P Dahan1, J Martinez Gala1, C Delmas2, S Monferran3, L Malric1, D Zentkowski4, V Lubrano5, C Toulas2, E Cohen-Jonathan Moyal6, A Lemarie3. 1. INSERM UMR 1037, Centre de Recherches en Cancérologie de Toulouse (CRCT), Université Toulouse III Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France. 2. 1] INSERM UMR 1037, Centre de Recherches en Cancérologie de Toulouse (CRCT), Université Toulouse III Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France [2] Laboratoire d'Oncogénétique, Institut Universitaire du Cancer Toulouse-Oncopole, Toulouse, France. 3. 1] INSERM UMR 1037, Centre de Recherches en Cancérologie de Toulouse (CRCT), Université Toulouse III Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France [2] Faculté des Sciences Pharmaceutiques, Université Toulouse III Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France. 4. Faculté des Sciences Pharmaceutiques, Université Toulouse III Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France. 5. 1] INSERM UMR 825, Université Toulouse III Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France [2] Service de Neurochirurgie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rangueil, Université Toulouse III Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France. 6. 1] INSERM UMR 1037, Centre de Recherches en Cancérologie de Toulouse (CRCT), Université Toulouse III Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France [2] Département de Radiothérapie et Oncologie, Institut Universitaire du Cancer Toulouse-Oncopole, Toulouse, France.
Abstract
Glioblastomas (GBM) are some bad prognosis brain tumors despite a conventional treatment associating surgical resection and subsequent radio-chemotherapy. Among these heterogeneous tumors, a subpopulation of chemo- and radioresistant GBM stem-like cells appears to be involved in the systematic GBM recurrence. Moreover, recent studies showed that differentiated tumor cells may have the ability to dedifferentiate and acquire a stem-like phenotype, a phenomenon also called plasticity, in response to microenvironment stresses such as hypoxia. We hypothesized that GBM cells could be subjected to a similar dedifferentiation process after ionizing radiations (IRs), then supporting the GBM rapid recurrence after radiotherapy. In the present study we demonstrated that subtoxic IR exposure of differentiated GBM cells isolated from patient resections potentiated the long-term reacquisition of stem-associated properties such as the ability to generate primary and secondary neurospheres, the expression of stemness markers and an increased tumorigenicity. We also identified during this process an upregulation of the anti-apoptotic protein survivin and we showed that its specific downregulation led to the blockade of the IR-induced plasticity. Altogether, these results demonstrated that irradiation could regulate GBM cell dedifferentiation via a survivin-dependent pathway. Targeting the mechanisms associated with IR-induced plasticity will likely contribute to the development of some innovating pharmacological strategies for an improved radiosensitization of these aggressive brain cancers.
Glioblastomas (GBM) are some bad prognosis brain tumors despite a conventional treatment associating surgical resection and subsequent radio-chemotherapy. Among these heterogeneous tumors, a subpopulation of chemo- and radioresistant GBM stem-like cells appears to be involved in the systematic GBM recurrence. Moreover, recent studies showed that differentiated tumor cells may have the ability to dedifferentiate and acquire a stem-like phenotype, a phenomenon also called plasticity, in response to microenvironment stresses such as hypoxia. We hypothesized that GBM cells could be subjected to a similar dedifferentiation process after ionizing radiations (IRs), then supporting the GBM rapid recurrence after radiotherapy. In the present study we demonstrated that subtoxic IR exposure of differentiated GBM cells isolated from patient resections potentiated the long-term reacquisition of stem-associated properties such as the ability to generate primary and secondary neurospheres, the expression of stemness markers and an increased tumorigenicity. We also identified during this process an upregulation of the anti-apoptotic protein survivin and we showed that its specific downregulation led to the blockade of the IR-induced plasticity. Altogether, these results demonstrated that irradiation could regulate GBM cell dedifferentiation via a survivin-dependent pathway. Targeting the mechanisms associated with IR-induced plasticity will likely contribute to the development of some innovating pharmacological strategies for an improved radiosensitization of these aggressive brain cancers.
Radiotherapy is, following surgical resection and associated with Temozolomide, the gold
standard treatment for glioblastoma (GBM). However, even after the association of
surgery and combined chemo/radiotherapy, these invasive and resistant tumors almost
systematically recur, with a median overall survival of 14 months.[1] It is now established that GBM are some very
heterogeneous tumors similar to most of the solid cancers.[2] Recent studies highlighted the presence of a subpopulation of
self-renewing and pluripotent GBM stem-like cells (GSCs), also called GBM-initiating
cells, among the tumor. These GSC are characterized by their ability to self-renew
in vitro (neurospheres (NS) formation) and in vivo, their higher
expression of neural stem cell (NSC) markers (i.e., Olig2, Nestin or A2B5) and stem cell
transcription factors (SCTF, i.e., Sox2, Nanog, Gli1 or Oct4), their pluripotent
aptitude to differentiate into neurons, astrocytes or oligodendrocytes and their high
tumorigenic potential in vivo in mice.[3,
4] In addition, the presence of these GSC may
explain the high GBM recurrence rate, as they were shown to be extremely tumorigenic and
radioresistant.[3, 5, 6]Several radioresistance mechanisms have been identified in these GSC. Most of them are
in favor of a clonal selection process through the GSC intrinsic resistance to ionizing
radiation (IR)-induced cell death,[7, 8] supported by a better efficiency of DNA-damage repair
systems,[6, 9,
10] a higher level of
anti-apoptotic[11, 12] or pro-survival factors[13,
14, 15] and a
sustained expression of pluripotency maintenance factors such as Notch1,[16] TGFβ,[17, 18] Sonic hedgehog
(SonicHH),[19] STAT3[20] or Wnt.[21]
Besides this, the influence of the microenvironment could also participate in
radioresistance,[17, 22] as hypoxia, which is a well-known factor of
radioresistance,[23, 24] acidic extracellular pH[25] and nitric oxide[26, 27] were shown to be involved in GSC stemness
preservation.However, several studies have put forward the hypothesis that GBM-differentiated cells
may be able to dedifferentiate toward a stem-like state when submitted to appropriate
stimuli[7] and then contribute to increase
the tumor stem cell pool. This assumption was supported by studies showing that hypoxic
conditions, hepatocyte growth factor or Temozolomide could induce such a phenomenon in
GBM cells.[23, 28,
29] Of note, hypoxia was previously shown to
induce a similar reprogramming in breast cancer[30] and neuroblastoma cells,[31] and our group showed that IR can stabilize HIF1α
(hypoxia-inducible factor 1α) and activate the associated hypoxic
pathways in GBM.[32, 33] This dedifferentiation process was also demonstrated in
vivo in murine neurons and astrocytes through the expression of GBM-associated
oncogenes.[34] In line with this, recent
works showed that IRs were able to induce at short term the expression of stem markers
(such as Sox2, Nestin and CD133) in GBM,[35]
without studying the presence of a potential dedifferentiation process. In consequence,
we hypothesized that plasticity may occur after radiotherapy in resistant remaining GBM
cells. The present study was designed to analyze the long-term effects of radiotherapy
on the phenotypic and molecular status of GBM cells isolated from several patient
resections and to find out whether or not these cells can dedifferentiate toward a
stem-like phenotype in response to IR.Our present data show in human primary GBM patient cell lines that a subtoxic IR dose
can induce at long term the overexpression of a large panel of stem markers in GBM
cells, a potentiation of their NS-forming capacity and an exacerbated tumorigenesis in
nude mice, indicating an IR-induced dedifferentiation process. We have also identified
the inhibitor of apoptosis protein (IAP) survivin as an important regulator of this
IR-induced plasticity. In conclusion, we showed here for the first time that
radiotherapy is able to sustain a phenotype shift toward stemness in GBM, which may
participate in the expansion of the cancer stem-like compartment in GBM after treatment
and finally favor a fast recurrence of these aggressive and invasive brain cancers.
Results
Characterization of the human primary GBM cells subjected to the IR-induced
dedifferentiation protocol
To study the hypothesis of an IR-induced plasticity, four GSC cell lines (C, D, G
and I) previously established in our group from patient surgical GBM samples and
cultured as GSC-enriched NS[29] were
forced to differentiate in fetal calf serum (FCS) medium for at least 15 days,
leading to a dramatic change in their cellular morphology and adhesion properties,
and to the loss of their ability to generate NS by self-renewal (Figure 1a). These differentiated GBM cells were then
subjected or not to a 3-Gy irradiation and placed 2 days after in either FCS or
stem cell medium (SCM), in order to maintain a differentiated status or to favor a
possible reversion to a stem phenotype, respectively (Figure
2a). These culture conditions were maintained until the generation of
NS in the medium, testifying of the reappearance of the in vitro
self-renewal ability. The long-term effects of irradiation were then analyzed at a
molecular level by RT-qPCR, western blotting or FACS analysis, and in
vivo by the tumorigenicity of the treated cells in orthotopically
xenografted nude mice.
Figure 1
Characterization of the stem and differentiated phenotypes in GSC-enriched NS and
FCS-differentiated GBM cultures. (a–c) GSC-enriched NS cell
lines isolated from four patient tumors (C, D, G and I) were kept in SCM medium or
allowed to differentiate as adherent GBM cells for at least 15 days in FCS medium.
(a) Phase-contrast photomicrographs of NS or GBM-differentiated cells.
Original magnification: × 10, scale bar: 6 μm. (b)
Real-time quantitative PCR analysis of the stem (CD133, Notch1, Nanog, Gli1, Sox2,
Nestin, SonicHH, EZH2, Olig1 and Olig2) and differentiation (GFAP and CTGF)
markers in NS or GBM-differentiated cells for the C, D, G and I cell lines. Shown
are the fold inductions expressed as means±S.E.M. of at least three
independent experiments. ∗P<0.05,
∗∗P<0.01,
∗∗∗P<0.001 compared with the
related control. (c) Immunofluorescence FACS analysis of stem (CD133,
Notch1, Nanog, Sox2, Nestin and A2B5) and differentiation (GFAP, Tuj1 and O4)
markers in NS or GBM-differentiated cells. The results depicted were
representative of three independent experiments (G cell line) and were reproduced
in all the cell lines
Figure 2
Overview of the long-term dedifferentiation protocol and assessment of the
irradiation dose. (a) As described in the Materials and Methods section,
GSC-enriched NS were isolated from patient samples and cultured in a specific SCM
medium. NS cells were then dissociated and placed into a differentiating medium
with FCS (FCS medium) for at least 15 days, to allow an optimum differentiation.
Adherent differentiated GBM cells were then subjected or not to a 3-Gy irradiation
and were placed 2 days after in fresh FCS medium, to keep them fully
differentiated, or in SCM medium to favor a possible dedifferentiation process.
The totality of the cells was finally collected at the end of the protocol, which
coincided to the apparition of NS in the culture supernatant, in order to be
analyzed. (b–f) Absence of effects of a 3-Gy irradiation on
viability and proliferation of GBM cells during the dedifferentiation protocol.
Differentiated GBM cells were subjected or not (Control, CTR) to a 3-Gy
irradiation and placed 2 days after in SCM medium for 5 additional days, according
to the dedifferentiation protocol (b–d) or for different time
points during this dedifferentiation protocol (e and f) The dose of
12 Gy was chosen as a positive control for cell death induction. At 7 days
post IR, cells were analyzed either by FACS for AV/PI double staining of both
apoptotic and necrotic cells (b) and PI staining of the Sub-G1 population
(c), or through WST-1 staining using a spectrophotometric determination
of the dye absorbance at 450 nm for the quantification of cell viability
and proliferation (d). For kinetic studies, cell death was assessed by
FACS, by AV/PI staining and expressed as percentages over background
(e), and cell count was performed to estimate the cell proliferation rate
in the indicated culture condition (f). Shown are the means±S.E.M.
of at least three independent experiments. ∗P<0.05,
∗∗P<0.01 compared with the related
control
In order to fully characterize the differentiated GBM cells subjected to this
dedifferentiation protocol, we first checked by RT-qPCR the expression of several
stem and differentiation markers in NS-derived cells and their differentiated
counterparts. We observed that in all NS cell lines, the expression of the largely
described stem markers CD133, Notch1, Nanog, Gli1, Sox2, Nestin, SonicHH, EZH2 and
Olig1/Olig2,[3, 36, 37] was markedly and
significantly repressed after a 15-day forced differentiation (Figure 1b). On the contrary, the expression of several
differentiation markers such as GFAP (glial fibrillary acidic protein) or
connective tissue growth factor (CTGF)[3,
38] was potently upregulated in
FCS-differentiated cells but almost undetectable in NS (Figure
1b). We confirmed by FACS that the cell surface stem markers CD133,
Notch1 and A2B5[4] were totally abrogated
in the differentiated cells, as well the SCTF Nanog and Sox2 (Figure 1c). The NSC protein Nestin, highly expressed in glioma and
particularly in GSC,[39, 40] also appeared markedly decreased. Finally, we observed
the appearance in these differentiated cells of the three lineage-specific
differentiation markers GFAP, O4 and TUJ1 (β3-Tubulin),[29] pointing the ability of this differentiation
process to exploit the GSC pluripotency to generate, respectively, tumor
astrocytes, oligodendrocytes and neurons (Figure 1c).
Of note, these differentiation markers were not expressed in the NS cells. The
results were reproduced in all cell lines (data not shown).
Absence of alteration of both cell viability and proliferation in response
to a 3-Gy irradiation
As previously mentioned, it appeared necessary in this study to avoid any clonal
selection after irradiation in order to only study the potential dedifferentiation
process induced by IR. As a consequence, our protocol required a non-toxic IR
dose. In that way, we performed some clonogenic NS formation assays at different
IR doses (0–10 Gy) and we observed that no significant toxicity can
be detected at 3 Gy or lower (data not shown). Next, we checked whether or
not this 3-Gy subtoxic dose was able to alter cellular viability or proliferation
during the dedifferentiation process. We also used a 12-Gy dose as a positive
control for toxicity. Using annexin V (AV)/propidium iodide (PI) double
staining and SubG1 detection to assess necrosis and apoptosis after a 3-Gy
irradiation, we failed to observe any viability impairment 7 days post IR (Figures 2b and c) or along the whole dedifferentiation
process (Figure 2e). Similarly, we did not see, using
WST1 assay, any alteration in cell proliferation at 7 days post IR (Figure 2d). A similar statement was made during the whole
dedifferentiation protocol, as we could not observe any change in the cell count
between the control and the 3-Gy-irradiated groups (Figure
2f). As expected, the 12-Gy dose induced a decrease in cell
proliferation and an increase of apoptotic and necrotic cell death as soon as 7
days post IR (Figures 2b, c and d).
Potentiation of the long-term acquisition of a stem-like phenotype by IR in
GBM differentiated cells
Using these characterized GBM differentiated cells irradiated by a 3-Gy subtoxic
dose, we subjected or not the cells to a medium change and place them either in
FCS medium to preserve their differentiated status or in SCM medium to favor the
potential appearance of a stem phenotype in a permissive environment (Figure 2a). NS did not appear in cells kept in FCS medium,
even after IR (Figure 3a). However, we observed after
at least 4 weeks of culture post IR (25 cm2 culture flasks) the
generation of NS in SCM medium (Figure 3a). This was
noticed at a basal level in non-irradiated control cells (CTR) and was greatly
potentiated by IR by two- to six fold according the cell line (Figures 3a and b). We also plated GBM-differentiated cells at low
densities in 24-well plates in order to perform a NS generation assay adapted from
the classic limiting dilution assay used generally for GSC.[41] Using this protocol, we were able to confirm
that FCS-maintained cells, with or without IR, failed to generate NS. On the
contrary, SCM-cultured cells gave rise to NS at long term and this generation was
greatly potentiated after irradiation (Figure 3c). We
also performed this NS generation assay after sorting the differentiated GBM cells
(negative for A2B5; Tchoghandjian et al.[4]) by FACS analysis in order to discard some eventual
remaining GSC in our differentiated cell cultures and we observed the same
increase in NS generation in response to irradiation (Figure
3d). Finally, we also established through the use of a classic
limiting dilution assay[41] that these
primary NS generated in SCM medium were able to give rise to secondary NS, with a
marked increased ability for primary NS-derived cells obtained after a 3-Gy
irradiation. This was observed whether the differentiated cells were sorted or not
before irradiation (Figures 3e and f).
Figure 3
Increased ability to generate NS in GBM-differentiated cells subjected to a 3-Gy
subtoxic irradiation. Cells treated or not by a 3-Gy irradiation and placed 2 days
after in either FCS or SCM medium for long-term culture were analyzed in order to
evaluate the number of NS generated in the culture supernatant. (a)
Phase-contrast photomicrographs of GBM cells at the end of the dedifferentiation
protocol. Arrows indicate the presence of NS. Original magnification: × 10,
scale bar: 6 μm. (b–d) Quantification of the
number of generated NS at the end of the dedifferentiation protocol for the four
cell lines C, D, G and I in irradiated (3 Gy) or untreated (CTR) GBM cells
kept in SCM medium. (b) NS were counted and results are expressed per
25-cm2 flasks. Results are expressed as the means±S.E.M. of
at least three independent experiments. ∗P<0.05,
∗∗P<0.01 compared with the related
control. (c) NS were also generated from differentiated cells through the
use of a dilution assay at low density and were counted at different dilutions in
each well of a 24-well plate. The results are shown for the C and I cell lines (20
000 cells/well). ∗P<0.05. (d)
Before the NS generation assay, A2B5-negative differentiated cells were sorted as
described in the Materials and Methods section (A cell line). The generated
primary NS were then counted at the end of the dedifferentiation protocol. Results
are expressed as the means±S.E.M. of three independent experiments.
∗P<0.05 (e and f) Primary NS were
generated from differentiated cells with (f) or without (e) an
optional FACS sorting of the A2B5-negative differentiated cells. These primary NS
were subsequently dissociated and plated in 96-well plates at different low cell
densities, to study their ability to generate secondary NS through limiting
dilution assays. ∗P<0.05.
∗∗P<0.01,
∗∗∗P<0.001 compared with the
related CTR SCM condition. Representative phase-contrast photomicrographs were
shown for each conditions (original magnification: × 4, scale bar:
17 μm)
We then analyzed the expression of a large panel of stem markers at the end of the
dedifferentiation protocol. We demonstrated by RT-qPCR that the mRNA expression
levels of several well-established stem markers, such as Nanog, Olig2, SonicHH and
EZH2, were markedly increased in 3-Gy-treated cells grown in SCM medium compared
with untreated cells kept in the same medium (Figure
4a). We did not observe this IR-induced potentiation in FCS condition.
Similar results were obtained for all the cell lines (data not shown). We analyzed
in parallel the expression of several differentiation markers and showed that the
astrocytic marker GFAP and the oligodendrocytic marker oligodendrocyte-myelin
glycoprotein[42] were accordingly
downregulated in SCM medium and that this decrease was amplified after irradiation
(Figure 4b).
Figure 4
Overexpression of stemness markers and downregulation of differentiation markers
at the RNA level in GBM cells after a 3-Gy irradiation. Differentiated GBM cells
treated or not by a 3-Gy irradiation and placed 2 days after in either FCS or SCM
medium for long-term culture were analyzed by real-time quantitative PCR (see
Materials and Methods) at the end of the dedifferentiation protocol. RNA
expression level of the indicated stem (a) or differentiation markers
(b) in GBM-differentiated cells subjected to the dedifferentiation
process for the indicated cell lines. The RNA expression levels of these different
markers were also shown for NS cells as a control, as these NS are enriched in
GSC. Shown are the fold inductions relative to the CTR SCM condition expressed as
means±S.E.M. of at least three independent experiments.
∗P<0.05,
∗∗P<0.01,
∗∗∗P<0.001 compared with the
related CTR SCM condition
To confirm these data at the protein level, we demonstrated by western blotting in
all the cell lines that long-term culture in SCM medium of irradiated
differentiated GBM cells greatly enhanced the expression of Olig2, Sox2 and Nestin
compared with untreated cells kept in SCM medium, which nevertheless showed a
slight increase of these stem markers compared with FCS-differentiated cells
(Figure 5a), as observed at the RNA level (Figure 4a). However, short-term analyses (2–7 days
post IR) demonstrated that this stem markers overexpression can exclusively be
observed after IR in SCM medium, without any effect in FCS-cultured cells or in
SCM-control cells, pointing out the predominant role of irradiation for stem
markers induction (Supplementary Figure 1a). In
order to measure more accurately the overexpression of different stem (Nestin,
A2B5, Nanog and Notch1) and differentiation (GFAP) markers, we demonstrated by
FACS analysis in all the cell lines that 3-Gy-irradiated cells cultured in SCM
medium either markedly upregulated these stem markers or downregulated GFAP
compared with the control SCM condition (Figure 5b).
In addition, we were able to show that this phenomenon was generalized to the
whole cell population and did not seem to be due to the expansion of some
particular cell clones within the cellular population.
Figure 5
Overexpression of stemness markers and downregulation of differentiation marker at
the protein level in GBM cells after a 3-Gy irradiation. Differentiated GBM cells
treated or not by a 3-Gy irradiation and placed 2 days after in either FCS or SCM
medium for long-term culture were analyzed either by western blotting (a)
or FACS immunofluorescence (b) at the end of the dedifferentiation
protocol. Protein expression levels in NS cells were shown as a control for the
stem condition. (a) Western blotting analysis of the stem markers Olig2,
Sox2 and Nestin. Equal gel loading and transfer efficiency were checked with
anti-actin or β2-microglobulin (β2M) antibodies. Blots
were representative of at least three independent experiments in the indicated
cell line and were reproduced in all the cell lines. (b) Immunofluorescence
analysis performed by FACS of the stem (Nestin, A2B5, Nanog and Notch1) and
differentiation (GFAP) markers in the G cell line. The SFI allowed to evaluate the
marker expression level (see Materials and Methods). Results are expressed as the
means±S.E.M. of at least three independent experiments in the G cell line
and were reproduced in all the cell lines. ∗P<0.05,
∗∗P<0.01 compared with the related CTR SCM
condition. For each marker, some representative FACS plot overlays (NS
versus CTR FCS, CTR FCS versus 3 Gy FCS and CTR SCM
versus 3 Gy SCM) were depicted
Increased tumorigenic potential in vivo in IR-dedifferentiated GBM
cells
One of the most important characteristics of GSC is their high tumorigenicity in
orthotopically xenografted nude mice compared with non-stem cells.[43] We analyzed accordingly the tumorigenic
potential of long-term irradiated GBM cells cultured either in SCM or FCS medium
at the end of the dedifferentiation protocol. We observed that GSC-enriched NS
cells show the highest tumorigenic potential when compared with all differentiated
conditions (Figure 6a). Three-Gray-irradiated cells
kept in FCS medium failed to show a significant tumorigenicity increase compared
with untreated cells. As control cells maintained in SCM medium showed a slight
increase in their tumorigenic potential, we observed that only the 3-Gy-treated
cells placed in SCM medium were able to display a markedly increased
tumorigenicity, with survival curves relatively close to those of the
corresponding NS cell line (Figure 6a). We next
performed an immunolabeling of the stem factor Nanog in the brain of these
xenografted mice and we showed that Nanog is expressed by small cell clusters, as
already described for several stem markers in humantumor tissues,[44, 45] and is
significantly increased in the 3-Gy SCM group compared with the related control
(Figure 6b and Supplementary
Figure 2). Although these first elements need to be further
confirmed in larger in vivo studies, they seem to support our
observations establishing that IR could potentiate the dedifferentiation of GBM
cells in vitro and lead to an upregulation of GSC number and an increased
tumorigenicity in vivo.
Figure 6
Increased in vivo tumorigenicity of 3-Gy-irradiated GBM cells placed in
SCM for long-term culture. Differentiated GBM cells treated or not by a 3-Gy
irradiation and placed 2 days after in either FCS or SCM medium for long-term
culture were subsequently orthotopically xenografted in nude mice to evaluate
their tumorigenic potential. NS cells were also injected as a control for the stem
condition, as they are enriched in GSC. (a) Survival curves established in
xenografted mice for the indicated injected cell line (three mice per group for
the D cell line and five mice per group for the G cell line). Exact
P-values between the 3-Gy SCM group and the related CTR SCM group are
indicated in the figure, after log-rank analysis. (b) Immunohistochemistry
(IHC) analysis of Nanog-positive cell clusters in the brain tumors of killed,
xenografted mice for the CTR SCM and the 3-Gy SCM groups (D and G cell lines,
three mice per group). Shown are means±S.E.M.
∗P<0.05
Requirement of a survivin-dependent pathway for IR-induced dedifferentiation
in GBM cells
Our group and others previously showed that survivin (BIRC5), an anti-apoptotic
IAP, is involved in GBM cell radioresistance, notably in relation with hypoxia
pathway.[32, 46] Moreover, it appears that survivin has a major
functional role in neural progenitor cells and during neurogenesis[47] and is closely associated with the
SonicHH/Gli1 pathway in GSC.[48] In
line with this, survivin was recently shown to be upregulated in GSC, to
contribute to their cell death resistance and to be increased by IR.[49] We then hypothesized that survivin may be
involved in the IR-induced dedifferentiation process described above. We first
checked the survivin expression in GSC-enriched NS, in differentiated cells and
during the IR-induced dedifferentiation, by qPCR (Figure
7a) and western blotting (Figure 7b). We
observed that in all the cell lines, this IAP was dramatically downregulated in
FCS-differentiated cells compared with NS, independently of their irradiation
status. Interestingly, a slight overexpression of survivin was seen in untreated
SCM condition but only the 3-Gy condition allowed to overexpress survivin at a
level approaching the one displayed in NS (Figures 7a and
b). This increase was also observed at short term after irradiation
(Supplementary Figure 1b). In consequence,
these variations appeared to be very similar to those seen for the different stem
markers analyzed above (Figures 4a and 5a, and Supplementary Figure
1a).
Figure 7
Overexpression of the anti-apoptotic protein survivin in 3-Gy-irradiated
GBM-differentiated cells placed in SCM for long-term culture. Differentiated GBM
cells treated or not by a 3-Gy irradiation and placed 2 days after in either FCS
or SCM medium for long-term culture were analyzed for survivin expression either
by real-time quantitative PCR (a) or western blotting (b) at the end
of the dedifferentiation protocol and for the four different patient cell lines.
RNA and protein expression levels for Survivin were also analyzed in NS cells as a
control for the stem condition. (a) PCR results were expressed as fold
inductions relative to the CTR SCM condition and shown as means±S.E.M. of
at least three independent experiments. ∗P<0.05,
∗∗P<0.01,
∗∗∗P<0.001. (b) Western
blotting results were representative of at least three independent experiments for
each cell line. Equal gel loading and transfer efficiency were checked with an
anti-actin antibody
We then investigated whether this survivin overexpression during the IR-induced
dedifferentiation was a consequence of this reprogramming or could be an essential
step supporting IR-induced GBM plasticity to a stem-like phenotype. To this end,
we treated GBM cells during the dedifferentiation process with 7 nM YM-155,
a selective inhibitor of survivin used in anti-cancer clinical
trials.[50] As an additional
control, we used MK-2206 (250 nM), a selective AKT inhibitor,[51] as we and others[52] showed that AKT can control the expression of survivin
in GBM cells (Figure 8a). We first checked the
efficiency of these inhibitors used at non-toxic concentrations (data not shown)
on survivin expression by western blotting during the IR-promoted
dedifferentiation (Figure 8a). Next, we observed their
effect at the end of the dedifferentiation protocol and showed that both
inhibitors induced a potent blockade of the 3-Gy-induced NS generation in SCM
medium (Figures 8b and c). Moreover, YM-155 and
MK-2206 markedly inhibited at the protein level the overexpression of the stem
markers Olig2, Sox2 and Nestin in response to IR in SCM medium (Figure 8d). Altogether, these results strongly suggest that the
IR-induced reprogramming in GBM cells was associated and supported by the
upregulation of the anti-apoptotic protein survivin.
Figure 8
Requirement of the IR-induced survivin overexpression for the dedifferentiation
process in GBM cells. (a–d) Differentiated GBM cells were
pre-treated for 24 h with either a survivin inhibitor (YM-155 7 nM)
or an AKT inhibitor (MK-2206 250 nM) and then irradiated or not at
3 Gy before being placed 2 days after in either FCS or SCM medium,
complemented or not with fresh YM-155 or MK-2206 inhibitors. (a) Western
blot analysis of the effect of YM-155 and MK-2206 treatment on Survivin expression
in GBM cells (I cell line) irradiated or not and kept in SCM medium for 1
additional week. Efficiency of MK-2206 toward AKT was also checked as a control by
the blotting of phospho-AKT1 (pAKT1). (b and c) At the end of the
dedifferentiation protocol, the effects of YM-155 and MK-2206 were measured on the
NS generation potential in response to IR by NS counting in phase-contrast
microscopy (original magnification: × 4, scale bar:
17 μm) (b) and subsequent quantification in the
indicated cell lines (c). Results are expressed as the means±S.E.M.
of three independent experiments. ∗∗P<0.01,
∗∗∗P<0.001 compared with the 3-Gy
SCM condition. (d) The involvement of Survivin in the IR-induced GBM
reprogramming was checked by western blotting by analyzing the expression of the
stem markers Nestin, Sox2 and Olig2 at the end of the dedifferentiation protocol
in the presence or absence of YM-155 and MK-2206. Concerning western blottings,
equal gel loading and transfer efficiency were checked with an anti-actin, AKT1 or
β2-microglobulin (β2M) antibody, and results were
representative of at least three independent experiments on the indicated cell
line and reproduced in all the cell lines
Discussion
Radiotherapy is undoubtedly a key component for GBM treatment. The standard protocol
defined by Stupp et al.[53, 54] associates concomitant chemotherapy with
Temozolomide and radiotherapy at a total dose of 60 Gy (30 daily fractions of
2 Gy), followed by adjuvant TMZ chemotherapy. This combined
chemo/radiotherapy following surgical tumor resection, when possible, leads to a
median overall survival of 14.6 months in the EORTC-NCIC trial[53, 54] and the
relapse, almost inevitable, mainly occurs at the initial tumor location exposed to
radiotherapy.[55] Consequently, it
appeared essential to identify the possible origins of this high relapse rate and to
increase the efficacy of radiotherapy in GBM to improve their clinical prognosis.Growing number of studies deciphered the resistance pathways occurring in GBM cells
in response to IR and notably focused on the radioresistant GSC subpopulation, much
more resistant to IR compared with differentiated GBM cells.[6, 13, 16] These GSC then may be selected by the treatment to favor
the subsequent tumor regrowth and relapse. Different targeted strategies have been
already tested to radiosensitize GSC in order to suppress either their survival
ability or their tumorigenic competency.[6,
12, 13, 16] Forced differentiation was also used to
sensitize GSC to radiotherapy.[56, 57] Nevertheless, none of these radiosensitizing
strategies got interested to target a putative dedifferentiation mechanism occurring
in resistant differentiated cells remaining in the tumor site after combined
surgery/radiochemotherapy and to analyze the effects of IR with regard to the
cellular plasticity processes.For the first time, we demonstrated here that IR at a subtoxic 3-Gy dose close to the
daily used dose in clinic are responsible for favoring at long term a major
dedifferentiation process in GBM cells, with the gain of an in vitro
self-renewal ability, the overexpression of a large panel of stem markers, the
dramatic decrease of several well-established neural differentiation markers and
finally the acquisition of a potentiated tumorigenic potential in vivo in
orthotopically xenografted nude mice. Moreover, we showed that this cellular
plasticity to a cancer stem cell (CSC) phenotype occurred independently of any clonal
selection, as we did not observe any impairment of either the proliferation rate or
the cell viability after a 3-Gy irradiation along the whole dedifferentiation
process. Altogether, our data highlight the existence of a new mechanism of
radioresistance in GBM cells through a cellular adaptation of the surviving cancer
cells after treatment, leading to their reprogramming to a stem-like state much more
tumorigenic. This work supports some recent observations in breast cancer cells
showing the re-acquisition of several stem characters in response to IR, highlighting
in some ways their reprogramming toward a stem-like phenotype.[58]This new process of cell adaptation to radiotherapy, which allows remaining
differentiated cancer cells to acquire stemness, may probably contribute, together
with clonal selection, to the stem cell compartment expansion inside the tumor after
treatment[41] and to the fast and
almost inevitable recurrence of these tumors. In consequence, it could be of great
interest to specifically inhibit this particular IR-induced plasticity in order to
setup new clinical strategies, in the aim to optimize radiotherapy in GBM patients.
For this purpose, we analyzed several genes known to participate to a cellular
adaptation process in response to IR and notably the anti-apoptotic protein survivin,
recently highlighted by our group in irradiated GBM cells.[32] We showed in the present study that survivin was markedly
enhanced in GSC compared with their differentiated counterparts, and that its
expression was potentiated during the dedifferentiation process in a similar way to
the stem markers. Moreover, we and others previously showed that this IAP is involved
in GBM radioresistance,[32, 46] is increased by IR in GBM cells,[46, 49] is upregulated in GSC
compared with differentiated GBM cells,[49]
is associated with faster GBM recurrence[49]
and is overexpressed in GBM recurrence tumor samples compared with newly diagnosed
ones.[49] In addition, survivin was
also shown to be tightly associated with different stem-promoting pathways in
CSC/NSC, notably SonicHH/Gli1,[48]
Notch,[59] Oct4/Stat3[60] and Sox2.[61] In consequence, we investigated its role in the IR-induced GBM
cell dedifferentiation. Through the use of the selective inhibitor of survivin
YM-155, actually used in phase II clinical trials for advanced non-small cell lung
carcinoma, melanoma, breast and prostate cancer,[62] we established that survivin is essential to the occurrence
of the IR-induced plasticity process and sustains both the NS-forming ability and the
stem markers overexpression in response to IR. It would be of interest to further
study the precise role of this IAP in the dedifferentiation process, as it appears
that survivin has, in addition to its inhibitory role of the executioner caspases
during apoptosis,[63] several other roles in
the cell machinery such as the mitosis process[63] or the DNA-damage repair system.[64] Finally, survivin was also shown to be a major target of
different pro-survival signaling pathways such as the PI3K/AKT axis and the HIF
factors.[65] As AKT and HIFs were shown
to sustain the stem-like GSC phenotype,[23,
24, 66, 67] this warrants future studies to discover the
interplay between IR, hypoxic signaling and AKT/survivin to install the GBM
dedifferentiation process.Altogether, our data demonstrate that a clinically relevant radiation dose, a key
component of the conventional GBM treatment, can potentiate in differentiated GBM
cells the acquisition of a stem-like phenotype associated with increased in
vitro self-renewal capacity and in vivo tumorigenesis. This
plasticity process in response to IR appeared to be supported by survivin, known to
be tightly associated with several stem-maintaining pathways. This survivin-mediated
reprogramming to stemness could probably contribute to the expansion of the GSC
compartment after treatment and may favor the fast recurrence of these aggressive
brain tumors. Setting up new clinical strategies to restrain this IR-induced
dedifferentiation should be considered for forthcoming trials, and on this basis the
specific targeting of survivin may be an interesting approach.
Materials and methods
Human tumor collection
The study was conducted on newly diagnosed GBM tumor samples isolated from four
different patients to establish four primary GSC cell lines (C, D, G and I). For
FACS sorting experiments, a fifth GSCpatient cell line was also used (A). These
samples were all obtained after written informed consent from patients admitted to
the Neurosurgery Department at Toulouse University Hospital and were processed in
accordance with the Institution's Human Research Ethics Committee. Tumors
used in this study were histologically diagnosed as grade IV astrocytoma according
to the WHO criteria. All the results depicted in this study were obtained from at
least three different independent experiments in the same cell line and were
reproduced in all the other cell lines.
Cell culture
The GBM samples were processed as described by Avril et al.,[68] in order to obtain the corresponding primary
NS cell lines shown by other groups to be enriched in GSC.[29] NSGSC lines were maintained in DMEM-F12
(Lonza, Levallois-Perret, France) supplemented with B27 and N2 (Invitrogen, Life
Technologies, Saint Aubin, France), 25 ng/ml of FGF-2 and EGF
(Peprotech, Neuilly sur Seine, France) at 37 °C in 5%
CO2 humidified incubators. All GSC lines were used for the
experiments in this SCM medium between the second and twelfth passages, in order
to avoid any stem cell characteristic loss. Forced differentiation was performed
according to previous published protocol[69] adapted as follows. Briefly, the dissociated NS cells were
cultured and plated as adherent monolayer (7.5 × 103
cells/cm2) in DMEM-F12 supplemented only with 10% FCS
(FCS medium) on laminin (1.5 μg/cm2,
Sigma-Aldrich, Saint-Quentin Fallavier, France) for at least 15 days to ensure an
optimum differentiation.
Irradiation-induced dedifferentiation protocol and NS generation
assays
The differentiated cells were subjected or not to 3 (subtoxic dose) or
12 Gy (positive control for cell death and proliferation assays)
(Gamma-cell Exactor 40, Nordion, Ottawa, ON, Canada). Two days post IR, cells were
placed either in FCS or SCM medium to keep them differentiated or to favor the
dedifferentiation process in a permissive stem medium, respectively (Figure 2a). Unless stated, cells were cultured until the
appearance of a sufficient number of NS in the medium, corresponding to an average
of 30 days after irradiation. For the experiments using the selective chemical
inhibitors of survivin or AKT, 7 nM YM-155 (SelleckChem, Houston, TX, USA)
or 250 nM MK-2206 (SelleckChem) were respectively added as a pretreatment 2
days before irradiation and then renewed with the cell medium every week. At the
end of the protocol, cultures were observed by microscopy (Nikon Diaphot, Nikon,
Champigny sur Marne, France) under a × 4 or × 10 objective and the
primary NS were counted for each condition in the entire 25-cm2 flask
(Figures 3a and b). Next, the totality of the cells
was collected after trypsinization for subsequent experiments. For adaptation of
the limiting dilution NS generation assay, we plated differentiated cells in
24-cell plates at different low cell densities
(2500–30 000 cells/well) before subjecting them to the
long-term protocol. Generated primary NS were then counted by microscopy in each
well (Figure 3c). When stated, differentiated cells
could also be sorted by FACS analysis to select the A2B5-negative cell population
before running the primary NS generation assay (Figure
3d).Primary NS obtained at the end of the dedifferentiation protocol, with or without
a preliminary FACS sorting of the differentiated cells, were dissociated and
plated in 96-well plates (24 wells per condition) at different cellular densities
(1–500 cells/well), in order to assess their ability to generate
secondary NS through limiting dilution assays. After 15 days, secondary NS were
counted by microscopy in each well.
Quantitative real-time RT-PCR
Total RNA was isolated either from primary NS, FCS-differentiated cells or from
cells at the end of the dedifferentiation protocol using RNeasy kit (Qiagen,
Courtaboeuf, France) and then reverse-transcribed using iScript cDNA synthesis kit
(Bio-Rad, Marnes la Coquette, France). Real-time qPCR reactions were carried out
using the Fluidigm 96.96 dynamic array integrated fluidic circuits and the Biomark
HD System (Fluidigm, Les Ulis, France) according Advanced Development Protocol no.
37 (Toulouse GeT Platform). β2-Microglobulin was used as endogenous
control in the ΔCt analysis. The different primers (Eurogentec, Angers,
France) used in this study are described in Supplementary
Table 1.
Immunohistochemistry
Immunohistochemistry was performed on the excised brains on paraffin-embedded
sections (5 μm). For Nanog detection, only the brain samples
displaying an equivalent tumor area of 70–80% of the total brain were
selected, as determined by Hemalun–Eosin staining (Supplementary Figure 2a). Briefly, the sections were incubated for
90 min with an anti-Nanog antibody (Ab62734, Abcam, Paris, France). Slides
were counterstained with hematoxylin and viewed on a Nikon microscope.
Nanog-positive cell clusters were then counted in the tumor area.
Flow cytometry analyses
Direct immunofluorescence assay was performed by FACS as previously
described.[70, 71] When required, collected cells were first subjected to a
step of permeabilization using the cytofix/cytoperm kit (BD Biosciences, Le
Pont de Claix, France). For all samples, 2 × 105 cells were then
incubated for 30 min in PBS with 10% BSA at 4 °C to avoid
nonspecific binding, and then incubated with appropriate conjugated primary
antibodies for 40 min at 4 °C. Fluorescence related to
immunolabeling was measured using a FACSCalibur flow cytometer (BD Biosciences).
The antibodies used are depicted in Supplementary Table
2. Each measurement was conducted on at least 7000 events, acquired
on CellQuest software (BD Biosciences) and analyzed with VenturiOne software
(Applied Cytometry, Sheffield, UK). To evaluate the marker expression, we
determined the specific fluorescence index (SFI) using the mean fluorescence
intensity (MFI). The SFI was calculated as previously described, with the
following formula SFI=(MFI antibody−MFI isotype control)/MFI
isotype control.[71] The gating strategy
used in these analyses is described in Supplementary Figure
3 and is based on a previously published protocol.[72] For NS generation assay, a FACS sorting
(Beckman MoFlo Astrios, Beckman Coulter, Villepinte, France) was performed when
mentioned on GBM-differentiated cells (A cell line) before the assay, in order to
only sort the differentiated population, which was characterized by (i) its
specific FSC-H/SSC-H pattern (Gate C, see Supplementary
Figure 3) and (ii) its negative expression of the stem marker A2B5,
as previously described.[4, 73]
Western blotting
Cells were lysed in RIPA buffer complemented with cocktails of protease and
phosphatase inhibitors (Sigma-Aldrich). Twenty-five micrograms of proteins were
then separated on a 10 or 12.5% SDS-PAGE, electroblotted onto PVDF
membranes (Amersham, GE Healthcare, Velizy-Villacoublay, France), which were
blocked with 10% milk. The primary antibodies used for this study are
listed in Supplementary Table 3.
Cell death and proliferation assays
Apoptotic cells were quantified using FACS analysis by determining the percentage
of cells with subG1-DNA content. This subG1 population was analysed after cell
permeabilization and subsequent PI staining, as previously described.[74] Apoptosis and necrosis were also quantified
at the same time on non-permeabilized cells by flow cytometry, with an Alexa Fluor
488-conjugated AV and PI kit, according to the manufacturer's protocol
(Invitrogen, Life Technologies). SubG1 and AV measurements were conducted on at
least 10 000 events, acquired on CellQuest software (BD Biosciences) and
analyzed with VenturiOne software (Applied Cytometry). The proliferation rate was
finally analyzed using the WST-1 assay (Roche Diagnostics, Meylan, France) in
96-well microplates, as previously described.[70] The yellow formazan product formed by viable adherent
cells was quantified by detection of its absorbance at 450 nm using a
Multiskan Multisoft Labsystem spectrophotometer (Thermofisher, Illkirch, France).
For these cell death and proliferation assays, differentiated cells were treated
or not with a 3- or 12-Gy irradiation, placed 2 days after either in FCS or SCM
medium and collected for analysis 1 week after irradiation.
Orthotopic xenograft generation
Nude mice were housed in the Claudius Regaud Institute Animal Care-accredited
facility and the Institution animal ethics committee approval was obtained for the
use of the animal model and the study protocols. Orthotopic human GBM xenografts
were established in 4- to 6-week-old female nude mice (Janvier Labs, Le
Genest-Saint-Isle, France) as previously described.[68] Briefly, mice received a stereotaxically guided
injection of either 1.75 × 105 (G cell line) or 2.5 ×
105 cells (D cell line) collected at the end of the
dedifferentiation protocol and resuspended in DMEM-F12. The injection was
precisely located into the right forebrain (2 mm lateral and 1 mm
anterior to the bregma at a 5-mm depth from the skull surface). In order to check
the cell tumorigenicity, survival curves were established and mice were killed at
the appearance of neurological signs. Excised brains were then collected for
subsequent immunohistochemistry analysis.
Statistical analysis
The results are presented as means±S.E.M. of at least three independent
experiments. Significant differences (∗P<0.05,
∗∗P<0.01 and
∗∗∗P<0.001) were evaluated with the
Student t-test. Log-rank analysis of Kaplan–Meier survival curves
was used to evaluate the tumorigenesis of injected cells, with P<0.05
considered as significantly different (Graphpad Prism v5, GraphPad Software, La
Jolla, CA, USA). Western blottings and FACS plots are representative of at least
three different experiments in the same cell line and were reproduced in all the
other cell lines.
Authors: M Venere; P Hamerlik; Q Wu; R D Rasmussen; L A Song; A Vasanji; N Tenley; W A Flavahan; A B Hjelmeland; J Bartek; J N Rich Journal: Cell Death Differ Date: 2013-10-11 Impact factor: 15.828
Authors: G Renner; H Janouskova; F Noulet; V Koenig; E Guerin; S Bär; J Nuesch; F Rechenmacher; S Neubauer; H Kessler; A-F Blandin; L Choulier; N Etienne-Selloum; M Lehmann; I Lelong-Rebel; S Martin; M Dontenwill Journal: Cell Death Differ Date: 2015-10-16 Impact factor: 15.828
Authors: D N Debruyne; L Turchi; F Burel-Vandenbos; M Fareh; F Almairac; V Virolle; D Figarella-Branger; N Baeza-Kallee; P Lagadec; V Kubiniek; P Paquis; D Fontaine; M-P Junier; H Chneiweiss; T Virolle Journal: Oncogene Date: 2017-09-18 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: Seamus P Caragher; Jack M Shireman; Mei Huang; Jason Miska; Fatemeh Atashi; Shivani Baisiwala; Cheol Hong Park; Miranda R Saathoff; Louisa Warnke; Ting Xiao; Maciej S Lesniak; C David James; Herbert Meltzer; Andrew K Tryba; Atique U Ahmed Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2019-01-16 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Brenda Auffinger; Drew Spencer; Peter Pytel; Atique U Ahmed; Maciej S Lesniak Journal: Expert Rev Neurother Date: 2015-05-31 Impact factor: 4.618
Authors: Jianhui Ma; Jorge A Benitez; Jie Li; Shunichiro Miki; Claudio Ponte de Albuquerque; Thais Galatro; Laura Orellana; Ciro Zanca; Rachel Reed; Antonia Boyer; Tomoyuki Koga; Nissi M Varki; Tim R Fenton; Suely Kazue Nagahashi Marie; Erik Lindahl; Timothy C Gahman; Andrew K Shiau; Huilin Zhou; John DeGroot; Erik P Sulman; Webster K Cavenee; Richard D Kolodner; Clark C Chen; Frank B Furnari Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2019-02-28 Impact factor: 31.743