» Articles » PMID: 27510297

Membrane Bile Acid Receptor TGR5 Predicts Good Prognosis in Ampullary Adenocarcinoma Patients with Hyperbilirubinemia

Overview
Journal Oncol Rep
Specialty Oncology
Date 2016 Aug 12
PMID 27510297
Citations 12
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Bile acids are potential carcinogens in gastrointestinal cancer, and interact with nuclear and membrane receptors to initiate downstream signaling. The effect of TGR5 [also known as G protein-coupled bile acid receptor 1 (GPBAR1)] on cancer progression is dependent on the tissue where it is activated. In this report, the function of TGR5 expression in cancer was studied using a bioinformatic approach. TGR5 expression in ampullary adenocarcinoma and normal duodenum was compared by western blotting, reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, and immunohistochemistry (IHC). High GPBAR1 gene expression was found to be an indicator of worse prognosis in gastric and breast cancer patients, and an indication of better prognosis in ovarian cancer patients. The level of GPBAR1 gene expression was higher in bile‑acid exposed cancer than in other types of cancer, and was increased in well-differentiated ampullary adenocarcinoma. Negative, weak or mild expression of TGR5 was correlated with younger age, higher plasma level of total/direct bilirubin, higher plasma concentration of CA-125, advanced tumor stage and advanced AJCC TNM stage. The disease-specific survival rate was highest in ampullary adenocarcinoma patients with high TGR5 expression and high total bilirubin level. In summary, TGR5 functions as a tumor-suppressor in patients with ampullary adenocarcinoma and preoperative hyperbilirubinemia. Further study of the suppressive mechanism may provide a new therapeutic option for patients with ampullary adenocarcinoma.

Citing Articles

Bacterial metabolites: Effects on the development of breast cancer and therapeutic efficacy (Review).

Guo Y, Dong W, Sun D, Zhao X, Huang Z, Liu C Oncol Lett. 2025; 29(4):210.

PMID: 40070782 PMC: 11894516. DOI: 10.3892/ol.2025.14956.


Predictive value of direct bilirubin and total bile acid in lung adenocarcinoma patients treated with EGFR-TKIs.

Li Y, Wang B, Fei S, Qin Y BMC Pulm Med. 2024; 24(1):583.

PMID: 39580432 PMC: 11585954. DOI: 10.1186/s12890-024-03367-1.


The role of TGR5 as an onco-immunological biomarker in tumor staging and prognosis by encompassing the tumor microenvironment.

Guan Z, Luo L, Liu S, Guan Z, Zhang Q, Wu Z Front Oncol. 2022; 12:953091.

PMID: 36338742 PMC: 9630950. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.953091.


TGR5 deficiency activates antitumor immunity in non-small cell lung cancer  restraining M2 macrophage polarization.

Zhao L, Zhang H, Liu X, Xue S, Chen D, Zou J Acta Pharm Sin B. 2022; 12(2):787-800.

PMID: 35256947 PMC: 8897042. DOI: 10.1016/j.apsb.2021.07.011.


GPBAR1 promotes proliferation and is related to poor prognosis of high-grade glioma via inducing MAFB expression.

Sun S, Guo H, Liang N, Wu T, Zhang C, Li H Histol Histopathol. 2021; 37(3):251-260.

PMID: 34904217 DOI: 10.14670/HH-18-407.


References
1.
Cao W, Tian W, Hong J, Li D, Tavares R, Noble L . Expression of bile acid receptor TGR5 in gastric adenocarcinoma. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2012; 304(4):G322-7. PMC: 3566614. DOI: 10.1152/ajpgi.00263.2012. View

2.
Hsu H, Shan Y, Jin Y, Lai M, Lin P . Loss of E-cadherin and beta-catenin is correlated with poor prognosis of ampullary neoplasms. J Surg Oncol. 2010; 101(5):356-62. DOI: 10.1002/jso.21493. View

3.
Kim I, Morimura K, Shah Y, Yang Q, Ward J, Gonzalez F . Spontaneous hepatocarcinogenesis in farnesoid X receptor-null mice. Carcinogenesis. 2006; 28(5):940-6. PMC: 1858639. DOI: 10.1093/carcin/bgl249. View

4.
Thomas C, Gioiello A, Noriega L, Strehle A, Oury J, Rizzo G . TGR5-mediated bile acid sensing controls glucose homeostasis. Cell Metab. 2009; 10(3):167-77. PMC: 2739652. DOI: 10.1016/j.cmet.2009.08.001. View

5.
Remmele W, Schicketanz K . Immunohistochemical determination of estrogen and progesterone receptor content in human breast cancer. Computer-assisted image analysis (QIC score) vs. subjective grading (IRS). Pathol Res Pract. 1993; 189(8):862-6. DOI: 10.1016/S0344-0338(11)81095-2. View