- Research article
- Open Access
Co-expression of low-risk HPV E6/E7 and EBV LMP-1 leads to precancerous lesions by DNA damage
BMC Cancer volume 21, Article number: 688 (2021)
Low-risk human papillomavirus (HPV), such as types 6 and 11, is considered non-oncogenic, but these types have been detected in oral cancer tissue samples, suggesting their possible involvement in oral carcinogenesis. Because double infection of high-risk HPV and Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) is known to be involved in oral carcinogenesis, we hypothesized that low-risk HPV and EBV co-infection can transform the oral cells. To verify our hypothesis, we evaluated the transformation activity of cell lines expressing both low-risk HPV E6/E7 and EBV LMP-1.
We transduced HPV6, 11 and 16 E6/E7 genes and EBV LMP-1 gene into primary mouse embryonic fibroblasts. The cell lines were examined for indices of transformation activity such as proliferation, induction of DNA damage, resistance to apoptosis, anchorage-independent growth, and tumor formation in nude mice. To evaluate the signaling pathways involved in transformation, NF-κB and p53 activities were analyzed. We also assessed adhesion signaling molecules associated with anchorage-independent growth such as MMP-2, paxillin and Cat-1.
Co-expression of low-risk HPV6 E6 and EBV LMP-1 showed increased cell proliferation, elevated NF-κB activity and reduced p53 induction. Moreover, co-expression of low-risk HPV6 E6 and EBV LMP-1 induced DNA damage, escaped from apoptosis under genotoxic condition and suppression of DNA damage response (DDR). Co-expression of low-risk HPV11 E6/E7 and EBV LMP-1 demonstrated similar results. However, it led to no malignant characteristics such as anchorage-independent growth, invasiveness and tumor formation in nude mice. Compared with the cells co-expressing high-risk HPV16 E6 and EBV LMP-1 that induce transformation, co-expression of low-risk HPV6 E6 and EBV LMP-1 was associated with low MMP-2, paxillin and Cat-1 expression.
The co-expression of low-risk HPV E6/E7 and EBV LMP-1 does not induce malignant transformation, but it allows accumulation of somatic mutations secondary to increased DNA damage and suppression of DDR. Thus, double infection of low-risk HPV and EBV could lead to precancerous lesions.
Human papillomavirus (HPV) is an oncogenic virus that causes uterine cervical, oral and anal cancers . More than 200 HPV types with DNA sequence variations have been identified to date. In general, HPV has been roughly classified as high-risk or low-risk HPV, based on their association with malignant or benign tumors, respectively . High-risk HPV such as HPV16 and HPV18 are the major oncogenic types detected in uterine cervical and oral cancers, whereas low-risk HPV such as HPV6 and HPV11 is related to benign lesions such as genital warts and papilloma .
HPV-encoded E6 and E7 genes are viral oncogenes that have a crucial role in cell transformation. In uterine cervical cancers, E6 and E7 from high-risk HPV are integrated into the genome, and their expression inactivates and degrades tumor suppressors p53 and pRb, respectively . By contrast, low-risk HPV E6 and E7 gene expression only weakly inactivates p53  and pRb . Consequently, low-risk HPV is considered to have a lower transformation activity.
On the other hand, low-risk HPV such as HPV6 and HPV11 have been detected in oral cancer tissue samples, suggesting a possible involvement in oral carcinogenesis [5, 6]. However, it remains uncertain whether low-risk HPV actually causes oral cancer.
Double infection of HPV and Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) is known to be associated with oral cancer progression [7,8,9]. EBV is an oncogenic virus associated with nasopharyngeal, gastric cancers and Burkitt lymphoma [10, 11]. LMP-1 is an EBV-encoded oncogene with the ability to transform EBV-infected B cells [12, 13] and human epithelial cells when co-expressed with Bcl-2 .
We previously reported that co-expression of high-risk HPV16 E6 and EBV LMP-1 transforms primary mouse embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs) . Since double infection of high-risk HPV and EBV is involved in oral carcinogenesis, we hypothesized that low-risk HPV could lead to changes in oral cells if the cells are co-infected with EBV. However, whether such co-infection would actually lead to oncogenesis is unknown. In this study, we examined transformation activity of MEFs co-expressing low-risk HPV6/11 E6/E7 and EBV LMP-1, comparing with those co-expressing high-risk HPV16 E6 and EBV LMP-1. We also observed whether injecting these MEFs into nude mice developed tumors.
Cell lines and cell culture
Primary MEFs (CF-1) were purchased from American Type Culture Collection and cultured in Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle Medium (Nissui) with 10% fetal bovine serum (Wako). The cells were incubated at 37 °C in 5% CO2.
The genes HPV6 E6, HPV6 E7, HPV11 E6, HPV11 E7, HPV16 E6 and HPV16 E7 were amplified by PCR containing restriction enzyme sites. These PCR products were digested with restriction enzymes, Bgl II and Xho I (New England Biolab), and ligated to pMSCV-puro vector (Clontech). Plasmids expressing EBV LMP-1, (i.e. pMSCV-neo-LMP-1) were prepared as previously described . pNF-κB-TA-luc, pp53-TA-luc, pβ-gal-basic (Clontech) and pcDNA3.1/Zeo (+) (Invitrogen) were also used for assays.
Viral gene transduction via retrovirus
The procedure for retrovirus production and the construction of viral protein expressing MEFs have been described previously . Briefly, the plasmids pMSCV-puro-6E6, pMSCV-puro-11E6, pMSCV-puro-11E7 and pMSCV-neo-LMP-1 were transfected into packaging cell lines PT-67 (Clontech) using Lipofectamine 2000 (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and incubated for 48 h. Retroviruses harboring the various HPV and/or EBV genes were generated, and CF-1 cells were then infected with the viruses. After retroviral infection, the cells were selected using 3 μg/ml puromycin or 150 μg/ml geneticin. Each viral gene expression was confirmed by RT-PCR (Supplemental Figure S1).
RNA was extracted from 1 × 106 cells using total RNA isolation (Macherey-Nagel). One μg of total RNA was treated with DNase I Amplification Grade (Thermo Fisher Scientific), followed by reverse transcription using PrimeScript II 1st strand cDNA Synthesis Kit (Takara). Aliquots of the resulting cDNA were used as a template in PCR with primers shown in Supplemental Table S1.
MTT (methyl thiazolyl tetrazolium) assays
The cells were seeded in 96-well plate at 1000 cells/well. The cell numbers were counted by adding cell count reagent SF (Nakalai Tesque) with the reaction performed at 37 °C for 90 min. Absorbance at 450 nm was measured by a micro plate reader (SH-1000, Corona).
TdT-mediated dUTP-biotin nick end labeling (TUNEL) staining
Apoptotic cells were detected by TUNEL staining under genotoxic conditions. The cells were seeded on chamber slides (4 well SLIDE and CHANBER sterilized, Watson) at 5 × 104 cells/well, treated with 125 μM H2O2 and then fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde for 30 min. After washing with PBS, TUNEL staining was performed using in situ Apoptosis Detection kit (Takara). The slides were treated with ProLong Gold Antifade Mountant with DAPI (Thermo Fisher Scientific).
Similar as for TUNEL staining, the cells were seeded in chamber slides, and fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde. The fixed cells were treated with 0.5% TritonX-100 (Wako), and washed in PBS. After blocking with 1% BSA (Wako), the cells were incubated with primary antibodies (shown in Supplemental Table S2) for 60 min followed by Alexa Fluor 594 (Thermo Fisher Scientific) for 40 min. The slides were treated with ProLong Gold Antifade Mountant with DAPI (Thermo Fisher Scientific).
Total protein was extracted from 1.0 × 106 cells using SDS buffer containing protease inhibitor cocktail (Sigma-Aldrich). Ten μg of extracted protein was electrophoresed on 10% SDS-PAGE and transferred to polyvinylidene difluoride membranes (GE Health Care Life Sciences). The protein-bonded membranes were blocked with 5% non-fat milk or 5% BSA (Wako) for 60 min. After washing in TBS-T, the membranes were incubated with primary antibodies (shown in Supplemental Table S3). The signals were detected using Amersham ECL Prime (GE Health Care Life Sciences). Signal density was calculated by Image J software (National Institute of Health).
Luciferase reporter assays
One day before analysis, the cells were seeded on a 96-well plate at 1.0 × 105 cells/well. The cells were transfected with pNF-κB-TA-luc or pp53-TA-luc (100 ng), pcDNA3.1/ Zeo (+) (100 ng) and pβ-gal-basic (50 ng) using Lipofectamine 2000 (Thermo Fisher Scientific) for 24 h. Cell lysates were assayed using a reporter assay system (Promega), and luciferase activity was measured by a Glomax 96 microplate luminometer (Promega). The lysates were incubated at 48 °C for 60 min, and assayed using the Galacto-Light Plus β-Galactosidase Reporter Gene Assay System (Applied Biosystem). Relative activities were calculated using β-galactosidase activity as an internal control.
Soft agar colony formation assays
A 0.75% base agar containing DMEM, FBS, penicillin and streptomycin was added to 6-well plates. Subsequently, top agar (0.36% agar, DMEM, FBS, penicillin and streptomycin) containing 2.0 × 105 cells was added onto the base agar. The cells were cultured for 4 weeks.
Cell invasion assays
A total of 1.0 × 105 cells were cultured with low serum medium (DMEM containing 0.5% BSA, 2 mM CaCl2 and 2 mM MgCl2) at 37 °C for 6 h and seeded onto a polycarbonate membrane. Invasive cells were detected by a CytoSelec 24-Well Cell Invasion Assay Basement Membrane, Colorimetric Format (Cell Biolabs).
A total of 1.0 × 105 cells were mixed with molten LMAgarose and 50 μl was placed on CometSlide (Trevigen). The slides were incubated with lysis solution (Trevigen) at 4 °C for overnight. Electrophoresis was performed at 100 V for 40 min. The electrophoresed slides were stained with SYBR® Green for 30 min in the dark. Comet length was measured using Image J (NIH).
Animal experiments were done in accordance with the guidelines for animal treatment, housing, and euthanasia of the Animal Experiment Committee of the University of the Ryukyus. The protocol of animal experiments was approved by the Animal Experiment Committee of the University of the Ryukyus (reference number: 5730). Four week-old female BALB/cScl-nu/nu nude mice (Japan SLC, Inc.) were purchased. At 5 weeks of age, they were injected subcutaneously with 1.0 × 105 cells. The mice were euthanized 12 weeks after injection with sodium pentobarbital, and tissue samples were collected for molecular and histological analysis.
Tumor samples from the nude mice were fixed in 10% phosphate-buffered formalin and embedded in paraffin. The samples were sectioned in 3 μm-thickness and dewaxed with xylene. The sections were examined with conventional hematoxylin and eosin staining. For immunohistochemistry, the sections were heated with 10 mM citrate buffer (pH 6.8) in an electric pot. After antigen retrieval, the sections were treated with 0.3% H2O2, and incubated with 1% BSA for 60 min. The sections were then incubated with primary antibodies (shown in Supplemental Table S2) for 60 min followed by HRP-labeled secondary antibody (Nichirei). The signals were visualized using diaminobenzidine (Nichirei).
Data were analyzed by non-repeated measures ANOVA followed by Bonferroni’s multiple comparison test. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.
Co-expression of low-risk HPV6 E6 and EBV LMP-1 increased cell proliferation via NF-κB activation and reduced p53 induction
To evaluate the transformation activity by low-risk HPV6 E6 and EBV LMP-1 co-expression, we firstly examined cell proliferation rates using MTT assay. The cells expressing any of the viral proteins grew significantly faster than mock cells (††p < 0.01) (Fig. 1A). In particular, the cells co-expressing both HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) and HPV16 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (16E6 + LMP-1) showed significantly higher proliferation rates regardless of whether the E6 was from high-risk or low-risk HPV (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01). HPV6 E7 + EBV LMP-1 (6E7 + LMP-1) also demonstrated elevated proliferation compared with mock cells, as seen in Supplemental Figure S2A.
It has been reported that EBV LMP-1 activates nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB) pathways , while HPV E6 and E7 suppress or degrade p53 and pRb . To examine the relationship in the cells expressing low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) between high proliferative activity and NF-κB activity, NF-κB-related proteins and its transactivation activity were measured by Western blotting and luciferase reporter assay, respectively. On Western blotting analyses, low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) showed phosphorylation of IκB, processing of p105 to p50, and high RelB expression (Fig. 1B) correlated with high pIκB/IκB ratio but comparable p105/p50 one to mock cells (Fig. 1C, D). On reporter assay for NF-κB, low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) had higher activity than cells expressing only HPV6 E6 (6E6) (*p < 0.05) (Fig. 1E). As EBV LMP-1 suppresses transcription of p53 , we performed a reporter assay to examine p53 induction in each cell line. The cells co-expressing low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) reduced p53 induction significantly more than those expressing HPV6 E6 alone (6E6) (Fig. 1F). However, both NF-κB activation and p53 suppression of low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) were lower than those resulting from high-risk HPV16 + EBV LMP-1 (16E6 + LMP-1) (Fig. 1E, F). Experiments with HPV11 E6/E7 + EBV LMP-1 (11E6 + LMP-1 and 11E7 + LMP-1) yielded similar findings, as seen in Supplemental Figure. S2B-E.
Co-expression of low-risk HPV6 E6 and EBV LMP-1 induced DNA damage, escape from apoptosis and suppression of DNA damage response (DDR) under genotoxic condition
Generally, it is thought that DNA damage occurs in cancer cells by hyperproliferation associated with oncogene signaling. DNA damage activates DNA damage response (DDR) pathway, which transmits signals to various cellular machineries including apoptosis. Therefore, apoptosis is suppressed by derangement of both the apoptotic machinery and DDR [19, 20]. To analyze DNA damage, we performed immunofluorescent staining of γ-H2AX. MEFs expressing viral protein(s) had a higher percentage of γ-H2AX-positive cells than mock cells (Fig. 2A, B and Supplemental Figure S3A, B). In particular, the cells expressing low-risk HPV6/11 E6/E7 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1, 6E7 + LMP-1, 11E6 + LMP-1 and 11E7 + LMP-1) induced greater DNA damage than the cells expressing low-risk HPV6/11 E6 or E7 alone (6E6, 6E7, 11E6 and 11E7) (Fig. 2A, B and Supplemental Figure S3A, B). A comet assay also showed that low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) induced longer comet tails than mock cells and increased the comet positivity rate (Fig. 2C, D and Table 1). We performed TUNEL staining under genotoxic conditions to examine resistance to apoptosis. Low-risk HPV6/11 E6/7 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1, 6E7 + LMP-1, 11E6 + LMP-1 and 11E7 + LMP-1) had a lower percentage of TUNEL-positive cells than MEFs expressing a single viral protein (6E6, 6E7, 11E6 and 11E7) (Fig. 2E, F and Supplemental Figure S3C, D), despite of increased DNA damage (Fig. 2A-D and Supplemental Figure S3A, B). We also assessed DDR by Western blotting. Under normal conditions, the ATR-Chk1 pathway was induced among all the cell lines tested including original CF-1 and mock cells, but ATM-Chk2 proteins were not expressed (Fig. 2G and Supplemental Figure S3E). Under genotoxic conditions, mock cells and the cells expressing a single viral protein induced ATM, ATR, Chk1, and Chk2. However, these DDR proteins were suppressed in cells expressing low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) suggesting inhibition of DDR (Fig. 2G). Taken together, low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) caused greater DNA damage and suppression of DDR, leading to mutagenesis identical to that seen with high-risk HPV16 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (16E6 + LMP-1).
No malignant phenotype was seen in the cells co-expressing low-risk HPV6 E6 and EBV LMP-1
To assess the malignant features associated with low-risk HPV6 E6 and EBV LMP-1 co-expression, we performed soft agar colony formation and cell invasion assays. In the former, high-risk HPV16 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (16E6 + LMP-1) cells formed abundant colonies of various sizes in the agar medium, but low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) cells formed no colony (Fig. 3A, B). In cell invasion assay, high-risk HPV16 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (16E6 + LMP-1) cells displayed higher invasive capacity than other clones, while low-risk HPV6/11 E6/E7 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1, 6E7 + LMP-1, 11E6 + LMP-1 and 11E7 + LMP-1) exhibited only slightly more invasion than mock cells, a result comparable to that with clones expressing only one of the viral proteins (Fig. 3C, D and Supplemental Figure S4A, B). To assess the tumor formation in vivo, we injected the cell lines under the skin of 5 week-old nude mice and observed them for 2 months. Although all the mice injected with high-risk HPV16 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (16E6 + LMP-1) cells developed tumors, no tumor was found in mice injected with low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) cells, low-risk HPV11 E6/E7 + EBV LMP-1 (11E6 + LMP-1 and 11E7 + LMP-1) cells or mock cells (Table 2 and Supplemental Table S4).
Anchorage-independent growth was suppressed in the cells co-expressing low-risk HPV6 E6 and EBV LMP-1 through downregulation of adhesion signaling
Despite the mutagenetic effects of low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) cells and low-risk HPV11 E6/E7 + EBV LMP-1 (11E6 + LMP-1 and 11E7 + LMP-1), they were unable to induce transformation (Table 2 and Supplemental Table S4). The most significant difference between low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) and high-risk HPV16 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (16E6 + LMP-1) cells was invasiveness and anchorage-independent growth. To examine more precisely, we compared the expression level of matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP-2), which plays crucial role in cancer invasion. Although high-risk HPV16 E6 alone (16E6) or with EBV LMP-1 (16E6 + LMP-1) was associated with increased MMP-2 expression, low-risk HPV6 E6 (6E6) did not induce MMP-2 expression. Conversely, it suppressed the effect of LMP-1 on MMP-2 induction, which was seen in low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) (Fig. 4A, B). Anchorage-independent growth is an important neoplastic trait associated with adhesion signaling. It has been reported that control of focal adhesion proteins such as paxillin is important for cancer metastasis, which depends on cellular migration and cell-matrix adhesion . Cool-associated tyrosine-phosphorylated protein-1 (Cat-1) has a crucial role in anchorage-independent growth by interacting with paxillin, which then activates Akt signaling in uterine cervical carcinoma cells . We compared adhesion molecule signaling between low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) and high-risk HPV16 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (16E6 + LMP-1) using immunocytochemistry and Western blotting. Although some of the viral proteins demonstrated increased levels of paxillin, low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) displayed comparable level of mock cells (Fig. 4C, D). Elevated Cat-1 expression was only seen in cells with high-risk HPV16 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (16E6 + LMP-1) (Fig. 4E, F). We confirmed similar cytoplasmic expression of MMP-2, paxillin and Cat-1 in the tumors arising in the nude mice injected with high-risk HPV16 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (16E6 + LMP-1) (Supplemental Figure S5). High-risk HPV16 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (16E6 + LMP-1) induced greater Akt signaling, whereas low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) showed low Akt activity (Fig. 4G). These results suggest that co-infection with a low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) is incapable of causing invasion and anchorage-independent growth because such an expression would not affect adhesion signaling by MMP-2, paxillin, and Cat-1 in the same way that high-risk HPV16 E6 and EBV LMP-1 co-expression does.
Collectively, these data indicate that low-risk HPV and EBV co-infections cannot induce malignant transformation because they do not disrupt cell adhesion signaling, but on the other hand, they do induce preneoplastic lesions that have substantial DNA damage and suppressed DDR.
Our study demonstrated that co-expression of low-risk HPV6/11 E6/E7 and EBV LMP-1 (HPV6 E6 + LMP-1, HPV6 E7 + LMP-1, HPV11 E6 + LMP-1 and HPV11 E7 + LMP-1) led to increased cell proliferation, elevated NF-κB activity, and reduced induction of p53. These co-expressing clones also induced DNA damage, which did not evoke apoptosis and DDR, implying that the accumulated DNA damage triggers mutation. However, in contrast to finding with high-risk HPV16 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (16E6 + LMP-1), low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) did not induce anchorage-independent growth, invasiveness and tumor formation in nude mice. These findings suggest that a co-infection with a low-risk HPV and EBV increases mutagenicity but does not cause malignant transformation.
Compared with high-risk HPV E6 and E7, low-risk HPV genes had little effect on p53 and pRb, eliciting weak degradation of those tumor suppressor genes . This may explain why low-risk HPVs evoke neither immortalization nor transformation.
In previous reports, we demonstrated that dual expression of high-risk HPV16 E6 and EBV LMP-1 in primary MEFs induced transformation, whereas either viral protein alone did not . In addition, transformation of cells co-expressing high-risk HPV16 E6 and EBV LMP-1 is associated with suppression of DDR and increased NF-κB activity . In a study on LMP-1 expressing B-lymphoma line, DDR was blocked by suppression of the DNA damage sensor, ATM and its downstream protein Chk2 . LMP-1 is also known to induce immortalization of primary human lymphocytes by suppression of apoptosis through NF-κB activation . In addition, LMP-1 has been reported to induce transformation of immortalized human keratinocytes and confer invasion capacity through suppression of E-cadherin expression [25, 26].
In the present study, low-risk HPV6/11 E6/E7 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1, 11E6 + LMP-1 and 11E7 + LMP-1) activated the NF-κB pathway and suppressed p53 transcriptional activity, an effect not seen in cells expressing low-risk HPV6/11 E6 or E7 alone (6E6, 11E6 and 11E7). It has been reported that LMP-1 activates NF-κB and suppresses transcription of p53, leading to genome instability and inhibition of apoptosis [18, 27]. However, we found that low-risk HPV6 E6 and EBV LMP-1 co-expression was unable to cause transformation. These findings indicate that increased NF-κB activity and suppression of DDR, while leading to mutagenesis, are insufficient for low-risk HPV to induce carcinogenesis.
One striking difference between co-expression of EBV LMP-1 with E6 or E7 from low- versus high-risk HPV was the effects on anchorage-independent growth. Scaffold proteins such as paxillin play an important role in regulating cell migration. Paxillin links the cell membrane to the actin cytoskeleton, and recruits tyrosine kinases such as FAK and Src . Tong and Howley reported that paxillin interacts with high-risk HPV E6 to cause transformation, but these effects are not seen with low-risk HPV E6 . Another scaffold protein, Cat-1 interacts with paxillin and promotes anchorage-independent growth by Akt activation in HeLa cells . Our data showed that low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) induced less expression of paxillin and Cat-1 than high-risk HPV16 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (16E6 + LMP-1). Probably, the insufficient anchorage-independent growth with low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) may be explained by downregulation of cell signaling via paxillin and Cat-1. MMP-2 is associated with metastasis of oral squamous cell carcinoma cells . Zhu et al. reported that HPV16 E6 and E7 proteins upregulate MMP-2 and MMP-9, and promote cell migration of cervical cancer cells . Similar to high-risk HPV E6 and E7, EBV LMP-1 protein isolated from nasopharyngeal carcinoma also induces MMPs . As with our other findings, MMP-2 expression with low-risk HPV6 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1) was lower than with high-risk HPV16 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (16E6 + LMP-1). Because MMPs are induced via the NF-κB pathway [32, 33], our data suggest that differences in NF-κB activity in low- versus high-risk HPV co-infection with EBV are associated with differences in anchorage-independent growth.
As summarized in Table 3, our findings with regard to the ability of HPV to affect various factors involved oncogenesis indicate that low-risk HPV proteins alone cause little effect but that low-risk HPV E6 or E7 along with EBV LMP-1 leads to significant mutagenesis without malignant transformation seen with high-risk HPV16 E6 + EBV LMP-1 (16E6 + LMP-1). Several investigators have reported that malignant tumors can develop from benign low-risk HPV associated lesions by smoking or irradiation [34,35,36]. Because low-risk HPV E6/E7 + EBV LMP-1 (6E6 + LMP-1, 6E7 + LMP-1, 11E6 + LMP-1 and 11E7 + LMP-1) induces more mutagenesis than infection with low-risk HPV E6/E7 alone (6E6, 6E7, 11E6 and 11E7), co-infection of low-risk HPV and EBV may therefore induce precancerous lesions that could be more easily transformed if they are subsequently subjected to further mutagenic effects.
In summary, our research demonstrated that the co-expression of low-risk HPV6/11 E6/E7 and EBV LMP-1 does not induce malignant transformation, but it allows accumulation of somatic mutations secondary to increased DNA damage and suppression of DDR. Thus, double infection of low-risk HPV and EBV could lead to precancerous lesions.
Availability of data and materials
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Latent membrane protein-1
DNA damage response
Mouse embryonic fibroblast
Methyl thiazolyl tetrazolium, 3-(4,5-Dimethyl-2-thiazolyl)-2,5-diphenyl-2H-tetrazolium bromide
TdT-mediated dUTP-biotin nick end labeling
Cool-associated tyrosine-phosphorylated protein-1
Doorbar J, Quint W, Banks L, Bravo IG, Stoler M, Broker TR, et al. The biology and life-cycle of human papillomaviruses. Vaccine. 2012;30(Suppl 5):F55–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.06.083.
Munoz N, Bosch FX, de Sanjose S, Herrero R, Castellsague X, Shah KV, et al. Epidemiologic classification of human papillomavirus types associated with cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;348(6):518–27. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa021641.
Li X, Coffino P. High-risk human papillomavirus E6 protein has two distinct binding sites within p53, of which only one determines degradation. J Virol. 1996;70(7):4509–16. https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.70.7.4509-4516.1996.
Munger K, Werness BA, Dyson N, Phelps WC, Harlow E, Howley PM. Complex formation of human papillomavirus E7 proteins with the retinoblastoma tumor suppressor gene product. EMBO J. 1989;8(13):4099–105. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1460-2075.1989.tb08594.x.
Lee LA, Huang CG, Tsao KC, Liao CT, Kang CJ, Chang KP, et al. Increasing rates of low-risk human papillomavirus infections in patients with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma: association with clinical outcomes. J Clin Virol. 2013;57(4):331–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2013.04.010.
Kreimer AR, Clifford GM, Boyle P, Franceschi S. Human papillomavirus types in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas worldwide: a systematic review. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2005;14(2):467–75. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-04-0551.
Jiang R, Ekshyyan O, Moore-Medlin T, Rong X, Nathan S, Gu X, et al. Association between human papilloma virus/Epstein-Barr virus coinfection and oral carcinogenesis. J Oral Pathol Med. 2015;44(1):28–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/jop.12221.
Polz-Gruszka D, Morshed K, Stec A, Polz-Dacewicz M. Prevalence of human papillomavirus (HPV) and Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) in oral and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma in South-Eastern Poland. Infect Agent Cancer. 2015;10(1):37. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13027-015-0031-z.
Tsuhako K, Nakazato I, Miyagi J, Iwamasa T, Arasaki A, Hiratsuka H, et al. Comparative study of oral squamous cell carcinoma in Okinawa, southern Japan and Sapporo in Hokkaido, northern Japan; with special reference to human papillomavirus and Epstein-Barr virus infection. J Oral Pathol Med. 2000;29(2):70–9. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0714.2000.290204.x.
Hutt-Fletcher LM. Epstein-Barr virus entry. J Virol. 2007;81(15):7825–32. https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.00445-07.
Young LS, Murray PG. Epstein-Barr virus and oncogenesis: from latent genes to tumours. Oncogene. 2003;22(33):5108–21. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1206556.
Roberts ML, Cooper NR. Activation of a ras-MAPK-dependent pathway by Epstein-Barr virus latent membrane protein 1 is essential for cellular transformation. Virology. 1998;240(1):93–9. https://doi.org/10.1006/viro.1997.8901.
Kulwichit W, Edwards RH, Davenport EM, Baskar JF, Godfrey V, Raab-Traub N. Expression of the Epstein-Barr virus latent membrane protein 1 induces B cell lymphoma in transgenic mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998;95(20):11963–8. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.95.20.11963.
Lu JJ, Chen JY, Hsu TY, Yu WC, Su IJ, Yang CS. Cooperative interaction between Bcl-2 and Epstein-Barr virus latent membrane protein 1 in the growth transformation of human epithelial cells. J Gen Virol. 1997;78(Pt 11):2975–85. https://doi.org/10.1099/0022-1317-78-11-2975.
Shimabuku T, Tamanaha A, Kitamura B, Tanabe Y, Tawata N, Ikehara F, et al. Dual expression of Epstein-Barr virus, latent membrane protein-1 and human papillomavirus-16 E6 transform primary mouse embryonic fibroblasts through NF-kappaB signaling. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2014;7(5):1920–34.
Tamanaha-Nakasone A, Uehara K, Tanabe Y, Ishikawa H, Yamakawa N, Toyoda Z, et al. K1 gene transformation activities in AIDS-related and classic type Kaposi's sarcoma: correlation with clinical presentation. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):6416. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-42763-0.
Gires O, Zimber-Strobl U, Gonnella R, Ueffing M, Marschall G, Zeidler R, et al. Latent membrane protein 1 of Epstein-Barr virus mimics a constitutively active receptor molecule. EMBO J. 1997;16(20):6131–40. https://doi.org/10.1093/emboj/16.20.6131.
Liu MT, Chang YT, Chen SC, Chuang YC, Chen YR, Lin CS, et al. Epstein-Barr virus latent membrane protein 1 represses p53-mediated DNA repair and transcriptional activity. Oncogene. 2005;24(16):2635–46. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1208319.
Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell. 2011;144(5):646–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2011.02.013.
Kuo LJ, Yang LX. Gamma-H2AX - a novel biomarker for DNA double-strand breaks. In Vivo. 2008;22(3):305–9.
Turner CE. Paxillin and focal adhesion signalling. Nat Cell Biol. 2000;2(12):E231–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/35046659.
Yoo SM, Latifkar A, Cerione RA, Antonyak MA. Cool-associated tyrosine-phosphorylated protein 1 is required for the Anchorage-independent growth of cervical carcinoma cells by binding Paxillin and promoting AKT activation. J Biol Chem. 2017;292(9):3947–57. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M116.769190.
Gruhne B, Sompallae R, Masucci MG. Three Epstein-Barr virus latency proteins independently promote genomic instability by inducing DNA damage, inhibiting DNA repair and inactivating cell cycle checkpoints. Oncogene. 2009;28(45):3997–4008. https://doi.org/10.1038/onc.2009.258.
Devergne O, Hatzivassiliou E, Izumi KM, Kaye KM, Kleijnen MF, Kieff E, et al. Association of TRAF1, TRAF2, and TRAF3 with an Epstein-Barr virus LMP1 domain important for B-lymphocyte transformation: role in NF-kappaB activation. Mol Cell Biol. 1996;16(12):7098–108. https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.16.12.7098.
Hu LF, Chen F, Zheng X, Ernberg I, Cao SL, Christensson B, et al. Clonability and tumorigenicity of human epithelial cells expressing the EBV encoded membrane protein LMP1. Oncogene. 1993;8(6):1575–83.
Fahraeus R, Chen W, Trivedi P, Klein G, Obrink B. Decreased expression of E-cadherin and increased invasive capacity in EBV-LMP-transfected human epithelial and murine adenocarcinoma cells. Int J Cancer. 1992;52(5):834–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.2910520527.
Husaini R, Ahmad M, Soo-Beng Khoo A. Epstein-Barr virus latent membrane protein LMP1 reduces p53 protein levels independent of the PI3K-Akt pathway. BMC Res Notes. 2011;4(1):551. https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-4-551.
Tong X, Howley PM. The bovine papillomavirus E6 oncoprotein interacts with paxillin and disrupts the actin cytoskeleton. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997;94(9):4412–7. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.94.9.4412.
Kawamata H, Nakashiro K, Uchida D, Harada K, Yoshida H, Sato M. Possible contribution of active MMP2 to lymph-node metastasis and secreted cathepsin L to bone invasion of newly established human oral-squamous-cancer cell lines. Int J Cancer. 1997;70(1):120–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0215(19970106)70:1<120::AID-IJC18>3.0.CO;2-P.
Zhu D, Ye M, Zhang W. E6/E7 oncoproteins of high risk HPV-16 upregulate MT1-MMP, MMP-2 and MMP-9 and promote the migration of cervical cancer cells. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2015;8(5):4981–9.
Lee DC, Chua DT, Wei WI, Sham JS, Lau AS. Induction of matrix metalloproteinases by Epstein-Barr virus latent membrane protein 1 isolated from nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Biomed Pharmacother. 2007;61(9):520–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopha.2007.08.007.
Li J, Lau GK, Chen L, Dong SS, Lan HY, Huang XR, et al. Interleukin 17A promotes hepatocellular carcinoma metastasis via NF-kB induced matrix metalloproteinases 2 and 9 expression. PLoS One. 2011;6(7):e21816. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021816.
Bond M, Fabunmi RP, Baker AH, Newby AC. Synergistic upregulation of metalloproteinase-9 by growth factors and inflammatory cytokines: an absolute requirement for transcription factor NF-kappa B. FEBS Lett. 1998;435(1):29–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0014-5793(98)01034-5.
Lindeberg H, Syrjanen S, Karja J, Syrjanen K. Human papillomavirus type 11 DNA in squamous cell carcinomas and pre-existing multiple laryngeal papillomas. Acta Otolaryngol. 1989;107(1–2):141–9. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016488909127491.
Kashima H, Wu TC, Mounts P, Heffner D, Cachay A, Hyams V. Carcinoma ex-papilloma: histologic and virologic studies in whole-organ sections of the larynx. Laryngoscope. 1988;98(6 Pt 1):619–24. https://doi.org/10.1288/00005537-198806000-00008.
Lindeberg H, Elbrond O. Malignant tumours in patients with a history of multiple laryngeal papillomas: the significance of irradiation. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1991;16(2):149–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2273.1991.tb01965.x.
We thank Professor Yasuharu Tanaka (University of the Ryukyus) for providing pNF-κB-TA-luc, pp53-TA-luc, pcDNA3.1/Zeo (+) and pβ-gal-basic. We also thank The Institute for Animal Experiments, Faculty of Medicine, University of the Ryukyus for excellent care of our animals.
This work was supported by Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research, Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP18K17030) to K.U. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the authors’ organization or JSPS.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Animal experiments were done in accordance with the guidelines for animal treatment, housing, and euthanasia of the Animal Experiment Committee of the University of the Ryukyus. The protocol of animal experiments was approved by the Animal Experiment Committee of the University of the Ryukyus (reference number: 5730).
Consent for publication
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Viral gene(s) expression of each clones.
Primers used for RT-PCR. Table S2. Primary antibodies used for immunocytochemistry and immunohistochemistry.
Primary antibodies used for Western blotting. Table S4. Tumors in nude mice.
Cell proliferation, NF-κBactivity and p53 induction.
DNA damage, DNA damage response (DDR) and apoptosis.
Expression of adhesion molecules in tumors arising from nude mice.
About this article
Cite this article
Uehara, K., Tanabe, Y., Hirota, S. et al. Co-expression of low-risk HPV E6/E7 and EBV LMP-1 leads to precancerous lesions by DNA damage. BMC Cancer 21, 688 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-021-08397-0
- Low-risk HPV
- High-risk HPV
- EBV LMP-1
- Precancerous lesion