4.6 Article

KMT2D loss drives aggressive tumor phenotypes in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CANCER RESEARCH
Volume 12, Issue 3, Pages 1309-1322

Publisher

E-CENTURY PUBLISHING CORP

Keywords

Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma; cSCC; KMT2D; metastasis; skin cancer

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [P30 CA016058]
  2. Pelotonia Postdoctoral Fellowship
  3. Pelotonia Idea Award
  4. Kenyon College-OSU CCC Summer Fellowship

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Loss of KMT2D may promote more aggressive and invasive behaviors in cSCC, suggesting potential targets for cancer therapies.
Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is the second most lethal skin cancer. Due to ultraviolet light induced damage, cSCCs have a high mutation rate, but some genes are more frequently mutated in aggressive cSCCs. Lysine-specific histone methyltransferase 2D (KMT2D) has a two-fold higher mutation frequency in metastatic cSCCs relative to primary non-metastatic associated cSCCs. The role of KMT2D in more aggressive phenotypes in cSCC is uncharacterized. Studies of other tumor types suggest that KMT2D acts to suppress tumor development. To determine whether KMT2D loss has an impact on tumor characteristics, we disrupted KMT2D in a cSCC cell line using CRISPR-cas9 and performed phenotypic analyses. KMT2D loss modestly increased cell proliferation and colony formation (1.4- and 1.6-fold respectively). Cells lacking KMT2D showed increased rates of migration and faster cell cycle progression. In xenograft models, tumors with KMT2D loss showed slight increases in mitotic indices. Collectively, these findings suggest that KMT2D loss-of-function mutations may promote more aggressive and invasive behaviors in cSCC, suggesting that KMT2D-related pathways could be targets for cancer therapies. Future studies to determine the downstream genes and mechanism of phenotypic effect are needed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available