No abstract

The SynGAP protein is a major regulator of synapse biology and neural circuit function. Genetic variants linked to epilepsy and intellectual disability disrupt synaptic function and neural excitability. SynGAP has been involved in multiple signaling pathways and can regulate small GTPases with very different roles. Yet, the molecular bases behind this pleiotropy are poorly understood. We hypothesize that different SynGAP isoforms will mediate different sets of functions and that deciphering their spatio‐temporal expression and subcellular localization will accelerate understanding their multiple functions. Using isoform‐specific antibodies recognizing SynGAP in mouse and human samples we found distinctive developmental expression patterns for all SynGAP isoforms in five mouse brain areas. Particularly noticeable was the delayed expression of SynGAP‐α1 isoforms, which directly bind to postsynaptic density‐95, in cortex and hippocampus during the first 2 weeks of postnatal development. Suggesting that during this period other isoforms would have a more prominent role. Furthermore, we observed subcellular localization differences between isoforms, particularly throughout postnatal development. Consistent with previous reports, SynGAP was enriched in the postsynaptic density in the mature forebrain. However, SynGAP was predominantly found in non‐synaptic locations in a period of early postnatal development highly sensitive to SynGAP levels. While, α1 isoforms were always found enriched in the postsynaptic density, α2 isoforms changed from a non‐synaptic to a mostly postsynaptic density localization with age and β isoforms were always found enriched in non‐synaptic locations. The differential expression and subcellular distribution of SynGAP isoforms may contribute to isoform‐specific regulation of small GTPases, explaining SynGAP pleiotropy.

No abstract

Purpose: Glioblastoma is the most aggressive brain tumor in adults and has few therapeutic options. The study of molecular subtype classifications may lead to improved prognostic classification and identification of new therapeutic targets. The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) subtype classification has mainly been applied in U.S. clinical trials, while the intrinsic glioma subtype (IGS) has mainly been applied in European trials. Experimental Design: From paraffin-embedded tumor samples of 432 patients with uniformly treated, newly diagnosed glioblastoma, we built tissue microarrays for IHC analysis and applied RNA sequencing to the best samples to classify them according to TCGA and IGS subtypes. Results: We obtained transcriptomic results from 124 patients. There was a lack of agreement among the three TCGA classificatory algorithms employed, which was not solely attributable to intratumoral heterogeneity. There was overlapping of TCGA mesenchymal subtype with IGS cluster 23 and of TCGA classical subtype with IGS cluster 18. Molecular subtypes were not associated with prognosis, but levels of expression of 13 novel genes were identified as independent prognostic markers in glioma-CpG island methylator phenotype–negative patients, independently of clinical factors and MGMT methylation. These findings were validated in at least one external database. Three of the 13 genes were selected for IHC validation. In particular, high ZNF7 RNA expression and low ZNF7 protein expression were strongly associated with longer survival, independently of molecular subtypes. Conclusions: TCGA and IGS molecular classifications of glioblastoma have no higher prognostic value than individual genes and should be refined before being applied to clinical trials.

No abstract