2. APE1 and cancer: a focus on polymorphisms and tissue expression
As previously discussed, being entailed in such focal cellular processes, APE1 dysregulation has a great impact on pathologies like cancer, making it an attractive therapeutical target [
2,
22]. APE1 dysregulation is involved, at three different levels, in tumour development, as it may concern alterations to its genetic sequence, to its expression, or to its localization [
2].
Several studies pointed out the important role of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), present in APE1 gene, in cancer pathology [
23] (
Figure 1). The most common and studied APE1 variant is Asp148Glu (D148E), which is present in 48,5% of the population [
24]. X-ray crystallography experiments showed that this variant lacks significant structural changes and its considered benign [
25]. As a matter of fact, the protein bearing this SNP holds normal AP endonuclease and DNA binding properties, but its 3’-RNA phosphatase and endoribonuclease activities are somehow affected [
14,
26]. The role of this polymorphism in cancer is controversial, due to several conflicting data in literature [
24]. This common variant has been widely studied since more than a hundred publications can be found regarding this topic. Numerous studies and meta-analysis associated D148E variant with an increased risk of different cancers, while others reported the opposite pattern even in the same tumour type [
2,
24,
27]. Another APE1 polymorphic variant associated with cancer and biochemically studied is Arg237Cys (R237C) [
28,
29]. This substitution is associated with endometrial cancer [
28,
29] and it has greater consequences on the functional activity of the whole protein [
25]. Indeed, the protein X-ray crystal structure revealed that this aminoacidic variation causes significant shifts in adjacent DNA binding residues, leading to a great diminution (
3-fold) of APE1 DNA binding ability [
25]. Remarkably, this polymorphic variant has a reduced ability to associate with its BER partners, such as polymerase β (Pol β) and XRCC1 [
23]. Indeed, the X-ray structure shows that also lysine 244 (K244) changes its position [
25], which has been implicated in APE1-Pol β protein-protein interaction [
30]. It has also been reported that R237C variant has a reduced AP-endonuclease activity [
23], reduced 3’->5’ exonuclease and 3’-damage excision activities [
29] and it has a reduced incision capacity close to nucleosomes [
31]. One more endometrial tumour-associated variant is Pro112Leu (P112L) [
28], which had comparable AP-endonuclease activity to the wild type form [
29].
In this review, we performed an analysis on cBioPortal to find APEX1 SNPs or insertion/deletions (IN/DELs) related to different cancer types, considering a curated selection of non-redundant studies (213 studies selected, 69223 samples, 65853 patients) (
https://bit.ly/3M9OYa7) [
32,
33]. The somatic mutation frequency of APEX1 was 0.2% with 108 unique variants. None of the variants detected was a driver mutation for cancer and most of them were sporadic. The most frequent variants were R193C/H, D148E, and H289Y/Q. Interestingly, even if R193C and R193H variants were detected to a comparable extent to D148E in the selected cohort of studies, there is no work in the literature that focuses on this mutation and on its functional impact. According to Mutation Assessor tool [
34,
35], theoretically, R193H has a low impact on the protein functional activity, while R193C might have a worse impact. There are no functional studies even about H289Y/Q variants, which are predicted to have a neutral impact on protein activity. In
Table 1, we report every variant found with the cBioPortal tool for each tumour type.
APE1 overexpression and altered localization are prominent features of several different tumours and most of the time they have been associated with poor prognosis and malignant phenotypes. We further provide a description of how APE1 is altered in cancer and how this impacts tumorigenesis (
Table 2).
In bladder cancer (BCa), several studies detected high expression levels of APE1 protein in tumour tissues compared to normal adjacent tissues and they were associated with poor outcomes [
37,
39,
42]. APE1 overexpression was also linked to lympho-vascular invasion features, as high VEGFA levels and infiltration of CD163
+ tumour associated macrophages (TAMs) [
40]. Nuclei-cytosol distribution of APE1 was variable between high- and low-grade tumours: indeed, low grade cancers displayed increased APE1 levels only in the nucleus, while high grade invasive tumours showed increased positive staining even in the cytoplasm [
37]. APE1 is also a promising diagnostic biomarker in BCa, as its levels in serum and urines were increased in contrast to normal healthy controls and they were associated with tumour grade and stage, recurrence, and invasion [
36,
38,
41]. Interestingly, a study observed an increased secretory activity of D148E in bladder cancers, which contributed to increased serum levels of the protein in patients [
127].
Concerning hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), APE1 is upregulated at both transcriptional and translational levels compared to normal liver tissues [
79,
80,
81]. Moreover, the mRNA content increased with tumour progression and it is higher in less differentiated and more aggressive tumours [
79]. Patients with greater APE1 protein levels exhibited unfavourable prognosis and lower overall survival [
80,
81]. Interestingly, both APE1 truncated forms, missing the first 33 residues (N∆33 - 35 kDa) and APE1 full length (37 kDa) were detected in HCC tissue samples and HCC cell lines [
82]. APE1 cellular distribution was altered in HCC: while APE1 staining was only nuclear in normal liver tissues, in tumour tissues there was also a significant fraction of the protein in the cytoplasm [
83]. Cytoplasmatic APE1 was about three times higher in poorly differentiated tumours and it was associated with reduced overall survival [
83]. Noteworthy, the cytoplasmatic staining was associated with APE1 mitochondrial accumulation in grade 1 and grade 2 HCC tumours, while in grade 3 tumours it was not [
84]. Even in HCC, APE1 serum levels can be used as a novel diagnostic biomarker [
82].
APE1 protein resulted overexpressed also in pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) tissues and cell lines and it was associated with tumour aggressiveness and poor survival [
120,
121,
122]. The proteolytic form of APE1 N∆33 has been detected even in PDAC tissues, with different abundance versus adjacent non-tumour tissue [
53]. Interestingly, the acetylated form of APE1 (acAPE1) was overexpressed in PDAC tumours, while it was almost undetectable in healthy pancreatic tissues [
53,
85]. acAPE1 holds an increased AP-endonuclease activity, which has been proposed as a cancer mechanism to overcome chemotherapy genotoxic stress and uphold proliferation [
85]. APE1 localization in PDAC was mainly nuclear and it was similar between primary tumours and their metastasis [
121]. Cytosolic localization was observed only in tumour advanced stages and never in the absence of nuclear localization, while its complete absence was associated with invasion and poor differentiation [
99,
121].
Concerning prostate cancer (PCa), APE1 protein levels were upregulated compared to normal tissue and benign hypertrophy (BPH) [
123,
124]. Moreover, higher APE1 levels were observed in tumours bearing TMPRSS2:ERG fusion [
124]. APE1 localization was only nuclear in normal prostate tissue and non-cancerous prostate cell lines, while there was an increase in the cytoplasmatic fraction in tumour tissues and tumoral cell lines [
123].
APE1 overexpression occurs also in oesophageal carcinomas, like oesophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) [
100,
101,
102] and oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) [
103,
104], probably as a mechanism adopted by cancer cells to survive the genotoxic effects of bile reflux [
103,
104]. APE1 localization was mainly nuclear and it was also associated with worse overall survival in patients receiving platinum chemotherapy [
99].
An
in silico analysis identified APE1 as a central hub gene for gastric cancer, as its overexpression had a great prognostic value in two analysed datasets (GSE1611533, GSE54129) [
62]. Indeed, APE1 was overexpressed at both transcriptional and protein level in gastric cancer [
63,
64]. APE1 staining was weak in normal non-cancerous gastric tissues, while it was both nuclear and cytoplasmatic in tumour tissues [
64]. High levels of APE1 were also correlated with invasion and poor prognosis [
64], as its serum levels are a valuable diagnostic biomarker for lymph node metastases prediction [
65].
APE1 was also upregulated in salivary gland carcinomas and its levels increased depending on malignant transformation of the tumour [
125]. APE1 overexpression was higher in smaller tumours displaying lymph node metastasis and invasive growth [
125,
126]. APE1 localization was mainly nuclear in every salivary gland tumour subtype, except for adenoid cystic carcinomas in which it showed both nuclear and cytoplasmatic localization [
125,
126].
Furthermore, the overexpression of APE1 protein and mRNA levels was reported also in non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) [
86,
87,
88,
89]. High APE1 expression was associated with poor prognosis, invasion, and chemoresistance, as its levels increased after treatment with platinum compounds [
88]. Moreover, high
post treatment APE1 serum levels were correlated with poorer overall survival [
90]. Nuclear APE1 staining was associated with favourable patient outcomes [
91], while a higher cytoplasmatic localization correlated with poor survival and shorter relapse-free survival (RFS) [
92,
93,
94]. Both full-length and truncated forms were found in lung cancer and interestingly APE1 was prevalently truncated at the N-terminus in NSCLC adjacent non-tumour tissues [
53]. AcAPE1 was overexpressed in NSCLC tumours, with a strictly nuclear localization [
53,
85].
Several studies identified overexpression of APE1 protein in ovarian cancers, which has been associated with advanced tumour stages and decreased overall survival [
99,
112,
113]. Moreover, patients with high levels of APE1 showed more frequent resistance to platinum therapy [
99,
112,
114]. The protein-protein interaction between APE1 and nucleophosmin 1 (NPM1) has been extensively examined in ovarian cancer, as the levels of the two proteins were positively correlated and associated with tumour aggressiveness, malignant phenotype, lymph node metastasis and poor chemosensitivity [
112,
115]. It has been shown that compounds which impair this interaction can add a synergistic effect to traditional chemotherapeutic molecules [
116] APE1 localization seemed to be heterogenous in ovarian cancers, depending on stage and histological subtype [
22]. Some studies showed prominent cytoplasmatic staining, which increased from well to poorly differentiated cancers and it was higher in advanced stages tumours [
114,
115,
117,
118]. In non-responding to cisplatin cases, the observed APE1 overexpression was mainly at cytoplasmatic level, a feature that was observed also in cisplatin resistant cell-lines [
114]. Interestingly, almost 90% of patients with abnormal levels of cytosolic APE1 displayed an abnormal distribution of NPM1 [
115]. Additionally, cytosolic APE1 can be considered an independent predictive factor for poor progression free survival and for poor overall survival in ovarian cancers [
117]. Other works showed prominent nuclear APE1 staining, which increased during tumorigenesis and was associated with survival time [
113,
119]. Other studies showed an increase of APE1 in both compartments but with higher nuclear staining, which was associated with cancer aggressiveness, lower debulking after surgery, platinum resistance and lower overall survival [
99,
114].
For what concerns breast cancer, different studies reported conflicting results about APE1 protein expression. Some works described APE1 overexpression in breast cancers, which was mostly nuclear and correlated with malignant phenotypes and unfavourable prognosis [
43,
44,
45]. Contrary to the pattern of increased acetylation observed in other cancer types [
53,
85], APE1 acetylation resulted in heterogeneous and deregulated in breast cancer [
46]. Even in this case, the functional interaction between APE1 and NPM1 in promoting platinum resistance has been described [
47]. In contrast to these findings, another study showed that lower levels of APE1 were associated with tumour aggressiveness and triple negative phenotype [
48]. Interestingly, another study showed that, within the Ki-67 low-level expression group, lower levels of APE1 were associated with poor overall survival [
44].
APE1 protein levels were upregulated even in cervical tumours and they were associated with Epithelial-to-Mesenchymal transition (EMT), lymph node metastasis and poor radiosensitivity [
49,
50,
51,
52]. APE1 localization was widely heterogeneous between cervical tumours, showing mainly nuclear staining [
50]. Remarkably, there was a significant difference in subcellular localization of APE1 between radiotherapy non-responding and responding tumour cell lines: indeed, radioresistant cervical tumours cell lines showed higher levels of the cytoplasmatic fraction and lower levels of the nuclear protein, suggesting a role of cytosolic APE1 in radio-resistance promotion [
51].
Several studies described an overexpression of APE1 in colorectal cancers (CRC), observing also a gradual increase of its expression during tumour progression [
54,
55,
56,
57]. APE1 levels resulted high also in liver metastasis of CRC [
58]. APE1 localization in CRC was both nuclear and cytoplasmatic, with most cells displaying mixed or exclusive cytoplasmatic localization [
54]. Even in CRC tumour samples and cell lines, nuclear acAPE1 was overexpressed [
53,
59] and it positively correlated with resistance to 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) [
59]. Moreover, both full-length and truncated forms were detected in colon cancer [
53]. Interestingly, the levels of serum APE1 autoantibodies are valuable diagnostic biomarkers for CRC [
60].
Regarding glioma, conflicting data are available. Some studies described an overexpression of APE1 in tumoral tissues compared to healthy ones [
66,
67], with a 13-fold increase of AP-endonuclease activity in 93% of tumours [
66]. Glioma radioresistant cell lines displayed higher levels of APE1 compared to responding cell lines [
68]. Indeed, an increase in APE1 expression was observed in patients after treatment and recurrence [
69]. On the other hand, different studies evidenced low mRNA and protein expression in adult high-grade gliomas, associated with poor overall survival [
70,
71]. Moreover, APE1 localization in gliomas was predominantly nuclear [
70].
For what concerns melanoma, several studies identified APE1 overexpression at both transcriptional and translational levels [
95,
96,
97]. Indeed, APE1 was overexpressed in melanoma cancer cell lines and in clinical samples, showing a prominent nuclear localization in both cases [
96,
97]. High mRNA levels were associated with vascular invasion, high proliferation rates, poor relapse free survival, and overall survival [
95,
98]. Patients with higher levels of APE1 also showed a lower response to therapy [
98].
APE1 was overexpressed also in another skin tumour, namely cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) [
61]. APE1 upregulation in cSCC was associated with increased proliferation and migration by EMT [
61]. APE1 was dysregulated in several Head and Neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC). In oral SCC (oSCC), APE1 was overexpressed at protein level and its high expression was significantly correlated with nodal status, shorter overall survival and disease-free survival [
72,
73]. APE1 localization in oSCC was mainly nuclear, but a translocation to cytoplasm was observed after cisplatin treatment [
72,
74]. In oSCC, APE1 serum levels are a promising diagnostic biomarker [
75]. Indeed, high levels of serum APE1 (sAPE1) are associated with late TNM stages, lymph node metastasis and worse pathological differentiation [
75]. Patients with lower levels of sAPE1 went through longer disease-free survival after post-surgery cisplatin therapy and longer overall survival [
75]. APE1 overexpression was observed also in laryngeal SCC (LSCC) [
76]. APE1 levels resulted upregulated even in sinonasal SCC (sSCC) and SCC with inverted papilloma (SCCwIP), with a vivid nuclear localization associated with metastatization [
77]. sSCC tumours showed higher cytoplasmatic staining compared to SCCwIP [
77]. Moreover, exclusive cytoplasmatic staining was associated with higher T-stage and histological grade [
77]. Lastly, APE1 overexpression characterised also lip SCC (lSCC), with a strong nuclear localization [
78].
Furthermore, APE1 levels were upregulated in osteosarcoma and they were associated with poor prognosis and cisplatin resistance [
105,
106,
107,
108,
109,
110,
111]. APE1 localization was both nuclear and cytoplasmatic [
105,
110]. Patients with higher levels of the protein in the cytoplasmatic fraction were less responding to cisplatin treatment and experienced recurrence and metastasis [
105].
Therefore, in general, APE1 is significantly overexpressed in different kinds of cancers and subcellular distribution may significantly change depending on the specific tissue and tumoral stage.