Literature DB >> 24091732

Single cell heterogeneity: why unstable genomes are incompatible with average profiles.

Batoul Y Abdallah1, Steven D Horne, Joshua B Stevens, Guo Liu, Andrew Y Ying, Barbara Vanderhyden, Stephen A Krawetz, Root Gorelick, Henry Hq Heng.   

Abstract

Multi-level heterogeneity is a fundamental but underappreciated feature of cancer. Most technical and analytical methods either completely ignore heterogeneity or do not fully account for it, as heterogeneity has been considered noise that needs to be eliminated. We have used single-cell and population-based assays to describe an instability-mediated mechanism where genome heterogeneity drastically affects cell growth and cannot be accurately measured using conventional averages. First, we show that most unstable cancer cell populations exhibit high levels of karyotype heterogeneity, where it is difficult, if not impossible, to karyotypically clone cells. Second, by comparing stable and unstable cell populations, we show that instability-mediated karyotype heterogeneity leads to growth heterogeneity, where outliers dominantly contribute to population growth and exhibit shorter cell cycles. Predictability of population growth is more difficult for heterogeneous cell populations than for homogenous cell populations. Since "outliers" play an important role in cancer evolution, where genome instability is the key feature, averaging methods used to characterize cell populations are misleading. Variances quantify heterogeneity; means (averages) smooth heterogeneity, invariably hiding it. Cell populations of pathological conditions with high genome instability, like cancer, behave differently than karyotypically homogeneous cell populations. Single-cell analysis is thus needed when cells are not genomically identical. Despite increased attention given to single-cell variation mediated heterogeneity of cancer cells, continued use of average-based methods is not only inaccurate but deceptive, as the "average" cancer cell clearly does not exist. Genome-level heterogeneity also may explain population heterogeneity, drug resistance, and cancer evolution.

Entities:  

Keywords:  genome theory; genomic instability; nonclonal chromosomal aberration; punctuated cancer evolution; tumor heterogeneity

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24091732      PMCID: PMC3903715          DOI: 10.4161/cc.26580

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cell Cycle        ISSN: 1551-4005            Impact factor:   4.534


  55 in total

1.  Bacterial persistence as a phenotypic switch.

Authors:  Nathalie Q Balaban; Jack Merrin; Remy Chait; Lukasz Kowalik; Stanislas Leibler
Journal:  Science       Date:  2004-08-12       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Variability of our somatic (epi)genomes.

Authors:  Vittorio Sgaramella
Journal:  Science       Date:  2010-07-02       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  Phenotypic diversity, population growth, and information in fluctuating environments.

Authors:  Edo Kussell; Stanislas Leibler
Journal:  Science       Date:  2005-08-25       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  The contribution of genomic heterogeneity. Preface.

Authors:  Henry H Q Heng
Journal:  Cytogenet Genome Res       Date:  2013-04-03       Impact factor: 1.636

Review 5.  Why imatinib remains an exception of cancer research.

Authors:  Steven D Horne; Joshua B Stevens; Batoul Y Abdallah; Guo Liu; Steven W Bremer; Christine J Ye; Henry H Q Heng
Journal:  J Cell Physiol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 6.384

Review 6.  Clonal and non-clonal chromosome aberrations and genome variation and aberration.

Authors:  Henry H Q Heng; Guo Liu; Steven Bremer; Karen J Ye; Joshua Stevens; Christine J Ye
Journal:  Genome       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 2.166

Review 7.  Cancer progression by non-clonal chromosome aberrations.

Authors:  Henry H Q Heng; Steven W Bremer; Joshua Stevens; Karen J Ye; Fred Miller; Gou Liu; Christine J Ye
Journal:  J Cell Biochem       Date:  2006-08-15       Impact factor: 4.429

8.  Conditional inactivation of Brca1 in the mouse ovarian surface epithelium results in an increase in preneoplastic changes.

Authors:  Katherine V Clark-Knowles; Kenneth Garson; Jos Jonkers; Barbara C Vanderhyden
Journal:  Exp Cell Res       Date:  2006-10-03       Impact factor: 3.905

9.  Genome based cell population heterogeneity promotes tumorigenicity: the evolutionary mechanism of cancer.

Authors:  Christine J Ye; Joshua B Stevens; Guo Liu; Steven W Bremer; Aruna S Jaiswal; Karen J Ye; Ming-Fong Lin; Lesley Lawrenson; Wayne D Lancaster; Markku Kurkinen; Joshua D Liao; C Gary Gairola; Malathy P V Shekhar; Satya Narayan; Fred R Miller; Henry H Q Heng
Journal:  J Cell Physiol       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 6.384

Review 10.  Genetic and non-genetic instability in tumor progression: link between the fitness landscape and the epigenetic landscape of cancer cells.

Authors:  Sui Huang
Journal:  Cancer Metastasis Rev       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 9.264

View more
  14 in total

1.  Unstable genomes elevate transcriptome dynamics.

Authors:  Joshua B Stevens; Guo Liu; Batoul Y Abdallah; Steven D Horne; Karen J Ye; Steven W Bremer; Christine J Ye; Stephen A Krawetz; Henry H Heng
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2014-05-01       Impact factor: 7.396

2.  Genomic Copy Number Variation Affecting Genes Involved in the Cell Cycle Pathway: Implications for Somatic Mosaicism.

Authors:  Ivan Y Iourov; Svetlana G Vorsanova; Maria A Zelenova; Sergei A Korostelev; Yuri B Yurov
Journal:  Int J Genomics       Date:  2015-09-01       Impact factor: 2.326

3.  Stress, genomic adaptation, and the evolutionary trade-off.

Authors:  Steven D Horne; Saroj K Chowdhury; Henry H Q Heng
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2014-04-23       Impact factor: 4.599

4.  Single-cell sequencing reveals karyotype heterogeneity in murine and human malignancies.

Authors:  Bjorn Bakker; Aaron Taudt; Mirjam E Belderbos; David Porubsky; Diana C J Spierings; Tristan V de Jong; Nancy Halsema; Hinke G Kazemier; Karina Hoekstra-Wakker; Allan Bradley; Eveline S J M de Bont; Anke van den Berg; Victor Guryev; Peter M Lansdorp; Maria Colomé-Tatché; Floris Foijer
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2016-05-31       Impact factor: 13.583

5.  Why it is crucial to analyze non clonal chromosome aberrations or NCCAs?

Authors:  Henry H Q Heng; Sarah M Regan; Guo Liu; Christine J Ye
Journal:  Mol Cytogenet       Date:  2016-02-13       Impact factor: 2.009

6.  Versatile approach for functional analysis of human proteins and efficient stable cell line generation using FLP-mediated recombination system.

Authors:  Roman J Szczesny; Katarzyna Kowalska; Kamila Klosowska-Kosicka; Aleksander Chlebowski; Ewelina P Owczarek; Zbigniew Warkocki; Tomasz M Kulinski; Dorota Adamska; Kamila Affek; Agata Jedroszkowiak; Anna V Kotrys; Rafal Tomecki; Pawel S Krawczyk; Lukasz S Borowski; Andrzej Dziembowski
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-03-28       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Single cell metabolomics using mass spectrometry: Techniques and data analysis.

Authors:  Renmeng Liu; Zhibo Yang
Journal:  Anal Chim Acta       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 6.558

Review 8.  Current challenges in the bioinformatics of single cell genomics.

Authors:  Luwen Ning; Geng Liu; Guibo Li; Yong Hou; Yin Tong; Jiankui He
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2014-01-27       Impact factor: 6.244

9.  5p13.3p13.2 duplication associated with developmental delay, congenital malformations and chromosome instability manifested as low-level aneuploidy.

Authors:  Ivan Y Iourov; Svetlana G Vorsanova; Irina A Demidova; Galina A Aliamovskaia; Elena S Keshishian; Yuri B Yurov
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2015-10-15

10.  A Postgenomic Perspective on Molecular Cytogenetics.

Authors:  Henry H Heng; Steven D Horne; Sophia Chaudhry; Sarah M Regan; Guo Liu; Batoul Y Abdallah; Christine J Ye
Journal:  Curr Genomics       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 2.236

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.