Skip to content
naulon

No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Oct 27, 2026.

Inverse correlation between E-cadherin and Snail expression in hepatocellular carcinoma cell lines in vitro and in vivo

W Jiao, K Miyazaki, Y Kitajima

British Journal of Cancer · 2002

doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6600017

Full text

From PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine, as current on Oct 27, 2026. Paragraph numbers are ours, so an answer can point at one.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the major type of primary liver cancer, is one of the most common malignancies worldwide. In Japan, HCC is one of the leading causes of cancer death. Chronic hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus infections are the major contributing factors of hepatocarcinogenesis. However, the basic molecular mechanism of hepatocarcinogenesis remains unclear.

E-cadherin (E-cad), one of the key cadherins, plays a major role in the establishment and maintenance of intercellular adhesion, cell polarity and tissue architecture. Abnormalities in expression and cellular distribution of E-cad are frequently associated with dedifferentiation, invasiveness, and lymph node or distance metastasis in a variety of human malignancies including primary HCC. E-cad is also a critical factor in the process of intrahepatic metastasis of HCC. Thus, elucidating the mechanisms leading to disturb E-cad function in carcinomas has become a crucial issue because it is expected to provide new insights into the process of tumour invasion and consequently open avenues for therapy. It has been reported that E-cad expression is under strict spatiotemporal control and may be regulated at genetic (e.g. E-cad CDH1 gene mutation, LOH, and/or epigenetic (e.g. CDH1 promoter methylation, SNP) level. Most recently, there is an evidence that functional perturbation of E-cad expression during the process of epithelial dedifferentiation occurs at the transcriptional level.

The transcriptional regulator Snail is the prototype of a family of zinc finger proteins that participate in various developmental and physiological processes. Snail expression in epithelial cells induces both epithelial-mesenchymal transitions and the acquisition of tumorigenic as well as invasive properties. Most recently, Snail was described to contribute to repress transcription of E-cad gene by binding to the E-boxes of the CDH1 promoter. There is a strong inverse correlation between the Snail and E-cad expression in a panel of epithelial and dedifferentiated cells derived from carcinomas of various etiologies, including oral squamous carcinoma, breast, pancreas, colon, bladder cancer, melanomas, and fibroblast. However, the correlation of Snail and E-cad is not yet known in human HCC.

In the present study, we examined relationship between Snail and E-cad expression in five cell lines with variable phenotypes derived from human HCC. The results were unambiguously revealed that Snail inverses correlation with E-cad expression at mRNA and protein levels in HCC cells in vitro as well as in vivo.

Cell culture and generation of tumours

Five established human HCC cell lines (HuL-1, Hep-G2, Changliver, HLE and HLF) were subjected to this study. All of these cells were obtained from RIKEN Cell Bank (Ibaraki, Japan). Cells were routinely cultured in Williams' medium E (W/E, ICN Biomedicals Inc, Costa Mesa, CA, USA) supplemented with 10% heat-inactivated FBS (JRH Biosciences, Lenexa, KS, USA), 100 μg ml−1 streptomycin, and 100 IU ml−1 penicillin, and incubated at 37°C under 5% CO2 in a humidified atmosphere. Tumours were induced in congenitally athymic male BALB/cA jcl nu/nu mice between 5 to 6-weeks-old by subcutaneous injection (5×106 cells per injection site). Mice were purchased from CLEA (Tokyo, Japan), and housed in a laminar flow cabinet under specific-pathogen free conditions according to the institutional guidelines. Injected animals were observed every 3 days and sacrificed when the tumours reached an external diameter of 1.5–2.0 cm. The tumours were fixed in 10% formalin neutral buffered solution (WAKO, Osaka, Japan), paraffin-embedded, and 5 μm sections then cut and sequentially stained with H&E, and used for in situ hybridization (ISH) and immunohistochemical (IHC) staining.

RT–PCR

Total RNA was isolated from each cell line using ISOGEN (Nippongene, Toyama, Japan). RT–PCR was carried out as described previously with specific primers. The primer pairs of human Snail (hSnail), E-cadherin (hE-cad) and GAPDH was designed as follows: hSnail (GenBank AF125377) forward 5′-TTC TTC TGC GCT ACT GCT GCG-3′ and reverse 5′-GGG CAG GTA TGG AGA GGA AGA-3′; hE-cad (GenBank Z13009) forward 5′-TCC CAT CAG CTG CCC AGA AA-3′ and reverse 5′-TGA CTC CTG TGT TCC TGT TA-3′; GAPDH (GenBank NM002046) forward 5′-TGG TAT CGT GGA AGG ACT CAT GAC-3′ and reverse 5′-ATG CCA GTG AGC TTC CCG TTC AGC-3′, respectively. The PCR product was an 883 bp fragment of hSnail gene, and a 502 bp fragment of the extracellular domain of the hE-cad gene. GAPDH was simultaneously amplified in each sample as the internal marker. All reactions were repeated at least twice.

Western blot

Whole cell lysate without trypsin treatment was prepared from 5×106 cultured cells using lysis buffer (0.1% SDS, 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM PMSF, 5 mM EDTA pH 8.0, 10 μg ml−1 trypsin inhibitor, 50 mM iodoacetamide, 50 mM Tris pH 7.4). After sonication and centrifugation, aliquots of each cell extracts containing equal amount of protein (50 μg) was resolved by 10% SDS–PAGE, and electrophoretically transferred onto Hybond™ ECL™ nitrocellulose membrane. Blots were probed with E-cad monoclonal antibody HECD-1 (1 μg ml−1, Takara Biochemicals, Tokyo, Japan), and developed with chemiluminescence as described previously.

Immunohistochemical staining

IHC staining on sections was performed essentially as described elsewhere. HECD-1 was used at 1:250 dilutions. No staining was obtained when PBS was used instead of the primary antibody.

Pretreatment of tumour sections for in situ hybridization

As a result of no satisfactory commercial specific antibodies against hSnail-peptide available yet, we developed an ISH method to detect endogenous Snail mRNA expression in tumour cells with an appropriate biotinylated hSnail cDNA probe. The 5 μm sections were mounted onto poly-L-lysine coated slides and dried at 37°C overnight. Sections were deparaffinized in xylene and dehydrated in ethanol. To obtain an optimal recovery of cells and proper removal of cellular protein for improvement of DNA probe penetration, a proteolytic digestion step was applied. The digestion was performed with proteinase K at a concentration of 10 μg ml−1 in 10 mM PBS (pH 7.4) for 20 min at 37°C. Sections were immersed in PBS containing 3% hydrogen peroxide to inhibit endogenous peroxidase activity.

cDNA probe

To identify endogenous Snail gene expression in the sections, we designed a hybridizing specific cDNA probe, complementary to the sequence of the hSnail mRNA. The PCR primer for the hydbridization probe was: forward, 5′-AGG CTT GGG CCA AGT GCC CA-3′; reverse, 5′-GGT GGG CCC GCA GGT TGG AG-3′. The thermal cycle profile consisted of an initial denaturation at 94°C for 2 min, followed by 35 cycles with a 30 s denaturation at 94°C, a 30 s annealing of primers at 60°C, and a 1.5 min extension at 72°C, and a final 10 min extension at 72°C. The PCR product, corresponding to the complete hSnail cDNA sequence extending from 451–743 positions, was electrophoresed in 1.5% agarose gels. The 292 bp fragment in length of interest was then sliced cleanly under UV illumination, and recovered by using MagExtractor® DNA Fragment Purification Kit (TOYOBO Co., Ltd. Osaka, Japan). The cDNA probe was labelled with Biotin-16-dUTP using Biotin-High Prime Kit (Roche Molecular Biochemical, Mannheim, Germany) according to the manufacturer's instructions.

In situ hybridization

ISH for Snail mRNA with appropriate positive and negative controls was performed. The probes were hybridized to the sections according to the standard protocol of the In Situ Hybridization Detection Kit (ISH-B1, Sigma). Twenty μl of Biotin-conjugated probe (1 ng 1 μl−1) were applied to the each slide under a coverslip. Denaturation was carried out by heating the slides in an oven to 95°C for 10 min. Hybridization was then performed for 16 h at 37°C in a sealed moist chamber. Coverslips were removed by submersing the slides in PBS. After blocking, the slides were applied of ExtrAvidin®-Peroxidase solution, the ISH signal was immunologically amplified using monoclonal anti-avidin-biotin conjugated solution followed by re-applying ExtrAvidin®-Peroxidase solution. Colour development was achieved by adding a freshly prepared substrate solution DAB. The sections were counterstained with haematoxylin, then dehydrated and mounted. We used poly d(T) Probe-Biotin labelled as a positive control and ISH solution as a negative control.

RESULTS

In this study, four cell lines, i.e. HuL-1, Hep-G2, Changliver, and HLF, developed tumours in mice. However, HLF cells needed longer latency periods, grew slower, and reached an average size of less than 20% of the formers after 1 month. HLE cells had no tumorigenicity. Histological analysis of tumours derived from respective HuL-1, Changliver and HLF cells revealed dedifferentiated characteristics, whereas the tumour induced by Hep-G2 cells showed differentiated features (data not shown). All these histopathologic properties resemble those of the original tumour as reported elsewhere.

To examine the expression of Snail and E-cad mRNA in these cell lines, RT–PCR analysis was performed. A clear inversed correlation between Snail and E-cad expression was observed (Figure 1). Snail mRNA expression was found in HuL-1, Changliver, HLE and HLF cells but not in Hep-G2 cells, whereas E-cad mRNA expression was detected in Hep-G2 cells merely. In addition, we analyzed E-cad protein expression in these cell lines by Western blot method, E-cad protein was detected only in Hep-G2 cells as well with monoclonal antibody HECD-1 (Figure 2).

By IHC staining of tumour sections, we found membranous expression of endogenous E-cad protein only in Hep-G2 cells (Figure 3B). ISH with biotinylated hSnail probe detected positive brown staining in the cytoplasm of HuL-1, Changliver and HLF cells, but not in Hep-G2 cells at all. These in vivo IHC of E-cadherin expression and ISH of Snail mRNA expression staining patterns were consistent with the same expression profiles as found in their respective in vitro RT–PCR and Western blot analyses.

DISCUSSION

HCC is known to have a poor prognosis because of multicentric development and intrahepatic metastasis. However, the molecular mechanisms of hepatocarcinogenesis and intrahepatic metastasis are not yet well understood. Loss of both cell-cell adhesion and cellular differentiation is one of the characteristics of malignant cells, and this has been reported extensively to correlate with E-cad down-regulation. Reduced E-cad expression due to transcriptional repressor Snail around CDH1 promoter region may participate in certain steps of carcinogenesis by reduction of intercellular adhesiveness, which may result in initiation of invasion and destruction of normal tissue morphology. The present study demonstrated the presence of Snail mRNA in HuL-1, Changliver, HLE and HLF cells, but not in Hep-G2 cells detected by RT–PCR, these patterns were further proved by ISH in tumours, where Snail mRNA signals expressed in each tumour sections induced by HuL-1, Changliver, and HLF, respectively. By contrast, E-cad mRNA and protein expression were only detected in Hep-G2 cells by RT–PCR and Western blot analyses, these results were confirmed by the finding in vivo IHC staining where endogenous E-cad protein membranous expression was revealed only in tumour sections induced by Hep-G2 cells. To our knowledge, no reports have yet been published on the use of in vivo as well as in vitro molecular techniques to show that the zinc finger protein Snail has reversed correlation with E-cad at mRNA and protein levels in HCC cell lines. Our subsequent study will include expanding the number of HCC cell lines to further investigate the relationship between E-cad and Snail; Ectopic expression of Snail in hepatocytes to assess whether or not the transformed phenotype in HCC can be reversed by abrogating Snail function. Meanwhile, extending correlation analysis of Snail and E-cad expression patterns in HCC surgical specimens so as to evaluate whether Snail may be used as a screen for the invasion and progression of HCC in human is also in consideration.

Transcription factors critically regulate cell physiologic processes because they control the protein repertoire expression. Alterations in transcription factors have significant impact on disease and their treatment. From the standpoint of hepatocellular carcinogenesis, unveil the mechanism of functions and regulation of Snail are not only important for understanding of hepatocarcinogenesis and intrahepatic metastasis processes, but will facilitate the design of novel therapies for HCC and the control of biologic responses after surgery.

References 34

  1. 1.

    AriizumiSITakasakiKYamamotoMOtsuboTKatagiriSSaitoA2001 Eight multicentric hepatocellular carcinomas occurring in the same segment of the liverJ Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg8383386

    Not in our library10.1007/s005340170013

  2. 2.

    BatlleESanchoEFranciCDominguezDMonfarMBaulidaJGarcie De HerrerosA2000 The transcription factor snail is a repressor of E-cadherin gene expression in epithelial tumour cellsNat Cell Biol28489

    Not in our library10.1038/35000034

  3. 3.

    BergslandEKVenookAP2000 Hepatocellular carcinomaCurr Opin Oncol12357361

    Not in our library10.1097/00001622-200007000-00013

  4. 4.

    BrackeMEVan RoyFMMareelMM1996 The E-cadherin/catenin complex in invasion and metastasisCurr Top Microbiol Immunol213123161

    Not in our library10.1007/978-3-642-61107-0_9

  5. 5.

    BuendiaM2000 Genetics of hepatocellular carcinomaSemin Cancer Biol10185200

    Not in our library10.1006/scbi.2000.0319

  6. 6.

    CanoAPerez-MorenoMARodrigoILocascioABlancoMJdel BarrioMGPortilloFNietoMA2000 The transcription factor snail controls epithelial-mesenchymal transitions by repressing E-cadherin expressionNat Cell Biol27683

    Not in our library10.1038/35000025

  7. 7.

    ChangRS1978 HeLa marker chromosomes, Chang liver cells, and liver-specific functionsScience199567568

    Not in our library10.1126/science.622561

  8. 8.

    CookPR1999 The organization of replication and transcriptionScience28417901795

    Not in our library10.1126/science.284.5421.1790

  9. 9.

    DorINambaMSatoJ1975 Establishment and some biological characteristics of human hepatoma cell linesGann66385392

    Not in our library

  10. 10.

    DurrRCaselmannWH2000 Carcinogenesis of primary liver malignanciesLangenbecks Arch Surg385154161

    Not in our library10.1007/s004230050259

  11. 11.

    EndoKUedaTUeyamaJOhtaTTeradaT2000 Immunoreactive E-cadherin, alpha-catenin, beta-catenin, and gamma-catenin proteins in hepatocellular carcinoma: relationships with tumor grade, clinicopathologic parameters, and patients' survivalHum Pathol31558565

    Not in our library10.1053/hp.2000.6683

  12. 12.

    FeitelsonMA1998 Hepatitis B x antigen and p53 in the development of hepatocellular carcinomaJ Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg5367374

    Not in our library10.1007/s005340050060

  13. 13.

    GiroldiLABringuierPPde WeijertMJansenCvan BokhovenASchalkenJA1997 Role of E boxes in the repression of E-cadherin expressionBiochem Biophys Res Commun241453458

    Not in our library10.1006/bbrc.1997.7831

  14. 14.

    GuytonKZKenslerTW1997 Prevention of liver cancerCurr Opin Oncol9492496

    Not in our library10.1097/00001622-199709050-00016

  15. 15.

    HayashiYWangWNinomiyaTNaganoHOhtaKItohH1999 Liver enriched transcription factors and differentiation of hepatocellular carcinomaMol Pathol521924

    Not in our library10.1136/mp.52.1.19

  16. 16.

    HedinKEKaczynskiJAGibsonMRUrrutiaR2000 Transcription factors in cell biology, surgery, and transplantationSurgery12815

    Not in our library10.1067/msy.2000.106426

  17. 17.

    HemavathyKAshrafSIIpYT2000 Snail/slug family of repressors: slowly going into the fast lane of development and cancerGene257112

    Not in our library10.1016/s0378-1119(00)00371-1

  18. 18.

    HennigGLowrickOBirchmeierWBehrensJ1996 Mechanisms identified in the transcriptional control of epithelial gene expressionJ Biol Chem271595602

    Not in our library10.1074/jbc.271.1.595

  19. 19.

    HuangGTLeeHSChenCHSheuJCChiouLLChenDS1999 Correlation of E-cadherin expression and recurrence of hepatocellular carcinomaHepatogastroenterology4619231927

    Not in our library

  20. 20.

    HuhNUtakojiT1981 Production of HBs-antigen by two new human hepatoma cell lines and its enhancement by dexamethasoneGann72178179

    Not in our library

  21. 21.

    HussainSPHarrisCC2000 Molecular epidemiology and carcinogenesis: endogenous and exogenous carcinogensMutat Res462311322

    Not in our library10.1016/s1383-5742(00)00015-6

  22. 22.

    JiaoWMiyazakiKKitajimaY2001 Exogenous expression of E-cadherin in gallbladder carcinoma cell line G-415 restores its cellular polarity and differentiationInt J Oncol1910991107

    Not in our library10.3892/ijo.19.6.1099

  23. 23.

    KanaiYUshijimaSHuiAMOchiaiATsudaHSakamotoMHirohashiS1997 The E-cadherin gene is silenced by CpG methylation in human hepatocellular carcinomasInt J Cancer71355359

    Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1097-0215(19970502)71:3<355::aid-ijc8>3.0.co;2-x

  24. 24.

    KnowlesBBHoweCCAdenDP1980 Human hepatocellular carcinoma cell lines secrete the major plasma proteins and hepatitis B surface antigenScience209497499

    Not in our library10.1126/science.6248960

  25. 25.

    KojiroM2000 Premalignant lesions of hepatocellular carcinoma: pathologic viewpointJ Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg5367374

    Not in our library10.1007/s005340070001

  26. 26.

    KondohNWakatsukiTHadaAShudaMTanakaKAraiMYamamotoM2001 Genetic and epigenetic events in human hepatocarcinogenesisInt J Oncol1812711278

    Not in our library10.3892/ijo.18.6.1271

  27. 27.

    LiLCChuiRMSasakiMNakajimaKPerincheryGAuHCNojimaDCarrollPDahiyaP2000 A single nucleotide polymorphism in the E-cadherin gene promoter alters transcriptional activitiesCancer Res60873876

    Not in our library

  28. 28.

    OdaT1999 Viral hepatitis and hepatocellular carcinoma prevention strategy in JapanJpn J Cancer Res9010511060

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1349-7006.1999.tb00676.x

  29. 29.

    OkudaK2000 Hepatocellular carcinomaJ Hepatol32225237

    Not in our library10.1016/s0168-8278(00)80428-6

  30. 30.

    OsadaTSakamotoMInoYIwamatsuAMatsunoYMutoTHirohashiS1996 E-cadherin is involved in the intrahepatic metastasis of hepatocellular carcinomaHepatology2414601467

    Not in our library10.1053/jhep.1996.v24.pm0008938181

  31. 31.

    TakeichiM1991 Cadherin cell adhesion receptors as a morphogenetic regulatorScience25114511455

    Not in our library10.1126/science.2006419

  32. 32.

    TakeichiM1993 Cadherins in cancer: implications for invasion and metastasisCurr Opin Cell Biol5806811

    Not in our library10.1016/0955-0674(93)90029-p

  33. 33.

    YokoyamaKKamataNHayashiEHoteiyaTUedaNFujimotoRNagayamaM2001 Reverse correlation of E-cadherin and snail expression in oral squamous cell carcinoma cells in vitroOral Oncol376571

    Not in our library10.1016/s1368-8375(00)00059-2

  34. 34.

    YuMCYuanJMGovindarajanSRossRK2000 Epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinomaCan J Gastroenterol14703709

    Not in our library10.1155/2000/371801

Cited by papers we hold 4

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.