Next Article in Journal
Effects of Silk Fibroin Enzyme Hydrolysates on Memory and Learning: A Review
Next Article in Special Issue
Direct Identification of Urinary Tract Pathogens by MALDI-TOF/TOF Analysis and De Novo Peptide Sequencing
Previous Article in Journal
Novel Novolac Phenolic Polymeric Network of Chalcones: Synthesis, Characterization, and Thermal–Electrical Conductivity Investigation
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Current State-of-the-Art Identification of Unknown Proteins Using Mass Spectrometry Exemplified on De Novo Sequencing of a Venom Protease from Bothrops moojeni
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Microbial Proteins in Stomach Biopsies Associated with Gastritis, Ulcer, and Gastric Cancer

1
Patients Diagnostic Lab, Isotope Application Division, Pakistan Institute of Nuclear Science and Technology (PINSTECH), Islamabad 44000, Pakistan
2
Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Biological Sciences, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad 45320, Pakistan
3
IZKF Core Unit Proteomics, University of Münster, 48149 Münster, Germany
4
The Centre for Liver and Digestive Diseases, Holy Family Hospital, Rawalpindi 46300, Pakistan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Molecules 2022, 27(17), 5410; https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27175410
Submission received: 23 June 2022 / Revised: 12 August 2022 / Accepted: 20 August 2022 / Published: 24 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Protein Analysis by Mass Spectrometry)

Abstract

:
(1) Background: Gastric cancer (GC) is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Helicobacter pylori infection is a major risk factor, but other microbial species may also be involved. In the context of an earlier proteomics study of serum and biopsies of patients with gastroduodenal diseases, we explored here a simplified microbiome in these biopsies (H. pylori, Acinetobacter baumannii, Escherichia coli, Fusobacterium nucleatum, Bacteroides fragilis) on the protein level. (2) Methods: A cohort of 75 patients was divided into groups with respect to the findings of the normal gastric mucosa (NGM) and gastroduodenal disorders such as gastritis, ulcer, and gastric cancer (GC). The H. pylori infection status was determined. The protein expression analysis of the biopsy samples was carried out using high-definition mass spectrometry of the tryptic digest (label-free data-independent quantification and statistical analysis). (3) Results: The total of 304 bacterial protein matches were detected based on two or more peptide hits. Significantly regulated microbial proteins like virulence factor type IV secretion system protein CagE from H. pylori were found with more abundance in gastritis than in GC or NGM. This finding could reflect the increased microbial involvement in mucosa inflammation in line with current hypotheses. Abundant proteins across species were heat shock proteins and elongation factors. (4) Conclusions: Next to the bulk of human proteins, a number of species-specific bacterial proteins were detected in stomach biopsies of patients with gastroduodenal diseases, some of which, like those expressed by the cag pathogenicity island, may provide gateways to disease prevention without antibacterial intervention in order to reduce antibiotic resistance.

1. Introduction

The American Cancer Society estimates about 26,380 new cases of stomach cancer and about 11,090 related deaths in the US in 2022 [1]. In the early 20th century, gastric cancer (GC) was the leading cause of cancer death in the US, a situation which is continuously improving—the number of new cases has been dropping by ~1.5% each year over the last 10 years [1]. This trend has been associated, besides the reduction in other risk factors [2], with the decline in Helicobacter pylori infections [1,3,4]. In other countries, particularly in East Asia, GC is still much more common as a result of insufficient sanitary standards and poor living conditions [3,4,5,6,7]. For instance, the frequency of GC in Pakistan has increased from 6.4% (study published in 2014 [8]) to 9.1% (our main study, see below, published in 2022 [9]).
H. pylori has been classified as a class I carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer [10]. It is the most common bacterial infection worldwide, affecting more than 50% of the global population, but only 1–3% of infected individuals ever develop GC [11,12]. Many other factors such as host constituents, environmental conditions, and the microbiota of the stomach may influence the development of gastric malignancies [12,13]. The GC microbiome has received increasing attention during the past years (for further reading of the role of non-H. pylori bacteria in GC development, see [14]). The stomach inactivates ingested microorganisms by exposing them to gastric fluid (containing gastric acid and proteolytic enzymes) and thus functions as a defensive barrier to harmful microbiota [15]. However, in GC patients, the stomach pH is higher and the microbiome, conclusively, changed [13,15,16]. It has been established that H. pylori infection can lead to achlorhydria and decreased acid secretion, thus directly contributing to alterations in the gastric microbiota (Figure 1) [11,13]. It is however not clear if the new microorganisms favor carcinogenesis or are only a result of the changed microenvironment [13].
The investigation of the GC microbiome is not straightforward and is a cause of much debate (for a recent review of pros and cons, see [13]). Arguments concern both the sample source (mostly biopsies today) and the analysis technique (16s rRNS and whole genome sequencing); the reproducibility of the results is thus limited [13]. Moreover, comparative data from the healthy stomach are hardly available for ethical reasons. Nevertheless, the carcinogenesis cascade shown in Figure 1 is widely accepted, as well as the role of microbial virulence factors (see below) [11,12,13,15,16].
While many microbial genomics data for gastric diseases are available, their complementation with protein information is still a considerable challenge [17,18]. Most studies such as the region-resolved mucosa proteome of the human stomach focused on human proteins only [19]. Metaproteomics requires the parallel measurement of thousands of proteins from an unknown number of species, namely the host and the cohabiting complex microbiome. This task presents problems on all fronts from sample handling to data mining. For instance, sample preparation methods are known to bias the recovery of host and microbial proteins, respectively [20]. In terms of the analysis of mass spectrometry (MS)-based protein expression data, databases of all organisms present are, in principle, needed, but not for every species yet available. Furthermore, the parallel use of many proteome databases extends the search space dramatically, leading to long calculation times and increased numbers of false-positive assignments, not the least due to homology effects. As a compromise, scientists study simplified microbiomes [21]. Moreover, bioinformatics approaches such as deep learning [22] and iterative searches [18] try to find a way to handle the mass of data, but they are all limited by the spectral quality of the MS raw data and the complexity of the sample.
It is, despite all limitations, of interest to learn about the presence of abundant microbial proteins in biopsies, as they may exert an influence on the tissue environment. We have thus tested MS-based comparative protein expression analysis data of gastric biopsies from patients suffering from gastritis, ulcers, as well as GC in a sub-project of a large study (for results on human proteins, see companion paper [9]). The general aim of the entire project was to generate data, which assist in reducing the number of referrals to endoscopy, which has considerably increased in recent years. This has been achieved based on MS human protein expression results, with the proposal of a lab test of the fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio at the primary to secondary care level, which recognizes gastritis. Our study [9] came with a wealth of meta-data, clinical information, and histopathological evaluation, along with H. pylori infection status (Aziz, S.; König, S.; Umer, M.; Iqbal, S.; Akhter, T. S.; Ahmad, T.; Zahra, R.; Ibrar, M.; Rasheed, F. Risk factor profiles for gastric cancer prediction with respect to Helicobacter pylori: A study of a tertiary care hospital in Pakistan. In submission). We have compared the biopsy and serum protein profiles of 219 patients and elucidated two GC serum marker panels, 29preGC-P (29 proteins significant in early-stage cancer) and 10GC-P (10 proteins significant in advanced cancer) [9].
Here, we set these results in perspective to the data obtained for the bacterial proteins detected in stomach biopsies. In the past, H. pylori was considered the only bacterium which can reside underneath the gastric mucosa and may be involved in gastroduodenal clinical complications and especially GC. H. pylori is known to have various virulence factors including vacuolating cytotoxin A (VacA) and cytotoxin-associated gene pathogenicity island (cagPAI). CagPAI encodes the type 4 secretion system (TSS4) to translocate cytotoxin-associated gene A (cagA) protein in gastric epithelial host cells to initiate carcinogenesis [23]. This concept has now changed with the emerging field of the proteomics of the human microbiome. The human gastrointestinal tract contains trillions of microbes that can live therein by forming a symbiotic relationship with their host; they play a vital role in human health and disease [24]. Bacteriodes, Fusobacteria, Actinobacteria, and Firmicutes were, for instance, enhanced in intraepithelial neoplasia and gastric cancer, as detected by 16S rRNA sequencing [25]. This identification of other microbial species in gastric mucosa along with H. pylori has challenged the previous reports. We have selected the species H. pylori, Acinetobacter baumannii, Escherichia coli, Fusobacterium nucleatum, and Bacteroides fragilis because those organisms have been associated with gastrointestinal cancer [12,26,27,28,29]. B. fragilis produces toxins to cause colon cancer [30] and F. nucleatum was associated with poor prognosis in patients who were diagnosed with Laurens’s diffuse type GC [27]. A. baumannii is a multidrug-resistant bacterium [31], and E. coli k12 plays a role in the upregulation of programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) via the NF-κB pathway in the inflamed tissues of the intestine for immune evasion [32]. This is the first investigation, to the best of our knowledge, which provides results on the protein level rather than reporting genes associated with various gastrointestinal diseases.

2. Results and Discussion

2.1. Patients and Samples

Extensive details on patients and samples are available in the companion paper to this project [9]. Briefly, symptomatic patients having upper gastroduodenal problems (acid reflux, abdominal pain, heartburn, vomiting, bloating) attending the Center for Liver and Digestive Diseases, Holy Family Hospital, Rawalpindi, for gastroduodenal endoscopy were enrolled. Biopsies were available from 75 patients and they were divided into groups according to the gastroduodenal clinical manifestations and histopathological evaluation (normal mucosa—NGM (n = 12), mild gastritis—MiG (n = 11), moderate gastritis—MoG (n = 11), marked gastritis—MaG (n = 11), pan gastritis—PanG (n = 5), ulceration—U (gastric ulcer, duodenal ulcer, n = 12), and GC (first and advanced stage, n = 13)). Most of the study participants (70%) were H. pylori positive. Gastric biopsy specimens were, if possible, collected from the normal (N) and adjacent diseased (D) parts of the stomach antrum during gastroduodenal endoscopy.

2.2. General Results

Using the high-definition MS data sets of the tryptically digested proteins from biopsies (for experimental details and the analysis of the human proteins see companion paper [9]), the combined Uniprot protein database of H. pylori, A. baumannii, E. coli, F. nucleatum, and B. fragilis was searched (Table 1). A total of 304 matches were found requesting a minimum of two peptide hits. The data are given in the Supplement (Table S1: all data; Tables S2–S9: data for H. pylori-positive samples, diseased sites; Table S2: GC vs. MaG/MoG; Table S3: GC vs. U; Tables S4–S9: NGM vs.: Table S4—GC, Table S5—MaG, Table S6—MiG, Table S7—MOG, Table S8—PanG, Table S9—U); for an overview of the whole data set, see Table 1 (Please be aware that statistical results depend on the data set studied. Thus, they may differ for the various comparisons shown in the Supplement). As is typical in proteomic analysis, for several hits in the data lists, multiple accession numbers were reported for homologous proteins, despite the fact that at least one unique tryptic peptide had to be detected. Thus, in order to clarify the true contribution of an individual protein, orthogonal analyses have to follow. Here, we discuss the results of this first global analysis.
As no enrichment of any kind has been performed, those 304 protein matches represented the most abundant proteins for each species. Chaperones, ribosomal proteins, enzymes, and elongation factors were detected as expected. The concentration of individual proteins in different organisms has been investigated by others with two-dimensional gel electrophoresis and 14C labeling, MS, and fluorescent light microscopy, which showed that especially these proteins are highly abundant [33]. For instance, the elongation factor EF-Tu, responsible for mediating the entrance of tRNA to the free site of the ribosome, was characterized as the most abundant protein with a copy number of ≈60,000 proteins per bacterial genome [33]. Newer work demonstrated in E. coli cytosol that highly concentrated proteins were involved in protein synthesis, energy metabolism, and binding, while proteins associated with transcription, transport, and cellular organization were relatively rare (dynamic range of ~105) [34]. We noted that some proteins such as elongation factors 4 (EF4, lepA), TS (EF-TS, tsf), and Tu (EF-Tu, tuf) were found for several of the bacterial species and wondered about false-positive assignment due to homologous peptides or limited spectral information. Blast analysis in the Uniprot database revealed 76.8% homology of H. pylori EF4 to that of Wolinella succinogenes; the homology for the species we considered was in the range of 50–60%. EF4 of B. fragilis was 88.5% homologous to that of Paraprevotella clara. Prevotella are among the enriched genera proteobacteria in GC [11]. Thus, our data, and metaproteomics data generally, should be used with care; the true presence of a particular protein of a specific species always needs to be proven and validated by other analytical methods [35]. Therefore, we further analyze our results in a conservative manner considering only proteins assigned with a confidence score better than 50. Below, we discuss the hits, which were of special importance for each bacterial species, based on the global analysis containing all data sets (Table 1). Specific data for binary comparisons of individual sample sets may slightly differ from the global analysis and are available in the Supplement.

2.3. H. pylori

H. pylori uses chemotaxis to avoid areas of low pH and also neutralizes the acid in the stomach environment by producing large amounts of urease, which breaks down urea to carbon dioxide and ammonia [36]. The latter is toxic to epithelial cells as are biochemicals produced by H. pylori such as proteases, VacA [37], and some phospholipases [36]. CagA can also cause inflammation and is a potential carcinogen [38,39]. It is absent in asymptomatic human carriers [40]. TSS4 expressed by cagPAI delivers CagA and inflammation-inducing peptidoglycan to the stomach epithelial cells, starting the inflammation cascade [41]. We detected TSS4 protein CagE, but not CagA and VacA, which was possibly a matter of concentration. The cagE gene has been published as a biomarker for erosive gastritis [42] and as a virulence factor associated with duodenal ulceration in children [43]. On the genomic level, cagE was named as a prognostic marker for intestinal and diffuse gastric cancer [44]. We found its highest abundance in PanG (3.5-fold more than the overall lowest concentration found in GC, Table 1); in U vs. NGM, its concentration was not very different (fold 1.9, Supplementary Table S9). Thus, on the protein level, CagE does not appear to be a GC marker in tissue biopsies.
Primosomal protein N’ was present more than 4-fold in U vs. NMG (overall highest mean fold value, Table 1); 2.5-fold in GC vs. NMG (Supplementary Table S4). It is a member of the replication restart primosome, which is essential for bacterial survival [45]. All other proteins changed only between two- and three-fold, including DNA topoisomerase I, a protein that is crucial in maintaining DNA superhelicity, thereby regulating various cellular processes [46]. The chaperone protein HtpG was fairly balanced in all biopsies; at the maximum, it was slightly more abundant in PanG vs. GC biopsies (2.3-fold). Interestingly, the transcription of the monocistronic hptG gene was switched off after heat shock [47]. Successful pathogens have developed robust chaperone systems to conquer the stressful host response to infection so that increasingly the potential of exploiting pathogen chaperones as drug targets is discussed [48].
As noted above, EF4 and EF-TS were also abundant, but more so in gastritis than GC. While both proteins are involved in protein synthesis [49,50], EF4 also promotes cell death under lethal stress [51]. EF-Tu, which was suggested as a potential adherence factor of H. pylori during pathogenesis [52,53], was detected here at 6.3-fold more abundance in mild gastritis than in GC. Other proteins have been found in the biopsies, but with no great change between sample types (fold change < 2) such as copper-transporting ATPase. H. pylori-associated gastritis is accompanied by a deficiency of copper in gastric epithelial and endothelial cells [54].

2.4. F. nucleatum

F. nucleatum is an oral bacterium commensal to the human oral cavity that plays a role in periodontal plaque [55]. It is also known that F. nucleatum creates a pro-inflammatory environment, which is conducive to tumor growth in colon cancer [56]. We detected α1-4 glucan phosphorylase, which was seen 3.5-fold more in MaG than in GC (Table 1). This enzyme has been mainly studied in E. coli; roles in the regulation of endogenous glycogen metabolism in periods of starvation, stress response, or adaptation were suggested [57]. The TetR family transcriptional regulator (3.1-fold PanG > NGM) is associated with antibiotic resistance, but also with roles in metabolism and quorum sensing [58]. The majority of the detected proteins exhibited fold changes < 3 including EF-G, chaperone protein ClpB, and ATP synthase β. DNA/RNA helicase (DEAD/DEAH BOX family) belongs to the superfamily 2 RNA helicase proteins, which chaperone folding and promote rearrangements of structured RNAs [59], it appeared fairly balanced across the biopsies of this project (2.1-fold).

2.5. E. coli

E. coli and other facultative anaerobes constitute about 0.1% of gut microbiota [60]. Most E. coli strains are harmless, but some serotypes can cause serious food poisoning in their hosts. The harmless strains are part of the normal microbiota of the gut and can benefit their hosts by producing vitamin K2 and preventing the colonization of the intestine with pathogenic bacteria [61,62]. More than a hundred complete genomic sequences of Escherichia are known and they show a remarkable amount of diversity; around 80% of each genome can vary among isolates [63]. Each individual genome contains between 4000 and 5500 genes (38% identified experimentally [64]), but the total number of different genes among all of the sequenced E. coli strains (the pangenome) exceeds 16,000. It has been assumed that two-thirds of the E. coli pangenome originated in other species and arrived through the process of horizontal gene transfer [65]. The transfer of DNA from one bacterial cell to another through the intervening medium appears to be part of an adaptation to stressful conditions, including those that cause DNA damage [66]. We detected DNA mismatch repair protein MutS [67] and Rpn family recombination-promoting nuclease/putative transposase [68], which are involved in these functions.
Besides the chaperone DnaK (maximum fold change 4.6, PanG vs. NGM), lipid-A-disaccharide synthase, which is a virulence factor in pathogenic bacteria [59], exhibited considerable differences across the biopsies; it was five-fold more abundant in MoG than in GC. All other proteins only changed less than three-fold and they were upregulated in MaG and U. The outer membrane usher protein YehB is part of the chaperone/usher pathway, which assembles adhesive and virulence-associated pili [69]. Multifunctional conjugation protein TraI has a role in antibiotic resistance propagation [70]. Sulfoquinovosidase is the gateway enzyme to sulfoglycolytic pathways [71].

2.6. B. fragilis

B. fragilis is part of the normal microbiota of the human colon and is generally commensal [72]. It is essential for healthy gastrointestinal functions such as mucosal immunity and host nutrition [73]. B. fragilis is an aerotolerant, anaerobic chemoorganotroph capable of degrading a wide variety of glycans, biopolymers, polysaccharides, and glycoproteins. It produces fatty acid as a byproduct of carbohydrate fermentation which can then be used as energy by the host; it was shown that animals lacking gut bacteria require 30% more caloric intake to maintain body mass [74]. The B. fragilis group is the most commonly isolated Bacteroidaceae in anaerobic infections, and Bacteroides are characterized by the highest resistance rates amongst anaerobic bacteria [75]. In biopsies, major changes were indicated for ParB-like partition protein (5.6-fold MoG > NGM). In bacteria, partition systems contribute to the faithful segregation of both chromosomes and low-copy-number plasmids [76]. Besides EF-Tu (3.5-fold PanG > GC), β-mannosidase was higher regulated than 3-fold (3.8-fold MaG > GC). It plays an important role in the polysaccharide degradation pathway [77]. Other proteins specifically seen in this organism were a putative cobalamin biosynthesis-related membrane protein [78], type I restriction enzyme R protein [79], 4-α-glucanotransferase, and metal-dependent hydrolase [80].

2.7. A. baumannii

A. baumannii can be an opportunistic pathogen in humans, affecting people with compromised immune systems, and is becoming increasingly important as a hospital-derived infection [81]. A. baumannii has also been identified as an ESKAPE pathogen, a group of pathogens with a high rate of antibiotic resistance that are responsible for the majority of nosocomial infections [82]. It can survive on artificial surfaces for an extended period of time, likely due to its ability to form biofilms [83]. In our experiments, regulated more than four-fold (PanG vs. MiG) was a tape measure domain protein, which received this name because the length of the corresponding gene is proportional to the length of the tail of a bacteria-infecting phage [84]. In fact, as the nosocomial pathogen A. baumannii is multidrug-resistant, phage therapy as an alternative to antibiotic therapy has been recovered [85]. Interestingly, there was also a phage integrase family protein detected predominantly in PanG biopsy samples (two-fold >NGM), a protein group which has risen to prominence as genetic tools [86]. Translation initiation factor IF-2 (2.4-fold PanG > NGM) synthesis was shown to be induced following cold stress, while ribosome synthesis and assembly slowed down [87]. Upregulated in U was a short-chain dehydrogenase family protein (3.9-fold vs. MiG). Its structure has been described from a genomic island of a clinical strain of A. baumannii [88]. Additionally, abundant in U was the pyruvate dehydrogenase E1 component (3.1-fold > NGM). It is part of the pyruvate dehydrogenase complex enzymatic system that is crucial in cellular metabolism as it controls the entry of carbon into the Krebs cycle [89].

2.8. Limitations

As discussed already in part above, this study suffers from limitations. We have been fortunate in having available to us samples of different gastrointestinal diseases for this project, but for some subgroups such as PanG, only a few biopsies were available, reducing the power of the analysis. The results should thus be considered with care in their context. Moreover, while the proteomic analysis of total proteomes has great value in providing an overview of the sample composition, it is a general and, in a way, a superficial experiment, which is not always able to properly identify homologous proteins or isoforms. This was discussed for elongation factors in Section 2.2. Subsequent orthogonal analyses need to be employed to pinpoint the presence of proteins of interest. Furthermore, proteomic experimental results are big data sets containing tens of thousands of peptide signals. Their analysis requires software support, which can generate false-positive matches depending on the search and filter criteria chosen. The best way to exclude these is still the manual control of individual mass spectra, which is not feasible for large data sets [35]. We have thus used both the number of detected peptides and the confidence score to eliminate false hits as much as possible.

3. Conclusions

No such comprehensive proteomics research study has been conducted before, which comprised various gastroduodenal afflictions with respect to H. pylori infection. This is also the first investigation to the best of our knowledge, which has provided results on the protein level rather than reporting regulated genes. In the past, H. pylori was considered the only bacterium living beneath the gastric mucosa and which may be involved in gastric cancer initiation. We have here detected proteins of four other bacterial pathogens, A. baumannii, E. coli, F. nucleatum, and B. fragilis, in biopsy specimens of gastric diseased patients.
Our measurements did not paint a comprehensive picture of the microbial proteins; they rather gave a first impression as we focused on the most confident protein matches. Ambiguity remained with regard to isoforms and homologous proteins, and individual hits will need to be validated. Abundant bacterial proteins were assigned, such as elongation and heat shock factors, which seemed to be highly concentrated across species. Other proteins, such as the H. pylori virulence factor CagE [42,43], appeared to be specific. For the oral bacterium F. nucleatum, we detected α1-4 glucan phosphorylase, which is involved in the regulation of endogenous glycogen metabolism during stress [57]. In E. coli, the virulence factor lipid-A-disaccharide synthase [59] was found especially in gastritis. So was β-mannosidase in the commensal bacterium B. fragilis; the enzyme is important in the polysaccharide degradation pathway [77]. In the opportunistic pathogen A. baumannii, the pyruvate dehydrogenase E1 component was regulated, which is crucial in cellular metabolism [89]. Interestingly, bacterial proteins of interest (Table 1) were more abundant in advanced gastritis than in NGM and GC. This finding could be reflective of increased microbial involvement in mucosa inflammation in line with current hypotheses [90]. For the H. pylori virulence factor CagE, evidence to that effect already exists [42,43].
The eradication of H. pylori has been considered as a measure to prevent GC [82,83] because it was recognized as a major risk factor. Antibiotic treatment obviously affects microbiota in general, however, leading to the temporary dysregulation of the microbiome and supporting antibacterial resistance. Thus, such harsh treatment needs to be applied with care and more selective; personalized approaches are called for (for more information on the exploitation of microbiota in personalized medicine, see [91]). Clearly, in disease research, the entire microbiome in its complexity is of importance. The findings of this study are helpful in redirecting the research focus on bacterial pathogens other than H. pylori residing underneath the gastric mucosa at acidic pH. The lack of diagnosis of these pathogens may be involved in the increase in antimicrobial resistance when treating H. pylori infection. It may thus be necessary to test for more bacterial species in routine lab work.
Moreover, information on the presence and regulation of various proteins of bacterial pathogens assists the scientific community in its investigation of microbial species in the context of gastric disease treatment and prevention such as the design of novel inhibitors to halt the spread of bacterial infections and GC. More research is still needed on the molecular pathways and host–pathogen interactions in gastric disease progression.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Permissions

Ethical approvals were obtained from the Ethical Technical Committee of the Pakistan Institute of Nuclear Science and Technology (PINSTECH), Islamabad (Ref.-No. PINST/DC-26/2017), the Bioethics Committee of Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad (Ref.-No. BBC-FBS-QAU2019-159), the Institutional Research Forum of Rawalpindi Medical University, Rawalpindi (Ref.-No. R-40/RMU), and the Ethics Committee of the University of Münster, Germany (Ref.-No. 2021-339-f-N). Informed written consent was obtained from each participant.

4.2. Protein Expression Analysis

Sample preparation and measurement were described in reference [9]. Briefly, proteins were extracted from the biopsies, tryptically digested, and subjected to reversed-phase liquid chromatography coupled to high-definition MS with Synapt G2 Si/M-Class nanoUPLC (Waters Corp., Manchester, UK). Label-free data-independent quantification experiments were analyzed with Progenesis for Proteomics (QIP, Nonlinear Diagnostics/Waters Corp.) using the combined Uniprot databases for from H. pylori, A. baumannii, E. coli K12, F. nucleatum and B. fragilis (download 8/25/2021). At least two peptides were required for protein assignment. Fold values as well as ANOVA p-values and confidence levels were also determined using Progenesis.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/molecules27175410/s1, Additional analysis data (for details see 2.2.), Excel-File: Supplement.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, F.R. and S.A.; Methodology, S.A.; Formal Analysis, S.A. and S.K.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation, S.A. and S.K.; Writing—Review and Editing, S.A., S.K., and F.R.; Supervision, R.Z. and F.R.; Project Administration, S.A.; Funding Acquisition, S.A.; Endoscopic evaluation and sampling, T.S.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research study was financially supported by the Pakistan Science Foundation (project # PSF/res/C-PINSTECH/Med (497)). SA was supported by a fellowship from the International Research Support Initiative Program, Higher Education Commission, Pakistan. (No: 1-8/HEC/HRD/2020/10636, PIN: IRSIP 45 BMS 101).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Bioethics Committee of Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad (Ref.-No. BBC-FBS-QAU2019-159), the Ethical Technical Committee, Pakistan Institute of Nuclear Science and Technology (PINSTECH), Islamabad, Pakistan (Ref.-No. PINST/DC-26/2017), the Institutional Research Forum, Holy Family Hospital, Rawalpindi Medical University, Rawalpindi (Ref.-No. R-40/RMU), and Ethics Committee of the University of Münster, Germany (Ref.-No. 2021-339-f-N).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed written consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

All data are available in the Supplementary Materials.

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge technical assistance from Doreen Ackermann (IZKF).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

GC—gastric cancer, MiG—mild gastritis, MiGa—atypical MiG, MiGn—normal MiG, MoG—moderate gastritis, MaG—marked gastritis, PanG—pan gastritis, NGM—normal gastric mucosa, HPp—H. pylori positive, HPn—H. pylori negative, D—disease site, N—normal site, MS—mass spectrometry.

References

  1. American Cancer Society. Available online: www.cancer.org/cancer/stomach-cancer/about/key-statistics.html (accessed on 15 March 2022).
  2. Poorolajal, J.; Moradi, L.; Mohammadi, Y.; Cheraghi, Z.; Gohari-Ensaf, F. Risk factors for stomach cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Epidemiol. Health 2020, 42, e2020004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Sitarz, R.; Skierucha, M.; Mielko, J.; Offerhaus, G.J.A.; Maciejewski, R.; Polkowski, W.P. Gastric cancer: Epidemiology, prevention, classification, and treatment. Cancer Manag. Res. 2018, 10, 239–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Ferley, J.; Soerjomataram, I.; Dikshit, R.; Eser, S.; Mathers, C.; Rebelo, M.; Parkin, D.M.; Forman, D.; Bray, F. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: Sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int. J. Cancer 2014, 136, E359–E386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Monno, R.; De Laurentiis, V.; Trerotoli, P.; Roselli, A.M.; Ierardi, E.; Portincase, P. Helicobacter pylori infection: Association with dietary habits and socioeconomic conditions. Clin. Res. Hepatol. Gastroenterol. 2019, 43, 603–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Youn Nam, S.; Park, B.J.; Nam, J.H.; Ryu, K.H.; Kook, M.C.; Kim, J.; Lee, W.K. Association of current Helicobacter pylori infection and metabolic factors with gastric cancer in 35,519 subjects: A cross-sectional study. United Eur. Gastroenterol. J. 2019, 7, 287–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Bernardo Guevara, B.; Cogdill, A.G. Helicobacter pylori: A review of current diagnostic and management strategies. Dig. Dis. Sci. 2020, 65, 1917–1931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Rasheed, F.; Campbell, B.J.; Alfizah, H.; Varro, A.; Zahra, R.; Yamaoka, Y.; Pritchard, D.M. Analysis of clinical isolates of Helicobacter pylori in Pakistan reveals high degrees of pathogenicity and high frequencies of antibiotic resistance. Helicobacter 2014, 19, 387–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Aziz, S.; Rasheed, F.; Zahra, R.; König, S. Gastric cancer pre-stage detection and early diagnosis of gastritis using serum protein signatures. Molecules 2022, 27, 2857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Schistosomes, liver flukes and Helicobacter pylori. In IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans; IARC: Lyon, France, 1994; Volume 61, pp. 1–241. [Google Scholar]
  11. Noto, J.M.; Peek, R.M., Jr. The gastric microbiome, its interaction with Helicobacter pylori, and its potential role in the progression to stomach cancer. PLoS Pathog. 2017, 13, 1006573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Muzaheed. Helicobacter pylori oncogenicity: Mechanism, prevention, and risk factors. Sci. World J. 2020, 2020, 3018326.
  13. Barra, W.F.; Sarquis, D.P.; Khayat, A.S.; Khayat, B.C.M.; Demachki, S.; Anaissi, A.K.M.; Ishak, G.; Santos, N.P.C.; dos Santos, S.E.B.; Burbano, R.R.; et al. Gastric cancer microbiome. Pathobiology 2021, 88, 156–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Li, Q.; Yu, H. The role of non-H. pylori bacteria in the development of gastric cancer. Am. J. Cancer Res. 2020, 10, 2271–2281. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  15. Yang, I.; Nell, S.; Suerbaum, S. Survival in hostile territory: The microbiota of the stomach. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 2013, 37, 736–761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Correa, P.; Piazuelo, M.B. The gastric precancerous cascade. J. Dig. Dis. 2012, 13, 2–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Blackburn, J.M.; Martens, L. The challenge of metaproteomic analysis in human samples. Exp. Rev. Proteom. 2016, 13, 135–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bassignani, A.; Plancade, S.; Berland, M.; Blein-Nicolas, M.; Guillot, A.; Chevret, D.; Moritz, C.; Huet, S.; Rizkalla, S.; Clément, K.; et al. Benefits of iterative searches of large databases to interpret large human gut metaproteomic data sets. J. Proteome Res. 2021, 20, 1522–1534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Ni, X.; Tan, Z.; Ding, C.; Zhang, C.; Song, L.; Yang, S.; Liu, M.; Jia, R.; Zhao, C.; Song, L.; et al. A region-resolved mucosa proteome of the human stomach. Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Gavin, P.G.; Wong, J.; Loo, D.; Zipris, D.; Hill, M.M.; Hamilton-Williams, E.E. Metaproteomic sample preparation methods bias the recovery of host and microbial proteins according to taxa and cellular compartment. J. Proteom. 2021, 240, 104219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Petruschke, H.; Schori, C.; Canzler, S.; Riesbeck, S.; Poehlein, A.; Daniel, R.; Frei, D.; Segessemann, T.; Zimmermann, J.; Marinos, G.; et al. Discovery of novel community-relevant small proteins in a simplified human intestinal microbiome. Microbiome 2021, 9, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Feng, S.; Sterzenbach, R.; Guo, X. Deep learning for peptide identification from metaproteomics datasets. J. Proteom. 2021, 247, 104316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Alipour, M. Molecular mechanism of Helicobacter pylori-induced gastric cancer. J. Gastrointest. Cancer 2021, 52, 23–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Chen, C.C.; Liou, J.M.; Lee, Y.C.; Hong, T.C.; El-Omar, E.M.; Wu, M.S. The interplay between Helicobacter pylori and gastrointestinal microbiota. Gut Microbes 2021, 13, 1909459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Wang, R.; Chen, X.Z. Prevalence of atrophic gastritis in southwest China and predictive strength of serum gastrin-17: A cross-sectional study (SIGES). Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 4523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Tetz, G.; Tetz, V. Draft genome sequence of Acinetobacter sp. Strain VT-511 isolated from the stomach of a patient with gastric cancer. Prokaryotes 2015, 3, e01202-15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Boehm, E.T.; Thon, C.; Kupcinskas, J.; Steponaitiene, R.; Skieceviciene, J.; Canbay, A.; Malfertheiner, P.; Link, A. Fusobacterium nucleatum is associated with worse prognosis in Lauren’s diffuse type gastric cancer patients. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 16240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Shariati, A.; Razavi, S.; Ghaznavi-Rad, E.; Jahanbin, B.; Akbari, A.; Norzaee, S.; Darban-Sarokhalil, D. Association between colorectal cancer and Fusobacterium nucleatum and Bacteroides fragilis bacteria in Iranian patients: A preliminary study. Infect. Agent Cancer 2021, 16, 41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Wang, L.; Zhou, J.; Xin, Y.; Geng, C.; Tian, Z.; Yu, X.; Dong, Q. Bacterial overgrowth and diversification of microbiota in gastric cancer. Eur. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2016, 28, 261–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Cheng, W.T.; Kantilal, H.K.; Davamani, F. The mechanism of Bacteroides fragilis toxin contributes to colon cancer formation. Malays. J. Med. Sci. MJMS 2020, 27, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kurihara, M.N.; Sales, R.O.; Silva, K.E.; Maciel, W.G.; Simionatto, S. Multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii outbreaks: A global problem in healthcare settings. Rev. Da Soc. Bras. De Med. Trop. 2020, 53, e20200248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Lee, S.A.; Wang, Y.; Liu, F.; Riordan, S.M.; Liu, L.; Zhang, L. Escherichia coli K12 upregulates programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in gamma interferon-sensitized intestinal epithelial cells via the NF-κB pathway. Infect. Immun. 2020, 89, e00618-20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Cell Biology by the Numbers. Available online: http://book.bionumbers.org/what-are-the-most-abundant-proteins-in-a-cell (accessed on 21 March 2022).
  34. Ishihama, Y.; Schmidt, T.; Rappsilber, J.; Mann, M.; Hartl, F.U.; Kerner, M.J.; Frishman, D. Protein abundance profiling of the Escherichia coli cytosol. BMC Genom. 2008, 9, 102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  35. König, S. Spectral quality overrides software scoreA brief tutorial on the analysis of peptide fragmentation data for mass spectrometry laymen. J. Mass Spectrom. 2021, 56, e4616. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  36. Eckburg, P.B.; Bik, E.M.; Bernstein, C.N.; Purdom, E.; Dethlefsen, L.; Sargent, M.; Gill, S.R.; Nelson, K.E.; Relman, D.A. Diversity of the human intestinal microbial flora. Science 2005, 308, 1635–1638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Mobley, H.L. Urease. In Helicobacter pylori: Physiology and Genetics; Mobley, H.L., Mendz, G.L., Hazell, S.L., Eds.; ASM Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  38. Park, J.Y.; Forman, D.; Waskito, L.A.; Yamaoka, Y.; Crabtree, J.E. Epidemiology of Helicobacter pylori and CagA-positive infections and global variations in gastric cancer. Toxins 2018, 10, 163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Müller, S.A.; Pernitzsch, S.R.; Haange, S.-B.; Uetz, P.; von Bergen, M.; Sharma, C.M.; Kalkhof, S. Stable isotope labeling by amino acids in cell culture based proteomics reveals differences in protein abundances between spiral and coccoid forms of the gastric pathogen Helicobacter Pylori. J. Proteom. 2015, 126, 34–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Miehlke, S.; Yu, J.; Schuppler, M.; Frings, C.; Kirsch, C.; Negraszus, N.; Morgner, A.; Stolte, M.; Ehninger, G.; Bayerdörffer, E. Helicobacter pylori vacA, iceA, and cagA status and pattern of gastritis in patients with malignant and benign gastroduodenal disease. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2001, 96, 1008–1013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Hudault, S.; Guignot, J.; Servin, A.L. Escherichia coli strains colonising the gastrointestinal tract protect germfree mice against Salmonella typhimurium infection. Gut 2001, 49, 47–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Ramis, I.B.; Vianna, J.S.; da Silva Junior, L.V.; Von Groll, A.; da Silva, P.E.A. cagE as a biomarker of the pathogenicity of Helicobacter Pylori. Rev. Soc. Bras. Med. Trop. 2013, 46, 185–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Day, A.S.; Jones, N.L.; Lynett, J.T.; Jennings, H.A.; Fallone, C.A.; Beech, R.; Sherman, P.M. cagE is a virulence factor associated with Helicobacter pylori-induced duodenal ulceration in children. J. Inf. Dis. 2000, 181, 1370–1375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Dos Santos Pereira, E.; Magalhães Albuquerque, L.; de Queiroz Balbino, V.; da Silva Junior, W.J.; Rodriguez Burbano, R.M.; Pordeus Gomes, J.P.; Barem Rabenhorst, S.H. Helicobacter pylori cagE, cagG, and cagM can be a prognostic marker for intestinal and diffuse gastric cancer. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2020, 84, 104477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Huang, Y.-H.; Huang, C.-Y. Structural insight into the DNA-binding mode of the primosomal proteins PriA, PriB, and DnaT. BioMed Res. Int. 2014, 2014, 195162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  46. Kondekar, S.M.; Gunjal, G.V.; Radicella, J.P.; Rao, D.N. Molecular dissection of Helicobacter pylori topoisomerase I reveals an additional active site in the carboxyl terminus of the enzyme. DNA Repair 2020, 91–92, 102853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Homuth, G.; Domm, S.; Kleiner, D.; Schumann, W. Transcriptional analysis of major heat shock genes of Helicobacter pylori. J. Bact. 2000, 182, 4257–4263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Neckers, L.; Tatu, U. Molecular chaperones in pathogen virulence: Emerging new targets for therapy. Cell Host Microbe 2008, 4, 519–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Burnett, B.J.; Altman, R.B.; Ferrao, R.; Alejo, J.L.; Kaur, N.; Kanji, J.; Blanchard, S.C. Elongation factor Ts directly facilitates the formation and disassembly of the Escherichia coli elongation factor Tu-GTP-aminoacyl-tRNA ternary complex. J. Biol. Chem. 2013, 288, 13917–13928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Pech, M.; Karim, Z.; Yamamoto, H.; Nierhaus, K.H. Elongation factor 4 (EF4/LepA) accelerates protein synthesis at increased Mg2+ concentrations. Proc. Natl. Aacd. Sci. USA 2011, 108, 1012994108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Li, L.; Hong, Y.; Luan, G.; Mosel, M.; Malik, M.; Drlica, K.; Zhao, X. Ribosomal elongation factor 4 promotes cell death associated with lethal stress. mBio 2014, 5, e01708-14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Chiu, K.-H.; Wang, L.-H.; Tsai, T.-T.; Lei, H.-Y.; Liao, P.-C. Secretomic analysis of host-pathogen interactions reveals that elongation factor-Tu is a potential adherence factor of Helicobacter pylori during pathogenesis. J. Prot Res. 2017, 16, 264–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Harvey, K.L.; Jarocki, V.M. The diverse functional roles of elongation factor Tu (EF-Tu) in microbial pathogenesis. Front. Microbiol. 2019, 10, 2351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Ge, Z.; Taylor, D.E. Helicobacter pylori genes hpcopA and hpcopP constitute a cop operon involved in copper export. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 1996, 145, 181–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Kuwahara, T.; Yamashita, A.; Hirakawa, H.; Nakayama, H.; Toh, H.; Okada, N.; Kuhara, S.; Hattori, M.; Hayashi, T.; Ohnishi, Y. Genomic analysis of Bacteroides fragilis reveals extensive DNA inversions regulating cell surface adaptation. Proc. Natl. Aacd. Sci. USA 2004, 101, 14919–14924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  56. Wexler, H.M. The Genus Bacteroides. In The Prokaryotes: Other Major Lineages of Bacteria and the Archaea; Rosenberg, E., DeLong, E.F., Lory, S., Stackebrandt, E., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 459–484. [Google Scholar]
  57. Schinzel, R.; Nidetzky, B. Bacterial α-glucan phosphorylases. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 1999, 171, 73–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Cuthbertson, L.; Nodwell, J.R. The TetR family of regulators. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2013, 77, 440–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Bohl, H.O.; Shi, K.; Lee, J.K.; Aihara, H. Crystal structure of lipid A disaccharide synthase LPXB from Escherichia coli. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Reid, G.; Howard, J.; Gan, B.S. Can bacterial interference prevent infection? Trends Microbiol. 2001, 9, 424–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Lukjancenko, O.; Wassenaar, T.M.; Ussery, D.W. Comparison of 61 sequenced Escherichia coli genomes. Microb. Ecol. 2010, 60, 708–720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Zhaxybayeva, O.; Doolittle, W.F. Lateral gene transfer. Curr. Biol. 2011, 21, R242–R246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Han, M.J.; Lee, S.Y. The Escherichia coli proteome: Past, present, and future prospects. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2006, 70, 362–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Signat, S.; Roques, C.; Poulet, P.; Duffaut, D. Fusobacterium nucleatum in periodontal health and disease. Curr. Issues Mol. Biol. 2011, 13, 25–36. [Google Scholar]
  65. Dorer, M.S.; Fero, J.; Salama, N.R. DNA damage triggers genetic exchange in Helicobacter pylori. PLoS Pathog. 2010, 6, e1001026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Kostic, A.D.; Chun, E.; Robertson, L.; Glickman, J.N.; Gallini, C.A.; Michaud, M.; Clancy, T.E.; Chung, D.C.; Lochhead, P.; Hold, G.L.; et al. Fusobacterium nucleatum potentiates intestinal tumorigenesis and modulates the tumor-immune microenvironment. Cell Host Microbe 2013, 14, 207–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Lamers, M.H.; Perrakis, A.; Enzlin, J.H.; Winterwerp, H.H.K.; de Wind, N.; Sixma, T.K. The crystal structure of DNA mismatch repair protein MutS binding to a G-T mismatch. Nature 2000, 407, 711–717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Kingston, A.W.; Ponkratz, C.; Raleigh, E.A. Rpn (YhgA-like) proteins of Escherichia coli K-12 and their contribution to RecA-independent horizontal transfer. J. Bact. 2017, 199, e00787-16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Werneburg, G.T.; Thanassi, D.G. Pili assembled by the chaperone/usher pathway in Escherichia coli and Salmonella. EcoSal Plus 2018, 8, 10.1128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Lujan, S.A.; Guogas, L.M.; Ragonese, H.; Matson, S.W.; Redinbo, M.R. Disrupting antiobiotic resistance propagation by inhibiting the conjugative DNA relaxase. Proc. Natl. Aacd. Sci. USA 2007, 104, 12282–12287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Speciale, G.; Jin, Y.; Davies, G.J.; Williams, S.J.; Goddard-Borger, E.D. YihQ is a sulfoquinovosidase that cleaves sulfoquinovosyl diacylglyceride sulfolipids. Nat. Chem. Biol. 2016, 12, 215–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Wexler, H.M. Bacteroides: The good, the bad, and the nitty-gritty. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2007, 20, 593–621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Snydman, D.R.; Jacobus, N.V.; McDermott, L.A.; Golan, Y.; Hecht, D.W.; Goldstein, E.J.; Harrell, L.; Jenkins, S.; Newton, D.; Pierson, C.; et al. Lessons learned from the anaerobe survey: Historical perspective and review of the most recent data (2005–2007). Clin. Infect. Dis. 2010, 50 (Suppl. 1), S26–S33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Antunes, L.C.S.; Visca, P.; Towner, K.J. Acinetobacter baumannii: Evolution of a global pathogen. Pathog. Dis. 2014, 71, 292–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Rice, L.B. Federal funding for the study of antimicrobial resistance in nosocomial pathogens: No ESKAPE. J. Infect. Dis. 2008, 197, 1079–1081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Funnell, B.E. ParB partition proteins: Complex formation and spreading at bacterial and plasmid centromeres. Front. Mol. Biosci. 2016, 3, 44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Gytz, H.; Liang, J.; Liang, Y.; Gorelik, A.; Illes, K.; Nagar, B. The structure of mammalian β-mannosidase provides insight into β-mannosidosis and nystagmus. FEBS J. 2019, 286, 1319–1331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Rodionov, D.A.; Vitreschak, A.G.; Mirinov, A.A.; Gelfand, M.S. Comparative genomics of the vitamin B12 metabolism and regulation in prokyryotes. J. Biol. Chem. 2003, 278, 41148–41159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Murray, N.E. Type I restriction systems: Sophisticated molecular machines. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2000, 64, 412–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Imamura, H.; Fushinobu, S.; Yamamoto, M.; Kumasaka, T.; Jeon, B.-S.; Wakagi, T.; Matsuzawa, H. Crystal structures of 4-α-glucanotransferase from Thermococcus litoralis and its complex with an inhibitor. J. Biol. Chem. 2003, 278, 19378–19386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Espinal, P.; Martí, S.; Vila, J. Effect of biofilm formation on the survival of Acinetobacter baumannii on dry surfaces. J. Hosp. Infect. 2012, 80, 56–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Uno, Y. Prevention of gastric cancer by Helicobacter pylori eradication: A review from Japan. Cancer Med. 2019, 8, 3992–4000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Shi, X.; Zhang, J.; Mo, L.; Shi, J.; Qin, M.; Huang, X. Efficacy and safety of probiotics in eradicating Helicobacter pylori: A network meta-analysis. Medicine 2019, 98, e15180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Belcaid, M.; Bergeron, A.; Poisson, G. The evolution of the tape measure protein: Units, duplications and losses. BMC Bioinform. 2011, 12, S10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Blasco, L.; Bleriot, I.; González de Aledo, M.; Fernández-García, L.; Pacios, O.; Oliveira, H.; López, M.; Ortiz-Cartagena, C.; Fernández-Cuenca, F.; Pascual, A.; et al. Development of an anti-Acinetobacter baumannii biofilm phage cocktail: Genomic adaptation to the host. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2022, 66, e01923-21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Fogg, P.C.M.; Colloms, S.; Rosser, S.; Stark, M.; Smith, M.C.M. New applications for phage integrases. J. Mol. Biol. 2014, 426, 2703–2716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Brandi, A.; Piersimoni, L.; Feto, N.A.; Spurio, R.; Alix, J.-H.; Schmidt, F.; Gualerzi, C.O. Translation initiation factor IF2 contributes to ribosome assembly and maturation during cold adaptation. Nucl. Acids Res. 2019, 47, 4652–4662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  88. Shah, B.; Tetu, S.G.; Harrop, S.J.; Paulsen, I.T.; Mabbutt, B.C. Structure of a short-chain dehydrogenase/reductase (SDR) within a genomic island from a clinical strain of Acinetobacter baumannii. Acta Cryst. 2014, F70, 1218–1323. [Google Scholar]
  89. Sgrignani, J.; Chen, J.J.; Alimonti, A.; Cavalli, A. How phosphorylation influences E1 subunit pyruvate dehydrogenase: A computational study. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 14683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Zeng, M.; Inohara, N.; Nuñez, G. Mechanisms of inflammation-driven bacterial dysbiosis in the gut. Mucosal Immunol. 2017, 10, 18–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Behrouzi, A.; Nafari, A.H.; Siadat, S.D. The significance of microbiome in personalized medicine. Clin. Transl. Med. 2019, 8, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Changes in gastric microbiota and microenvironment during carcinogenesis (adapted from [11,13,16]). Following infection, H. pylori dominates the gastric microbiota leading to chronic gastritis, reduced acid secretion, and alterations in the gastric microbiome.
Figure 1. Changes in gastric microbiota and microenvironment during carcinogenesis (adapted from [11,13,16]). Following infection, H. pylori dominates the gastric microbiota leading to chronic gastritis, reduced acid secretion, and alterations in the gastric microbiome.
Molecules 27 05410 g001
Table 1. Significantly changed bacterial proteins detected in stomach biopsies in the global analysis of all samples (Anova p < 0.02, confidence score > 50, fold change > 2, excluding proteins of no known function). For each MS data set, which was presented to Progenesis software, the cumulated ion intensities were used to calculate fold values for protein matches. The groups showing the highest and the lowest mean values are reported. In the case of multiple assignments of the same protein, only the best match is given. For details see Supplementary Table S1, for binary comparison Tables S2–S9. NGM has been italicized, and GC was marked in bold. Interestingly, the lowest mean condition is populated by NGM, MiG, and GC indicating more involvement of bacterial proteins in gastritis and ulcer.
Table 1. Significantly changed bacterial proteins detected in stomach biopsies in the global analysis of all samples (Anova p < 0.02, confidence score > 50, fold change > 2, excluding proteins of no known function). For each MS data set, which was presented to Progenesis software, the cumulated ion intensities were used to calculate fold values for protein matches. The groups showing the highest and the lowest mean values are reported. In the case of multiple assignments of the same protein, only the best match is given. For details see Supplementary Table S1, for binary comparison Tables S2–S9. NGM has been italicized, and GC was marked in bold. Interestingly, the lowest mean condition is populated by NGM, MiG, and GC indicating more involvement of bacterial proteins in gastritis and ulcer.
AccessionPeptide CountUnique PeptidesConfidence ScoreMax Fold ChangeHighest Mean ConditionLowest Mean ConditionMassDescriptionName
H. pylori
Q4825232302013.5PanGGC112,648Type IV secretion system protein CagEcagE
P5599130101952.4MaGMiG84,222DNA topoisomerase 1topA
Q9ZMM2112842.3PanGGC71,311Chaperone protein HtpGhtpG
B2USI5134772.8MoGGC67,412Elongation factor 4lepA
Q9ZKE4123744.4UNGM71,164Primosomal protein N’priA
B5Z9I6113642.7PanGNGM39,970Elongation factor Tstsf
Q9ZKF687522.3MaGMiG62,69930S ribosomal protein S1rpsA
F. nucleatum
Q8RGE246403722.8MaGNGM50,219ATP synthase subunit betaatpD
Q8RF6118141093.5MaGGC91,782Alpha-1_4 glucan phosphorylaseFN0857
Q8R5Z31312852.1PanGNGM11,0809DNA/RNA helicase (DEAD/DEAH BOX family)FN1974
Q8RFA3108753.1PanGNGM44,947Transcriptional regulator_TetR familyFN0813
Q8RHQ8128752.9PanGGC97,405Chaperone protein ClpBclpB
Q8RIF1108732.3PanGMiG30,287Oligopeptide transport ATP-binding protein oppDFN1649
Q8R604118602.1PanGMiG78,086Protein translation elongation factor G (EF-G)FN1546
E. coli
P333411715992.9MoGGC92,510Outer membrane usher protein YehByehB
P23909173992.7PanGNGM95,589DNA mismatch repair protein MutSmutS
P32138131792.2MaGGC77,902SulfoquinovosidaseyihQ
A0A6D2W4651413754.6PanGNGM69,172Chaperone protein DnaKdnaK
P14565109662.7MaGNGM19,2016Multifunctional conjugation protein TraItraI
A0A6D2XSN2129652.1UMiG36,025Rpn family recombination-promoting nuclease/putative transposaseFAZ83_12895
A0A4S5B3J91110625.0MoGGC42,787Lipid-A-disaccharide synthaselpxB
A0A6D2XN3087582.5PanGMiG12,29550S ribosomal protein L7/L12rplL
B. fragilis
A0A380YYU977694522.5MaGGC55,261ATP synthase subunit betaatpD
Q5LEE231291823.8MaGGC99,598Beta-mannosidasebmnA
A0A380YZS627251663.0PanGGC148,490Putative cobalamin biosynthesis-related membrane proteincobN_1
Q5LEB723201432.6MiGGC107,262Type I restriction enzyme R ProteinhsdR
Q5L9C719161132.1PanGGC106,6214-alpha-glucanotransferasemalQ
Q5L8N9107575.6MoGNGM73,150ParB-like partition proteinsparB_1
A0A380YS49119563.5PanGGC43,808Elongation factor Tutuf
Q5L7x186502.5MoGNGM69,190Metal-dependent hydrolaseBF9343_4047
A. baumannii
A0A009HW7029251524.1PanGMiG144,320Tape measure domain proteinJ512_0646
A0A009IJB720161212.0PanGNGM127,978Phage integrase family proteinJ512_2803
A0A009IU53169882.4PanGNGM97,429Translation initiation factor IF-2infB
A0A009ILQ71210662.9PanGGC123,032DEAD/DEAH box helicase family proteinJ512_2067
A0A009HXA1128613.1UNGM102,148Pyruvate dehydrogenase E1 componentaceE
A0A009IT4376503.9UMiG27,161Short chain dehydrogenase family proteinJ512_0848
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Aziz, S.; Rasheed, F.; Akhter, T.S.; Zahra, R.; König, S. Microbial Proteins in Stomach Biopsies Associated with Gastritis, Ulcer, and Gastric Cancer. Molecules 2022, 27, 5410. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27175410

AMA Style

Aziz S, Rasheed F, Akhter TS, Zahra R, König S. Microbial Proteins in Stomach Biopsies Associated with Gastritis, Ulcer, and Gastric Cancer. Molecules. 2022; 27(17):5410. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27175410

Chicago/Turabian Style

Aziz, Shahid, Faisal Rasheed, Tayyab Saeed Akhter, Rabaab Zahra, and Simone König. 2022. "Microbial Proteins in Stomach Biopsies Associated with Gastritis, Ulcer, and Gastric Cancer" Molecules 27, no. 17: 5410. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27175410

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop