Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Poster presentation
  • Open Access

A computational approach to identify transposable element insertions in cancer cells

  • 1, 2,
  • 1 and
  • 1, 3
Genome Biology201112 (Suppl 1) :P28

https://doi.org/10.1186/1465-6906-12-S1-P28

  • Published:

Keywords

  • Transposable Element
  • Cell Line HCC1954
  • Gene Ontology Analysis
  • Hg19 Assembly
  • Cell Adhesion Protein

Background

Transposable elements (TEs) in the human genome may contribute to molecular evolution, hereditary diseases and cancer [[13]]. Therefore, analyzing the impact of TEs in the genome is necessary to better characterize genetic events related to tumorigenesis. Here, we used a computational approach to identify TE insertions in publicly available data for exome sequences in lymphoblastoid and breast tumor cells derived from the same patient.

Methods

A total of 29,340, sequences from the cell lines HCC1954 (18,365,271) and HCC1954BL (10,975,107) were used to investigate gene fusion with TEs (gfTEs) [4, 5]. The RepeatMasker and Burrows-Wheeler Alignment (BWA) tools were used to identify and to map gfTEs, respectively. We also used BEDTools to find overlaps between gfTEs and genome annotations. Human mRNAs and RepeatMasker tracks were downloaded in BED format from the GRCh37/ hg19 assembly. Repbase was used to filter the eukaryotic TEs.

Results

RepeatMasker was used to identify gfTEs in the exome reads. Next, the repeat masked reads were aligned against the reference genome using BWA. Finally, we filtered the aligned reads to exclude those without TEs (length of Ns <15, Ns means block of nucleotides masked), those with alignments showing low sequence identity (<95%) or those with a small hit length (<50 nucleotides). The study focused on the detection of TEs in coding sequence gene regions. A total of 3,307,608 reads were excluded, and 23,841 reads were predicted as cancer-specific gfTEs. Table 1 shows the number of gfTEs distributed among the TE families and highlights the members with higher frequency in both cell lines. Insertions of LINE/L1 and SINE/Alu were the most frequent. The Gene Ontology analysis for the biological process and molecular function terms showed a bias toward membrane receptor and cell adhesion proteins.
Table 1

Number of genes containing insertion of TEs from different families

Class/Family

HCC1954BL (N)

HCC1954 (T)

DNA

4

3

DNA/MuDR

5

1

DNA/PiggyBac

2

2

DNA/TcMar-Mariner

10

9

DNA/TcMar-Tc2

6

8

DNA/TcMar-Tigger

90

96

DNA/hAT

2

8

DNA/hAT-Blackjack

7

19

DNA/hAT-Charlie

107

137

DNA/hAT-Tip100

12

19

LINE/CR1

23

25

LINE/Dong-R4

1

1

LINE/L1

863

641

LINE/L2

163

175

LINE/RTE

9

13

LINE/RTE-BovB

1

0

LTR

1

2

LTR/ERV1

134

145

LTR/ERVK

11

17

LTR/ERVL

70

77

LTR/ERVL-MaLR

148

186

LTR/Gypsy

6

7

Other

5

4

RNA

1

3

SINE

6

17

SINE/Alu

264

406

SINE/Deu

5

14

SINE/MIR

109

145

SINE/tRNA

0

3

Satellite

7

15

Satellite/acro

2

1

Satellite/centr

52

112

Unknown

6

8

rRNA

14

11

scRNA

4

2

snRNA

0

2

srpRNA

4

1

tRNA

0

1

Total

2.154

2.340

Conclusions

We used a computational approach to identify putative cancer-specific gfTEs using human exome capture sequences. Interestingly, the total number of gfTEs was similar in normal and tumor cell lines, but the Gene Ontology analysis revealed an enrichment of insertions in genes encoding protein receptors and cell adhesion molecules. These results suggest that TEs could be contributing to cancer development.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Regional Blood Center of Ribeirão Preto, Molecular Biology and Bioinformatics Laboratory, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, 14051-140, Brazil
(2)
Barão de Mauá University, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, 14026-150, Brazil
(3)
Department of Genetics, Medical School of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, 14049-900, Brazil

References

  1. Cordaux R, Batzer MA: The impact of retrotransposons on human genome evolution.Nat Rev Genet 2009, 10:691–703.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Callinan PA, Batzer MA: Retrotransposable elements and human disease.Genome Dyn 2006, 1:104–115.PubMedView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Zhang W, Edwards A, Fan W, Deininger P, Zhang K: Alu distribution and mutation types of cancer genes.BMC Genomics 2011, 12:157.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Zhao Q, Kirkness EF, Caballero OL, Galante PA, Parmigiani RB, Edsall L, Kuan S, Ye Z, Levy S, Vasconcelos AT, Ren B, de Souza SJ, Camargo AA, Simpson AJ, Strausberg RL: Systematic detection of putative tumor suppressor genes through the combined use of exome and transcriptome sequencing.Genome Biol 2010, 11:R114.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Galante PA, Parmigiani RB, Zhao Q, Caballero OL, de Souza JE, Navarro FC, Gerber AL, Nicolás MF, Salim AC, Silva AP, Edsall L, Devalle S, Almeida LG, Ye Z, Kuan S, Pinheiro DG, Tojal I, Pedigoni RG, de Sousa RG, Oliveira TY, de Paula MG, Ohno-Machado L, Kirkness EF, Levy S, da Silva WA Jr, Vasconcelos AT, Ren B, Zago MA, Strausberg RL, Simpson AJ, de Souza SJ, Camargo AA: Distinct patterns of somatic alterations in a lymphoblastoid and a tumor genome derived from the same individual.Nucleic Acids Res 2011, 39:6056–6068. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkr221PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

Advertisement