SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
“The receptor tyrosine kinase EPHB4 has tumor suppressor activities in intestinal tumorigenesis “
SUPPLEMENTARY FIGURE LEGENDS
Supplementary Figure 1: Immunostaining with endothelial markers. Immunohistochemical staining against CD34 (A-B, C-D) or CD105 (C-D) did not show significant differences between control HT29 cells transfected with pEGFP-N2 and derivative cells transfected with dominant negative EPHB4 C-EGFP (A-D) or small intestinal tumors from Apcmin/+ mice that are wild type or heterozygous for EphB4 (E-F). Arrowheads indicate blood vessels.
Supplementary Figure 2: Number and location of goblet, Paneth and enteroendocrine cells. Staining with 1% Alcian blue was used to reveal goblet cells. Paneth cells were detected by immunostaining with a rabbit polyclonal anti-lysozyme antibody (Dako, CA; prediluted) after treatment with 10 mM citrate pH 6 for 20 min for antigen retrieval. Enteroendocrine cells were quantified after Grimelius staining as described before (Fernandez Pascual et al 1976 Stain Technol 51:231). No differences were observed in the number and location of small intestinal goblet cells (Alcian blue positive; A-B), Paneth cells (Lysozyme positive; C-D) or enteroendocrine cells (Grimelius staining positive; E-F) of Apcmin/+;EphB4+/- and Apcmin/+;EphB4+/+ mice (n=10 and 7, respectively).
Supplementary Figure 3: Microarray data validation. Histogram A) shows the gene expression differences observed in Apcmin/+;EphB4+/+ and Apcmin/+;EphB4+/+ mice using microarray analysis and quantitative Real-Time RT-PCR. B) An excellent correlation was observed between gene expression assessments made with these two techniques (Pearson ’s R=0.99 and p=0.003). Theprimers used were EhBEphB4-F: CAACTGGATGAGAGCGAGAG; EphB4-R: GAGGCAGAGAACTGCAATGA; Igfpbp5-F: AAGCTTCCCTCCAGGAGTTC; Igfpbp5-R: GGAGGGCTTACACTGCTTTC; Mmp2-F: GGGTGGTGGTCATAGCTACTT; Mmp2-R: TTCCAAACTTCACGCTCTTG; Col5a2-F; CAAGACACCTGCTCTAAGCG; Col5a2-R: CCAACATCTATGATGGGCAA; and for 18S rRNA the sequence of the primers and the internal probe were 18S-rRNA-F: AGTCCCTGCCCTTTGTACACA, 18S-rRNA-R: GATCCGAGGGCCTCACTAAAC and 18S-rRNA-probe: FAM-CGCCCGTCGCTACTACCGATTGG-TAMRA.
Supplementary Figure 4: EPHB4 levels and Wnt signaling. A-D) Immunohistochemical staining with an anti- catenin did not reveal any significant differences in the levels or localization of -catenin. E) The levels of activity of TCF4/ - catenin were assessed using the TOP/FOP system as previously reported (Korinek et al 1997 Science 275:1784). Briefly, cells were transfected with a vector containing a three tandem repeat of a consensus TCF4/ -catenin binding site or a mutated binding site driving the transcription of a Luciferase reporter gene. The pRL-TK plasmid was used to control for transfection efficiency. No differences were observed in catenin/TCF4 trascriptional activity in empty vector control HT29 cells (EV) and EPHB4 dominant negative transfectants (DN).
1 SUPPLEMENTARY FIGURE LEGENDS (cont.)
Supplementary Figure 5: Expression of genes involved in the adenoma to carcinoma transition. Previous studies have identified these eight genes as key players in the transition from adenoma to carcinoma (34). The fold change in the expression of these genes is shown for intestinal carcinomas/adenomas in Apcmin/+ mice (grey bars) and in adenomas from Apcmin/+ mice that are wild type or heterozygous for EphB4 (back bars). The inset shows the correlation between these values.
Supplementary Figure 6: Functional network of 60 out of 183 genes differentially expressed in Apcmin/+ mice that are wild type or heterozygous for EPHB4. This network graph represents genes as nodes and functional connections as links. Genes down-regulated (red nodes), genes coding for collagen (blue nodes), genes coding for proteinases (green nodes) and genes coding for growth factors (orange nodes) are highlighted. The larger red node corresponds to EphB4.
2 Supplementary Figure 1
ABAnti CD34 Anti CD34
HT29 HT29 pEGFP N2 pEPHB4 C EGFP C Anti CD105D Anti CD105
HT29 HT29 pEGFP N2 pEPHB4 C EGFP EFAnti CD34 Anti CD34
Apcmin/+ ;EphB4+/+ Apcmin/+ ;EphB4+/
3 Supplementary Figure 2
A) Alcian Blue B) Alcian Blue
EphB4+/+;Apcmin/+ EphB4+/-;Apcmin/+
C) Anti-Lysozyme D) Anti-Lysozyme
EphB4+/+;Apcmin/+ EphB4+/-;Apcmin/+
E) Grimelius F) Grimelius
Apcmin/+;EphB4+/+ Apcmin/+;EphB4+/- 4 Supplementary Figure 3
A) 16 qPCR 12 Array
nge 8
4 Fold cha Fold 0 MMP2 Col5a2 EPHB4 IGFBP5 B)
Pearson’s R=0.99 p=0.003 5 Supplementary Figure 4
6 E) vity ls) i e 4
2 elative Lucelative lev atenin/TCF4 act c R - (
0 HT29- HT29- 6 EV DN Supplementary Figure 5
10 Carcinoma/adenoma 5 EphB4 het/wt
0 nge a -5 Fold EphB4 5 WT/HET -10 -5 5 10 -10 -5
Fold ch -10 A/C
-15 d Fol -15 -20 Pearson R: 0.96 p<0.003 -20 5 2 g l9 t2 2f e 17 0 p r y p M Mc S10 Sox Spr Igfb Serpin
7 Supplementary Figure 6
COLOR KEY
8 EphB4 in intestinal tumorigenesis Dopeso et al
Supplementary Table 1: Genes with fold difference greater than 2-fold in adenomas of Apcmin/+ mice that are wild type or heterozygous for EphB4.
Mean fold in probe set Gene Symbol Gene Name EphB4 WT vs. HET 1448964_at S100g S100 calcium binding protein