[10] N. Patani, W. Jiang, R. Mansel, R. Newbold and K. Mokbel, “The mRNA Expression of SATB1 and SATB2 in Human Breast Cancer,” Cancer Cell International, Vol. 9, 2009, p. 18.
[11] L. L. Kodach, S. A. Bleuming, A. R. Musler, M. P. Peppelenbosch, D. W. Hommes, G. R. Van den Brink, et al., “The Bone Morphogenetic Protein Pathway Is Active in Human Colon Adenomas and Inactivated in Colorectal Cancer,” Cancer, Vol. 112, No. 2, 2008, pp. 300-306.

Copyright © 2023 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.