Stephanie Verbeke1, Elodie Richard2, Elodie Monceau3, Xenia Schmidt4,5, Benoit Rousseau6, Valerie Velasco7,8, David Bernard9, Herve Bonnefoi10, Gaetan MacGrogan11,12, Richard D Iggo13,14. 1. INSERM U916, Bergonié Cancer Institute, University of Bordeaux, 229 cours de l'Argonne, Bordeaux, 33076, France. stefverbeke@aol.com. 2. INSERM U916, Bergonié Cancer Institute, University of Bordeaux, 229 cours de l'Argonne, Bordeaux, 33076, France. e.richard@bordeaux.unicancer.fr. 3. INSERM U916, Bergonié Cancer Institute, University of Bordeaux, 229 cours de l'Argonne, Bordeaux, 33076, France. e.monceau@bordeaux.unicancer.fr. 4. INSERM U916, Bergonié Cancer Institute, University of Bordeaux, 229 cours de l'Argonne, Bordeaux, 33076, France. xenia.schmidt@inserm.fr. 5. School of Medicine, University of St Andrews, Medical and Biological Sciences Building, North Haugh, St Andrews, KY16 9TF, UK. xenia.schmidt@inserm.fr. 6. Animalerie A2, University of Bordeaux, 146 rue Léo Saignat, 33076, Bordeaux, France. benoit.rousseau@u-bordeaux2.fr. 7. INSERM U916, Bergonié Cancer Institute, University of Bordeaux, 229 cours de l'Argonne, Bordeaux, 33076, France. v.velasco@bordeaux.unicancer.fr. 8. Pathology Department, Bergonié Cancer Institute, 229 cours de l'Argonne, 33076, Bordeaux, France. v.velasco@bordeaux.unicancer.fr. 9. INSERM U1052, Centre Leon Berard, University of Lyon, 28 rue Laennec, 69008, Lyon, France. david.bernard@lyon.unicancer.fr. 10. INSERM U916, Bergonié Cancer Institute, University of Bordeaux, 229 cours de l'Argonne, Bordeaux, 33076, France. h.bonnefoi@bordeaux.unicancer.fr. 11. INSERM U916, Bergonié Cancer Institute, University of Bordeaux, 229 cours de l'Argonne, Bordeaux, 33076, France. g.macgrogan@bordeaux.unicancer.fr. 12. Pathology Department, Bergonié Cancer Institute, 229 cours de l'Argonne, 33076, Bordeaux, France. g.macgrogan@bordeaux.unicancer.fr. 13. INSERM U916, Bergonié Cancer Institute, University of Bordeaux, 229 cours de l'Argonne, Bordeaux, 33076, France. r.iggo@bordeaux.unicancer.fr. 14. School of Medicine, University of St Andrews, Medical and Biological Sciences Building, North Haugh, St Andrews, KY16 9TF, UK. r.iggo@bordeaux.unicancer.fr.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The cell of origin for estrogen receptor α-positive (ERα+) breast cancer is probably a luminal stem cell in the terminal duct lobular units. To model these cells, we have used the murine myoepithelial layer in the mouse mammary ducts as a scaffold upon which to build a human luminal layer. To prevent squamous metaplasia, a common artifact in genetically-engineered breast cancer models, we sought to limit activation of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) during in vitro cell culture before grafting the cells. METHODS: Human reduction mammoplasty cells were grown in vitro in WIT medium. Epidermal growth factor in the medium was replaced with amphiregulin and neuregulin to decrease activation of EGFR and increase activation of EGFR homologs 3 and 4 (ERBB3 and ERBB4). Lentiviral vectors were used to express oncogenic transgenes and fluorescent proteins. Human mammary epithelial cells were mixed with irradiated mouse fibroblasts and Matrigel, then injected through the nipple into the mammary ducts of immunodeficient mice. Engrafted cells were visualized by stereomicroscopy for fluorescent proteins and characterized by histology and immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: Growth of normal mammary epithelial cells in conditions favoring ERBB3/4 signaling prevented squamous metaplasia in vitro. Normal human cells were quickly lost after intraductal injection, but cells infected with lentiviruses expressing CCND1, MYC, TERT, BMI1 and a short-hairpin RNA targeting TP53 were able to engraft and progressively replace the luminal layer in the mouse mammary ducts, resulting in the formation of an extensive network of humanized ducts. Despite expressing multiple oncogenes, the human cells formed a morphologically normal luminal layer. Expression of a single additional oncogene, PIK3CA-H1047R, converted the cells into invasive cancer cells. The resulting tumors were ERα+, Ki67+ luminal B adenocarcinomas that were resistant to treatment with fulvestrant. CONCLUSIONS: Injection of preneoplastic human mammary epithelial cells into the mammary ducts of immunodeficient mice leads to replacement of the murine luminal layer with morphologically normal human cells. Genetic manipulation of the injected cells makes it possible to study defined steps in the transformation of human mammary epithelial cells in a more physiological environment than has hitherto been possible.
INTRODUCTION: The cell of origin for estrogen receptor α-positive (ERα+) breast cancer is probably a luminal stem cell in the terminal duct lobular units. To model these cells, we have used the murinemyoepithelial layer in the mouse mammary ducts as a scaffold upon which to build a human luminal layer. To prevent squamous metaplasia, a common artifact in genetically-engineered breast cancer models, we sought to limit activation of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) during in vitro cell culture before grafting the cells. METHODS:Human reduction mammoplasty cells were grown in vitro in WIT medium. Epidermal growth factor in the medium was replaced with amphiregulin and neuregulin to decrease activation of EGFR and increase activation of EGFR homologs 3 and 4 (ERBB3 and ERBB4). Lentiviral vectors were used to express oncogenic transgenes and fluorescent proteins. Human mammary epithelial cells were mixed with irradiated mouse fibroblasts and Matrigel, then injected through the nipple into the mammary ducts of immunodeficientmice. Engrafted cells were visualized by stereomicroscopy for fluorescent proteins and characterized by histology and immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: Growth of normal mammary epithelial cells in conditions favoring ERBB3/4 signaling prevented squamous metaplasia in vitro. Normal human cells were quickly lost after intraductal injection, but cells infected with lentiviruses expressing CCND1, MYC, TERT, BMI1 and a short-hairpin RNA targeting TP53 were able to engraft and progressively replace the luminal layer in the mouse mammary ducts, resulting in the formation of an extensive network of humanized ducts. Despite expressing multiple oncogenes, the human cells formed a morphologically normal luminal layer. Expression of a single additional oncogene, PIK3CA-H1047R, converted the cells into invasive cancer cells. The resulting tumors were ERα+, Ki67+ luminal B adenocarcinomas that were resistant to treatment with fulvestrant. CONCLUSIONS: Injection of preneoplastic human mammary epithelial cells into the mammary ducts of immunodeficientmice leads to replacement of the murine luminal layer with morphologically normal human cells. Genetic manipulation of the injected cells makes it possible to study defined steps in the transformation of human mammary epithelial cells in a more physiological environment than has hitherto been possible.
Pioneering studies by the Weinberg group have shown that normal human cells can
be fully converted into tumor cells by targeting a small number of processes known
to be abnormal in cancer, including telomere maintenance, the restriction point,
cell cycle checkpoints and apoptosis [1]. Human mammary epithelial cells transformed in this way have been
widely used but frequently form tumors with histological features rarely seen in
humanbreast cancer, in particular squamous carcinoma [2]. This is probably caused by excessive activation of EGFR
[3]. Since squamous metaplasia
increases with time in culture, current approaches attempt to shorten the
transformation process as much as possible, often to as little as 24 hours
[4],[5]. Squamous changes are also commonly seen in transgenicmouse
models of breast cancer, where part of the explanation may lie in mistargeting of
oncogenes to myoepithelial or bipotent progenitor/stem cells rather than luminal
stem cells [6].About 70% of humanbreast cancers express the estrogen receptor alpha (ERα,
ESR1), but genetically defined tumors based on
transformation of normal human cells are usually ERα negative. Since the ESR1 gene is rarely amplified in breast cancer, ERα
expression is normally ascribed to a lineage choice that traps the cells in an
ERα + state. The most likely cell of origin for this event is a luminal progenitor
or stem cell located in the terminal duct-lobular unit (TDLU) [7].Traditional breast cancer models based on injection of tumor cells directly into
the mammary fat pad [8] or under the
renal capsule [9] do not take into
account the unique features of the microenvironment in which breast cancers develop.
Behbod and colleagues recently described an intraductal injection technique that
disseminates tumor cells throughout the mouse mammary ductal tree, including the
TDLUs [10]. This approach places
potential tumor cells at or near the normal point of origin of breast cancer and
faithfully reproduces the histology of humanductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)
[11].We describe an approach based on the Behbod intraductal injection technique
using genetically engineered cells cultured in conditions favoring ERBB3 signaling.
Cells transduced with vectors expressing CCND1,
MYC, TERT,
BMI1 and a short hairpin RNA targeting p53
(TP53) were able to form a morphologically
normal luminal layer. Introduction of a single additional activated oncogene,
PIK3CA-H1047R, converted them into
ERα + invasive ductal adenocarcinomas.
Methods
Lentiviral vectors
The lentiviral plasmid vector expressing TERT and puromycin acetyltransferase (pac) (pSD-83) was described by Duss et al [12]. The vector expressing BMI1 and CFP (pER7)
was constructed from pSD-84 [12] by
replacing the pac gene with CFP by standard cloning. The vector expressing
MYC and hygromycin phosphohydrolase
(hph) (pSV32) was constructed by shuffling
the MYC open reading frame from pSD-94
[12] into pLenti PGK-hygro DEST
(Addgene 19066) by Gateway cloning. The vector expressing CCND1 and neomycin phosphotransferase (npt) (pSV31) was constructed by Gateway cloning of the CCND1 open reading frame from pENTR-CCND1 (PlasmID
HsCD00001252) into pLenti PGK-Neo DEST (Addgene 19067). The pLVTH-sip53 vector
expressing GFP and a short hairpin RNA
targeting TP53 was obtained from Addgene
(12239). The vector expressing PIK3CA-H1047R
and hph (pER157) was constructed by cloning the
PIK3CA-H1047R open reading frame from
pBABE-PIK3CA (PlasmID clone 25920) into pENTR1A to give pER152, then transferred
by Gateway cloning into pLenti CMV/TO-hygro DEST (Addgene 17484). The vector
expressing tdTomato (pER5) was kindly provided by Francois Moreau-Gaudry.
Western blot analysis
Cells were collected four to seven days post-transfection and lysed in sodium
dodecyl sulfate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) sample buffer
[13]. Cell lysates were separated
by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto nitrocellulose membranes. The membranes were
blocked with 5% fat-free milk powder in 150 mM NaCl, 50 mM Tris-HCL pH 8.0, 0.1%
Tween-20 (TBST) and incubated overnight at 4°C with the following antibodies: TERT
(Y182), PI3K p110α (04-399), ΔN-p63 (p40 [5]-[17] PC373),
GATA3 (09-076) (Millipore); BMI1 (D20B7), keratin 18 (DC10), cyclin D1 (DCS6), myc
(D84C12), AKT (9272), phospho-AKT-T308 (4056/244 F9), ERBB3 (4754) (Cell Signaling
Technology); FOXA1 (Ab55-178) (Abcam); AGR2 (1C3), tubulin (B-5-1-2) (Sigma);
keratin 14 (LL002, gift from Birgit Lane); ERα (Ab-16, RB-1493)
(ThermoScientific); p53 (D01, gift from David Lane). After three washes in TBST,
bound primary antibodies were detected by incubation with HRP-conjugated
anti-rabbit, anti-mouse or anti-goat IgG (GE Healthcare) at room temperature for
1 hour, washed again in TBST, and visualized using ECL reagents (GE Healthcare).
Images were captured on a Fusion FX7 scanner (Vilber Lourmat) or Hyperfilm (GE
Healthcare).
Flow cytometry analysis
Cells were grown in pWIT or svWIT medium as indicated in the figures, detached
using 0.5% Trypsin-EDTA (Invitrogen), pelleted, washed and counted.
105 cells were incubated for 20 minutes with the
following antibodies: allophycocyanin (APC)-conjugated anti-EpCAM; phycoerythrin
(PE)-conjugated anti-CD49f; PE-conjugated anti-CD10 (BD Biosciences). Non-specific
PE-IgG2a and APC-IgG1 (BD Biosciences) were used as control antibodies. The gates
marking the quadrants in the figures were set to exclude cells labeled by the
control antibodies. Cells were washed three times then analyzed on a FACSCalibur
flow cytometer (Becton Dickinson, San Jose, CA, USA) using CellQuest Pro
software.
Immunofluorescence and immunohistochemistry (IHC)
Paraffin-embedded mammary tissues were sectioned at 4 μm, deparaffinized, and
boiled in pH 6.0 citrate buffer to retrieve antigens. For immunofluorescence,
sections were blocked in Dako REAL Peroxidase-Blocking Solution S2023 for 10 min
and incubated with primary antibodies specific for p63 (4A4; Dako, 1/40 dilution)
and GFP (ab290; Abcam, 1/800 dilution) for 30 minutes. Donkey anti-rabbit IgG
conjugated to Alexa Fluor AF488 (Invitrogen, 1/400 dilution) was used to detect
the anti-GFP antibody. An MOM ImmPRESS Kit (MP-2400, Vector Labs) and
Cy3-conjugated goat anti-horseradish peroxidase (123-165-021; Jackson
ImmunoResearch Labs, 1/200 dilution) were used according to the manufacturer’s
instructions to detect the anti-p63 antibody. Sections omitting the primary
antibody was used as negative controls. Nuclei were visualized with DAPI, and
sections were mounted with Fluoromount (Sigma). Slides were scanned on a Leica
spinning disk DM6000B-CS confocal microscope. Immunohistochemical staining was
performed on a Benchmark-ULTRA (Ventana) according to the manufacturer’s protocol
with the following antibodies: ERα (SP1, Ventana, 32 min, pre-diluted),
progesterone receptor (1E2, Ventana, 12 min, pre-diluted), p53 (DO7, Dako, 32 min,
1:50), keratin 5/6 (D5/16B4, Dako, 32 min, 1:50), keratin 14 (LL002, Ventana,
40 min + amplification, pre-diluted), keratin 8/18 (5D3, Novocastra, 20 min,
1:200), keratin 19 (A53-b/A2.26, Ventana, 32 min, pre-diluted), keratin 7 (SP52,
Ventana, 32 min, pre-diluted), SMA (1A4, Sigma, 32 min, 1:12000), p63 (4A4, Dako,
32 min, 1:100), Ki67 (30-9, Ventana, 32 min, pre-diluted), GFP (B-2, Santa Cruz
sc-9996, 32 min, 1:400).
Bioinformatics
To identify the normal cell types expressing EGFR family members in human reduction mammoplasty tissue, the most
variable probes for each EGFR family member
were selected from the Lim et al GSE16997
series matrix file [14]. The error
bars in Figure 1A are sem; the p values
shown are for t-tests comparing the mature luminal with the indicated populations.
The tumor analysis in Figure 1B&C was
performed on GSE6861 Affymetrix X3P gene expression data from large operable or
locally advanced breast cancer [15],[16]. The CEL
files were normalized with RMA in R [17], filtered to remove probesets spanning a region <56 bp,
and the most variable probesets for EGFR family
members were selected based on the standard deviation across all the tumors. The
classification in Figure 1B&C into
luminal, molecular apocrine and basal-like tumors is based on expression of
FOXA1 (positive in luminal and molecular
apocrine tumors) and ESR1 (positive in luminal
tumors). Both genes show strongly bimodal expression; the cut-off is the nadir
between the two peaks of the bimodal distributions. This classification splits
breast tumors into the three groups described by Farmer et
al [18]; FOXA1 was used instead of AR because the X3P probes work slightly better (both genes are
excellent markers for luminal and molecular apocrine tumors). The plot in
Figure 1B shows the raw expression
values generated by RMA. These values were converted to a distribution with the
density command in R using the default parameters, then the maximum of each
distribution was scaled to 1 to make it easier to compare the distributions in
Figure 1C.
Figure 1
EGFR family gene expression in normal and
tumor cells. A. Illumina gene expression data from normal
human reduction mammoplasty cells (mean + SEM). MaSC, mammary stem cell;
LP, luminal progenitor; ML, mature luminal. Error bars sem; † p < 0.01;
* p < 0.05; n = 3; the p values are for comparisons of ML with the
other groups. B&C. Affymetrix gene
expression data for large operable or locally advanced breast cancer. The
scatterplot in B shows how the tumors were classified into luminal
(ER+/FOXA1+, 43 samples); molecular apocrine (ER-/FOXA1+, 49 samples); and
basal-like (ER-/FOXA1-, 69 samples). The plots in C show the expression profile of EGFR family members in each tumor class. The distributions
are strikingly bimodal (see text for details). The maximum density for
each distribution is scaled to 1 to facilitate comparison of the different
tumor classes.
EGFR family gene expression in normal and
tumor cells. A. Illumina gene expression data from normal
human reduction mammoplasty cells (mean + SEM). MaSC, mammary stem cell;
LP, luminal progenitor; ML, mature luminal. Error bars sem; † p < 0.01;
* p < 0.05; n = 3; the p values are for comparisons of ML with the
other groups. B&C. Affymetrix gene
expression data for large operable or locally advanced breast cancer. The
scatterplot in B shows how the tumors were classified into luminal
(ER+/FOXA1+, 43 samples); molecular apocrine (ER-/FOXA1+, 49 samples); and
basal-like (ER-/FOXA1-, 69 samples). The plots in C show the expression profile of EGFR family members in each tumor class. The distributions
are strikingly bimodal (see text for details). The maximum density for
each distribution is scaled to 1 to facilitate comparison of the different
tumor classes.
Cell biology
Reduction mammoplasty samples were donated by healthy premenopausal women
between the ages of 21 and 40 with no previous history of breast cancer. The study
was approved by the Tayside Tissue Bank ethics committee (project TR000015), and
patients gave written informed consent. Breast primary epithelial cells (BPEC)
were prepared by standard techniques [19] and cultured in a 37°C, 5% CO2, 5%
O2 incubator on Primaria dishes (BD Biosciences) in WIT
medium containing 10 ng/mlbFGF and either 10 ng/mlEGF for pWIT, or 5 ng/mlNRG1
and 10 ng/mlAREG for svWIT [2]. Low
passage cultures of BPECs were sequentially infected with lentiviruses and
selected for 4 to 10 days in media supplemented with 2 μg/mlpuromycin, 50 μg/mlhygromycin B or 500 μg/mlG418, as appropriate. Viral particles were produced by
calcium phosphate transfection of 293 T cells [20]. Infections were performed at a multiplicity of 10 infectious
units per cell based on the MCF7 titer. The final 4G-shp53-PI3K cells were
uniformly positive for CFP and GFP, which are carried by the BMI1 and shp53
vectors, respectively, but showed heterogeneous staining for tdTomato because the
tdTomato vector was added last, not selected with an antibiotic, and confers no
growth advantage on the cells. For proliferation assays, cells were treated with 2
nM 17-β-estradiol or 1 μM fulvestrant and counted at each time point with a
Coulter counter. To test for significant differences between the growth curves in
Figure 2B and Figure 3C, the slopes were compared after linear regression
on logged data with lm in R, with a correction in Figure 2B for performing three tests.
Figure 2
Silencing of p53 and activation of PI3K in
4G cells. A. Western blots showing that the shp53 vector
silences p53 expression, and the PIK3CA
vector increases PI3K expression and AKT phosphorylation on T308.
B. Growth curves comparing parental 4G
cells with cells infected with the shp53 and PIK3CA vectors. Error bars sem; † p < 0.001; *
p < 0.05; n = 5 biological replicates.
Figure 3
Tumor growth is not inhibited by
fulvestrant. A. Western blot showing that treatment of
4G-shp53-PI3K tumor cells with 1 μM fulvestrant reduces the level of ERα.
B&C. Fulvestrant has no effect on
proliferation of the cells measured by crystal violet staining (B) or growth curves (C; fulvestrant treatment was started at the arrow; n = 3;
NS, not significant). D. 4G-shp53-PI3K
cells were injected into the ducts, allowed to form tumors for 3 weeks
then treated with fulvestrant or vehicle for 5 weeks. Representative
immunohistochemical images show a marked reduction in ERα level in treated
tumors. Each image is derived from a separate animal (n = 6 for control,
n = 7 for fulvestrant). The slides were all processed together. Scale bars
in F, 50 μm. E&F. 4G-shp53-PI3K cells
were injected into the ducts, allowed to form tumors for 3 weeks then
treated with fulvestrant or vehicle for 3 weeks. E. PhotonIMAGER scans of excised mammary glands after
treatment with fulvestrant or vehicle (control) to show how the response
was quantified. The scanner counts fluorescence emitted by tdTomato.
F. Quantitative data from the glands in
E (n = 8 for control, n = 9 for fulvestrant; NS, not
significant).
Silencing of p53 and activation of PI3K in
4G cells. A. Western blots showing that the shp53 vector
silences p53 expression, and the PIK3CA
vector increases PI3K expression and AKT phosphorylation on T308.
B. Growth curves comparing parental 4G
cells with cells infected with the shp53 and PIK3CA vectors. Error bars sem; † p < 0.001; *
p < 0.05; n = 5 biological replicates.Tumor growth is not inhibited by
fulvestrant. A. Western blot showing that treatment of
4G-shp53-PI3K tumor cells with 1 μM fulvestrant reduces the level of ERα.
B&C. Fulvestrant has no effect on
proliferation of the cells measured by crystal violet staining (B) or growth curves (C; fulvestrant treatment was started at the arrow; n = 3;
NS, not significant). D. 4G-shp53-PI3K
cells were injected into the ducts, allowed to form tumors for 3 weeks
then treated with fulvestrant or vehicle for 5 weeks. Representative
immunohistochemical images show a marked reduction in ERα level in treated
tumors. Each image is derived from a separate animal (n = 6 for control,
n = 7 for fulvestrant). The slides were all processed together. Scale bars
in F, 50 μm. E&F. 4G-shp53-PI3K cells
were injected into the ducts, allowed to form tumors for 3 weeks then
treated with fulvestrant or vehicle for 3 weeks. E. PhotonIMAGER scans of excised mammary glands after
treatment with fulvestrant or vehicle (control) to show how the response
was quantified. The scanner counts fluorescence emitted by tdTomato.
F. Quantitative data from the glands in
E (n = 8 for control, n = 9 for fulvestrant; NS, not
significant).
Xenografts
The study was performed in accordance with European Community Standards of
Care and Use of Laboratory Animals under level 2 containment at the University of
Bordeaux. Approval was granted for the animal experiments by the Comite d’Ethique
pour l’Experimentation Animal (CEEA50) ethics committee, Bordeaux (project number
5012034-A). For xenografts, 100000 BPECs and 100000 p53-/- mouse embryo
fibroblasts irradiated with 30Gy were mixed with 10% growth factor reduced
Matrigel (BD Biosciences) and injected into 6-week-old female NSG mice (NOD-scidIL2RG-/-, Jackson Laboratory strain number 005557).
The injection volume was 100 μl for subcutaneous and 10 μl for intraductal
injections [10]. Tumor size after
subcutaneous injection was measured with a PhotonIMAGER (Biospace, Paris, France)
and scaled to the size at the first time point in each tumor group. To identify
significant differences, t tests were performed in R on logged data at each time
point with a correction for performing five tests in Figure 4A and Figure 3 tests in Additional file 1: Figure S1E&F. To measure tumor size after intraductal
injection the glands were removed at the end of the experiment and scanned as a
single group with the PhotonIMAGER.
Figure 4
Subcutaneous tumor formation requires
activation of PI3K. A. Red fluorescence was used to measure
subcutaneous tumor growth. Fluorescence in photons per second per
cm2 per steradian was normalized to the
starting value one week after injection. n = 6; *, p < 0.05. B. Histopathology (H&E stain) and
immunohistochemistry show that the tumors were ERα+, Ki67+
adenocarcinomas. The central region in the sections contains an island of
mouse stroma surrounded by human tumor cells (PGR gives a non-specific
cytoplasmic stain in the stroma). Scale bars 100 μm.
Subcutaneous tumor formation requires
activation of PI3K. A. Red fluorescence was used to measure
subcutaneous tumor growth. Fluorescence in photons per second per
cm2 per steradian was normalized to the
starting value one week after injection. n = 6; *, p < 0.05. B. Histopathology (H&E stain) and
immunohistochemistry show that the tumors were ERα+, Ki67+
adenocarcinomas. The central region in the sections contains an island of
mouse stroma surrounded by humantumor cells (PGR gives a non-specific
cytoplasmic stain in the stroma). Scale bars 100 μm.
Results
A new genetically defined human adenocarcinoma model
WIT medium was developed to prevent squamous metaplasia of genetically defined
mammary tumors [2]. When we grew
reduction mammoplasty cells in WIT medium, transformed them with TERT, BMI1,
ESR1 and MYC, and injected them subcutaneously into immunodeficientmice they
formed mixed tumors that rapidly became entirely squamous with the appearance of
stratification and keratin pearls (Figure 5A shows expression of the transgenes; Figure 5B-E show the morphology of the tumors). EGFR family members show differences in expression in
normal mammary epithelial cell subsets: EGFR
expression is significantly lower in mature luminal cells than in other subsets;
ERBB3 expression is significantly lower in
stem cells than in mature luminal cells; luminal progenitors have an intermediate
phenotype (Figure 1A) [21]. EGFR
family members show strikingly bimodal patterns of expression in human breast
tumors: EGFR is higher in basal-like and
molecular apocrine tumors; ERBB2 is higher in
molecular apocrine tumors; ERBB3 is higher in
luminal and molecular apocrine tumors; and ERBB4 is higher in luminal tumors (Figure 1B&C) [15],[16],[18]. Based on
these observations; on histopathological data showing EGFR expression by myoepithelial cells, keratinocytes and squamous
tumors [22],[23]; and on the fact that EGF promotes expansion
of the myoepithelial layer in short term organoid cultures [3], we reasoned that it might be possible to
reduce squamous metaplasia in engineered tumor models by decreasing the activation
of EGFR and increasing that of ERBB3 and ERBB4. To
test this, we grew normal reduction mammoplasty cells in WIT medium containing
either EGF (“pWIT medium”) or amphiregulin (AREG) plus neuregulin (NRG1) (“svWIT
medium”). Parallel cultures in the two media were infected first with TERT and BMI1
viruses, then superinfected with CCND1 and
MYC viruses, to give “4G” cells. Expression
of the transgenes was confirmed by Western blotting (Figure 6A and Additional file 2: Figure S2A). Cells grown in pWIT formed loose colonies of
spindle-shaped cells mixed with larger cells, whereas cells in svWIT formed
tighter colonies of more uniform round cells (Figure 6B). Flow cytometry showed that the svWIT culture was
homogeneous, with a single population high in EPCAM, low in CD10 and intermediate
in CD49f expression (Figure 6C). The cells
in pWIT contained two populations, one CD49f-/CD10+/EPCAM-, the other
CD49f+/CD10-/EPCAM+. The CD10+ population in pWIT could correspond to
myoepithelial cells. The EPCAM+ cells in both media are presumably luminal cells;
the EPCAM level is higher in svWIT than pWIT, suggesting that the cells are more
differentiated in svWIT. Western blotting showed that the switch from EGF to AREG
and NRG1 in svWIT decreased the level of EGFR receptor tail phosphorylation
despite an increase in the amount of the protein (Figure 6A), consistent with weaker activation of EGFR and decreased
receptor turnover. Western blotting of the cells in pWIT showed that they express
keratin 14 and ΔN-p63α strongly, confirming the suggestion from the flow cytometry
data that at least one of the populations in pWIT is myoepithelial or squamous.
The cells in svWIT expressed luminal markers (AGR2, ERBB3 and keratin 18;
Figure 6A), as well as ERα and ELF5
(Figure 6A), but not FOXA1 or GATA3
(Additional file 2: Figure S2B). ER,
FOXA1 and GATA3 are markers for mature hormone-sensing cells, whereas ELF5 is a
marker for the secretory lineage [24]. Coexpression of ER and ELF5, as seen in the cells grown in
svWIT medium, has been proposed to mark luminal progenitors that have not yet
committed to one lineage [24]. We
conclude that a shift in the balance of EGFR family signaling in favor of ERBB3
selects for cells that share some features with luminal progenitors, and prevents
overgrowth by myoepithelial and squamous cells.
Figure 5
Transformed BPECs grown in pWIT medium
form squamous tumors. Human mammary epithelial cells were
infected with vectors expressing TERT,
BMI1, MYC and ESR1 (3G-ER
cells). A. Western blot showing
expression of the transgenes in parental (NT) and transformed cells.
B&C. Tumor formation two weeks after subcutaneous injection of 3G-ER
cells into NSG mice (n = 2). B.
Stereomicrograph showing tdTomato fluorescence from the tumor. C. Glandular regions express keratin 8/18;
squamous regions express keratin 14. All of the cells are ERα + because
one of the lentiviruses used to transform the cells expresses ESR1. D&E.
At 3 weeks (D, n = 2) and 5 weeks (E, n = 5) after injection, the tumors
are dominated by stratified cells undergoing terminal squamous
differentiation leading to the formation of keratin pearls. Keratin pearls
are marked by asterisks. Scale bars: B 1 mm; upper panels in C 500 μm;
lower panels in C 200 μm; D&E 200 μm.
Figure 6
Comparison of WIT medium containing EGF or
NRG1/AREG. Human mammary epithelial cells were infected with
vectors expressing TERT, BMI1, CCND1
and MYC.
A. Western blots showing that the
transgenes are expressed. The cells in medium containing AREG and NRG1
(svWIT) have luminal characteristics. The cells in medium containing EGF
(pWIT) have stronger phosphorylation of EGFR. B. Photomicrographs showing that cells in pWIT are a mixture
of spindle shaped and rounder cells, whereas cells in svWIT have a more
uniform cobblestone appearance. Scale bars 250 μm. C. Flow cytometry shows that cells in svWIT have a putative
luminal progenitor phenotype (CD49+/EPCAM+) whereas cells in pWIT are a
mixture of putative luminal progenitors and myoepithelial cells. The
quadrants were defined by the isotype controls.
Transformed BPECs grown in pWIT medium
form squamous tumors. Human mammary epithelial cells were
infected with vectors expressing TERT,
BMI1, MYC and ESR1 (3G-ER
cells). A. Western blot showing
expression of the transgenes in parental (NT) and transformed cells.
B&C. Tumor formation two weeks after subcutaneous injection of 3G-ER
cells into NSG mice (n = 2). B.
Stereomicrograph showing tdTomato fluorescence from the tumor. C. Glandular regions express keratin 8/18;
squamous regions express keratin 14. All of the cells are ERα + because
one of the lentiviruses used to transform the cells expresses ESR1. D&E.
At 3 weeks (D, n = 2) and 5 weeks (E, n = 5) after injection, the tumors
are dominated by stratified cells undergoing terminal squamous
differentiation leading to the formation of keratin pearls. Keratin pearls
are marked by asterisks. Scale bars: B 1 mm; upper panels in C 500 μm;
lower panels in C 200 μm; D&E 200 μm.Comparison of WIT medium containing EGF or
NRG1/AREG. Human mammary epithelial cells were infected with
vectors expressing TERT, BMI1, CCND1
and MYC.
A. Western blots showing that the
transgenes are expressed. The cells in medium containing AREG and NRG1
(svWIT) have luminal characteristics. The cells in medium containing EGF
(pWIT) have stronger phosphorylation of EGFR. B. Photomicrographs showing that cells in pWIT are a mixture
of spindle shaped and rounder cells, whereas cells in svWIT have a more
uniform cobblestone appearance. Scale bars 250 μm. C. Flow cytometry shows that cells in svWIT have a putative
luminal progenitor phenotype (CD49+/EPCAM+) whereas cells in pWIT are a
mixture of putative luminal progenitors and myoepithelial cells. The
quadrants were defined by the isotype controls.
Tumor formation by cells grown in svWIT medium
It was not possible to compare the phenotype of tumors formed by 4G cells
grown in the two media because the cells are not tumorigenic. To transform them
fully, they were infected with lentiviruses expressing PIK3CA-H1047R and a small hairpin RNA (shp53) targeting TP53. Western blotting showed that the shp53 vector
reduced the amount of p53 (Figure 2A).
Cells infected with the PIK3CA vector showed
increased expression of PI3K and increased phosphorylation of AKT on T308,
indicating that PDK1 was activated by PI3K (Figure 2A). Growth curves showed that the shp53 and PIK3CA vectors significantly increased the growth rate
(Figure 2B). As expected for genetically
defined models of this type, comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) profiles were
completely flat until p53 was silenced, but even cells containing all six vectors
had only minor changes (loss of 3p21, gain of 5p14; loss of X; Figure 7). Interestingly, the breakpoint on 3p21 truncates
PBRM1 (BAF180), a known breast cancer tumor suppressor gene [25]. To determine whether the cells were
tumorigenic in vivo, they were injected
subcutaneously into immunodeficientmice. Only the cells transduced with both the
shp53 and the PIK3CA vectors could form
progressively growing tumors (Figure 4A;
the images of mice show how the data were collected, the graph shows fluorescence
normalized to the value one week after injection). Histological examination showed
that the tumors were grade 3 adenocarcinomas (Figure 4B). The tumor cells stained strongly with anti-GFP antibody and
with human-specific antibodies against keratins 7 and 19, confirming that they
were carcinoma cells [26] derived
from the injected human epithelial cells. Cells in contact with the mouse stroma
expressed p63 and keratin 14, suggesting that they might be trying to form a
myoepithelial boundary layer (Figure 4B,
the stroma is marked by an asterisk). Cells in the main tumor mass expressed
keratins 5/6 and 8/18. The overall pattern of keratin staining indicates that the
tumors were adenocarcinomas rather than squamous carcinomas, but the presence of
scattered p63-positive cells and the induction of myoepithelial genes at
boundaries with mouse stroma suggest that the cells may retain some common
progenitor features. Importantly, the tumor cells were positive for ERα and Ki67
but negative for PGR (Figure 4B). The
experiment was repeated with two other mammoplasties (XS03 and XS05): expression
of TERT, BMI1, MYC and CCND1 and activation of PI3K were confirmed by Western
blotting (Additional file 1: Figure
S1A&B); flow cytometry showed the presence of a single EPCAM+ luminal
population (Additional file 1: Figure
S1C&D); and subcutaneous xenografts only formed tumors following introduction
of the PIK3CA-H1047R vector (Additional file
1: Figure S1E&F). We conclude that
cells transformed in medium containing AREG and NRG1 form luminal B mammary
adenocarcinomas with squamous metaplasia of cells in contact with the mouse
stroma.
Figure 7
Genomic profiles at different stages in
the transformation protocol. CGH plots of 4G cells and 4G
cells infected with the PIK3CA vector
show no copy number changes. Silencing of p53 in 4G cells leads to loss of
chr X and minor changes on chromosomes 3 and 5 which do not progress after
introduction of the PIK3CA vector. The
spike on chromosome 3q in 4G PIK3CA and 4G shp53 PIK3CA cells is caused by
four exonic probes in the PIK3CA locus.
There were no additional changes after passage in mice.
Genomic profiles at different stages in
the transformation protocol. CGH plots of 4G cells and 4G
cells infected with the PIK3CA vector
show no copy number changes. Silencing of p53 in 4G cells leads to loss of
chr X and minor changes on chromosomes 3 and 5 which do not progress after
introduction of the PIK3CA vector. The
spike on chromosome 3q in 4G PIK3CA and 4G shp53 PIK3CA cells is caused by
four exonic probes in the PIK3CA locus.
There were no additional changes after passage in mice.
Orthotopic tumor formation
Behbod and colleagues recently described a new approach to model DCIS by
injecting cells through the nipple directly into the mouse mammary ductal tree
[10]. To test whether exposure to
this more physiological context would correct the transformed phenotype of the
4G-shp53-PIK3CA cells we mixed them with irradiated mouse fibroblasts and
laminin-rich extracellular matrix (matrigel) and injected the mixture into the
ducts. Fibroblasts and matrigel were used to promote the survival of the
epithelial cells in the perioperative period, but we have not formally tested
whether they increase the rate of engraftment; in contrast with the Kuperwasser
approach the fibroblasts were murine in origin and injected into the ducts not the
stroma. Six week-old mice were injected because the majority of the primary ductal
tree is present, providing a large surface area for the human cells to colonize,
but the ducts are still growing and forming side branches at this age, so the
cells can potentially be incorporated into ducts as they are laid down.Three weeks after injection, mice were sacrificed and the mammary glands were
examined by stereomicroscopy (Figure 8A).
Clusters of fluorescent cells were scattered throughout the injected glands. At
higher magnification, the main ducts and side branches are clearly visible
(Figure 8B). The injected cells
expressed red, blue and green fluorescent proteins but the strength of the red
signal was variable in different clones because the number of copies of the
tdTomato provirus varied between cells. Clusters of yellow cells alternate with
clusters of green cells in the right panel in Figure 8B, indicating that different ratios of red and green vector were
present; we can infer that hundreds of cells successfully seeded independent tumor
foci throughout the gland. The H&E stain showed that the mammary ducts were
filled with cells resembling the pattern seen in DCIS (Figure 8C). IHC for GFP confirmed that the tumor cells were
derived from the injected human cells. IHC for p63 and SMA showed that at this
stage (3 weeks after injection) the myoepithelial layer was present
(Figure 8C), indicating that the tumor
was DCIS, but there were fewer myoepithelial cells than in normal murine ducts
(Figure 9). As expected, the
myoepithelial cells did not stain for GFP, indicating that they were murine in
origin (Figure 9: red arrow, normal duct;
green arrow, DCIS). Intraductal injection of cells from the other mammoplasties
also produced ERα + DCIS (Additional file 1: Figure S1G). The tumor cells were all positive for keratins 7,
8/18 and 19, most were weakly positive for keratins 5/6, and occasional cells were
positive for keratin 14 (Figure 8C). This
mixed luminal/basal pattern has been reported to occur in one quarter of primary
operable breast tumors [27].
Interestingly, the cells were positive for ERα and Ki67 but negative for PGR
(Figure 8C; the PGR stain is negative
relative to controls cells on the same section).
Figure 8
DCIS formation 3 weeks after intraductal
injection of 4G-shp53-PI3K tumor cells. A. Composite image
showing human cells expressing CFP scattered throughout the gland.
B. Enlarged images; the right panel
shows alternating clusters of yellow and green cells. C. H&E stain and immunohistochemistry showing
ERα+, Ki67+ DCIS (the PGR staining is negative in the tumor cell nuclei
relative to controls on the slide). Scale bars A & B 1 mm, C
100 μm.
Figure 9
The myoepithelial layer in DCIS is murine
in origin. Ducts containing DCIS 3 weeks after intraductal
injection of 4G-shp53-PI3K tumor cells were costained for p63 (red), GFP
(green) and DNA (DAPI, blue) (n = 4). The p63-positive cells do not stain
for GFP, indicating that they are murine in origin. Red arrow, normal
murine duct; green arrow, DCIS. Scale bars 50 μm.
DCIS formation 3 weeks after intraductal
injection of 4G-shp53-PI3K tumor cells. A. Composite image
showing human cells expressing CFP scattered throughout the gland.
B. Enlarged images; the right panel
shows alternating clusters of yellow and green cells. C. H&E stain and immunohistochemistry showing
ERα+, Ki67+ DCIS (the PGR staining is negative in the tumor cell nuclei
relative to controls on the slide). Scale bars A & B 1 mm, C
100 μm.The myoepithelial layer in DCIS is murine
in origin. Ducts containing DCIS 3 weeks after intraductal
injection of 4G-shp53-PI3K tumor cells were costained for p63 (red), GFP
(green) and DNA (DAPI, blue) (n = 4). The p63-positive cells do not stain
for GFP, indicating that they are murine in origin. Red arrow, normal
murine duct; green arrow, DCIS. Scale bars 50 μm.Six weeks after injection, stereomicroscopy showed dilated ducts packed with
fluorescent cells. There was again variable red staining, indicating that multiple
clones were present, but large regions showed homogeneous staining, suggesting
that individual clones had expanded to fill those regions (Figure 10A). Eight weeks after injection, tumor had spread
to fill large contiguous parts of the ductal tree (Figure 10B). H&E staining showed that the tumor had
broken out of the ducts and started to invade the mammary fat (Figure 10C). Keratin 19 and GFP staining confirmed that the
tumor cells were derived from the injected human cells. The tumor cells still
expressed ERα but there was lower keratin 8/18 and higher keratin 14 staining as
the cells migrated from the ducts into the stroma. This was accompanied by
histological features of early squamous differentiation (pink cytoplasmic
staining, marked by arrows in Figure 10C,
without stratification or keratin pearls). We conclude that loss of environmental
cues when the tumor breaks free from the ducts allows the cells to evolve towards
a more adeno-squamous phenotype, although the squamous differentiation was much
less pronounced than in our previous model [12].
Figure 10
Invasive tumor formation 6 and 8 weeks
after intraductal injection of 4G-shp53-PI3K tumor cells. A.
Mammary ducts dilated by human tumor cells at 6 weeks. B. Diffuse blue masses 8 weeks after intraductal
injection caused by tumor cells invading the stroma. C. Mixed DCIS and invasive tumor at 8 weeks. H&E stain
and immunohistochemistry show increased keratin 14 staining as cells
migrate from the ducts into the stroma. Early squamous changes are marked
by arrows. There are small difference in the structures in the serial
sections in C because the structures gradually change as the sectioning
proceeds through the paraffin block. Scale bars A 1 mm, B 2 mm, C
100 μm.
Invasive tumor formation 6 and 8 weeks
after intraductal injection of 4G-shp53-PI3K tumor cells. A.
Mammary ducts dilated by humantumor cells at 6 weeks. B. Diffuse blue masses 8 weeks after intraductal
injection caused by tumor cells invading the stroma. C. Mixed DCIS and invasive tumor at 8 weeks. H&E stain
and immunohistochemistry show increased keratin 14 staining as cells
migrate from the ducts into the stroma. Early squamous changes are marked
by arrows. There are small difference in the structures in the serial
sections in C because the structures gradually change as the sectioning
proceeds through the paraffin block. Scale bars A 1 mm, B 2 mm, C
100 μm.Since the tumors are potentially a model for high grade ERα-positive breast
cancer, they were tested for estrogen-dependence. Western blotting showed that
in vitro treatment with fulvestrant reduced
the level of ERα (Figure 3A), but the
growth rate was unaffected (Figure 3B&C). The cells were xenografted intraductally into mice and
allowed to form tumors for 3 weeks, after which the mice received weekly
injections of fulvestrant for 5 weeks. Immunohistochemistry showed that the level
of ERα was lower in the tumors that received fulvestrant than in the
vehicle-treated controls (Figure 3D),
confirming that the drug had reached its target in
vivo. To quantitate the response, mice were allowed to form tumors
for 3 weeks, treatment was given for 3 weeks, the injected mammary glands were
excised, and total tdTomato fluorescence was measured (Figure 3E). There was no significant difference between the
treated and control groups (Figure 3F).
The lack of response in vitro and in vivo mimics the resistance of human luminal B tumors
to endocrine therapy in patients with breast cancer.
Humanization of the mouse mammary gland
The Weinberg lab has shown that “humanization” of the mouse mammary gland by
human fibroblasts promotes engraftment of human mammary epithelial cells
[28]. The epithelial cells form
duct-like structures but they do not ramify to fill the gland with a normal ductal
tree, possibly because it is difficult to distribute human fibroblasts evenly
throughout the fat pad. The logic behind their approach is that subtle differences
in signaling proteins create a species barrier that prevents humanmyoepithelial
cells from communicating properly with mouse fibroblasts. We reasoned that human
luminal cells might be able to communicate effectively with mousemyoepithelial
cells and therefore tried to use the mousemyoepithelial layer as a scaffold upon
which to build a human luminal epithelium. We initially attempted to humanize the
ducts of NSG mice by intraductal injection of reduction mammoplasty cells
immortalized by TERT and BMI1 (“2G” cells), but the cells were rapidly lost. To
give the human cells a proliferative advantage over the resident murine luminal
cells, we tested 4G-shp53 cells, which we showed above to be non-tumorigenic.
Three weeks after intraductal injection there was much less fluorescence in the
injected glands than after injection of their PIK3CA-transformed counterparts (Figure 11A). Histological examination showed that small clumps of human
cells had penetrated the mouse luminal layer and attached to the underlying murinemyoepithelial layer (Figure 11B). By six
weeks, large segments of the mammary ductal tree were fluorescent, indicating that
viable human cells had engrafted and increased in number. The presence of
alternating yellow and green regions showed that the grafts were derived from
multiple different clones (Figure 12A).
Immunohistochemistry for GFP confirmed that extensive regions of the ductal tree
contained human cells (Figure 12B).
Histologically, the human cells were slightly larger than the murine luminal cells
but there was no evidence of the premalignant changes of the sort usually observed
in flat epithelial atypia or atypical ductal hyperplasia [29]. Human cells replaced murine cells in the
luminal layer but the myoepithelial layer was murine, as shown by the absence of
cells positive for both p63 and GFP in double labeled sections
(Figure 13). The myoepithelial layer
was intact, as judged by staining for smooth muscle actin, but the number of
myoepithelial cells was lower than in contiguous regions with murine luminal
cells. All of the human cells expressed ERα, and many expressed Ki67, but they did
not express PGR, FOXA1 or GATA3 (Figure 12C&D), consistent with their in
vitro profile. To test whether the cells could differentiate to form
secretory cells, two mice were grafted, allowed to form humanized ducts, then
mated and sacrificed on day 1 of lactation, 14 weeks after intraductal injection
of the human cells. The human cells were restricted to the ducts and did not form
alveoli although some human cells in the ducts did undergo secretory
differentiation (Figure 14: open
arrowheads show murine alveoli; filled arrowheads show a non-secretory humanized
duct; arrows show casein-expressing cells in a humanized duct). Taken together,
the data suggest that the cells immortalized by the TERT, BMI1, CCND1, MYC and shp53
transgenes may be precursors of hormone sensing or secretory cells trapped at the
luminal progenitor stage.
Figure 11
Foci of engrafted human cells 3 weeks
after intraductal injection of 4G-shp53 cells. A.
Stereomicrograph showing isolated foci of human cells (the images cover a
single gland with a small overlap in the middle). B. Attachment of 4G-shp53 cells to the duct wall 3 weeks
after intraductal injection. Left panels, H&E staining. Right panels,
matched sections showing GFP staining to identify the human cells. The
clumps of human cells correspond to the scattered foci of fluorescent
cells seen by stereomicroscopy in A. Scale bars A 1 mm, B 100 μm.
n = 2.
Figure 12
Replacement of the murine luminal layer
6 weeks after intraductal injection of 4G-shp53 cells. A.
Stereomicrograph showing spread of human cells within the ducts.
Alternating yellow and green areas in the right panel demonstrate
independent engraftment of multiple clones. B&C. Histopathology (H&E stain) and
immunohistochemistry show that the human cells have replaced the murine
luminal layer with morphologically normal human cells. The human cells are
larger, as seen at junctions between murine and human luminal cells. GFP,
keratin 7 and keratin 19 staining specifically label the human cells. The
cells are ERα+, PGR-, Ki67+ luminal cells. SMA staining shows that the
myoepithelial layer is intact. D. GATA3
and FOXA1 are positive in murine ducts (marked by arrows) but negative in
humanized ducts (marked by an arrowhead). Scale bars A 1 mm, B 100 μm, C
50 μm, D 200 μm.
Figure 13
The myoepithelial layer is murine in
humanized glands. Ducts humanized with 4G-shp53 cells were
costained for p63 (red), GFP (green) and DNA (DAPI, blue) (n = 3). All
injected human cells express GFP strongly. Green arrow, human luminal
cells in a humanized duct; red arrow, murine myoepithelial cells in a
murine duct. Scale bars 50 μm.
Figure 14
4G-shp53 cells can undergo secretory
differentiation but do not form normal alveoli. Mice with
human cells engrafted in the ducts were sacrificed on day 1 of lactation
(n = 2). Histopathology (H&E stain) and immunohistochemistry for GFP
show that human cells are present in the ducts but do not spread into the
lactating alveoli. Immunohistochemistry for casein shows that some of the
human cells in the ducts have undergone secretory differentiation. The
structures in the middle of the image are mouse alveoli (open arrowheads);
they do not stain for casein because the antibody is human specific. The
structure on the right is a humanized duct containing cells that do not
express casein (closed arrowheads). The structure on the left is a
humanized duct containing cells that do express casein (arrows). Scale
bars 200 μm.
Foci of engrafted human cells 3 weeks
after intraductal injection of 4G-shp53 cells. A.
Stereomicrograph showing isolated foci of human cells (the images cover a
single gland with a small overlap in the middle). B. Attachment of 4G-shp53 cells to the duct wall 3 weeks
after intraductal injection. Left panels, H&E staining. Right panels,
matched sections showing GFP staining to identify the human cells. The
clumps of human cells correspond to the scattered foci of fluorescent
cells seen by stereomicroscopy in A. Scale bars A 1 mm, B 100 μm.
n = 2.Replacement of the murine luminal layer
6 weeks after intraductal injection of 4G-shp53 cells. A.
Stereomicrograph showing spread of human cells within the ducts.
Alternating yellow and green areas in the right panel demonstrate
independent engraftment of multiple clones. B&C. Histopathology (H&E stain) and
immunohistochemistry show that the human cells have replaced the murine
luminal layer with morphologically normal human cells. The human cells are
larger, as seen at junctions between murine and human luminal cells. GFP,
keratin 7 and keratin 19 staining specifically label the human cells. The
cells are ERα+, PGR-, Ki67+ luminal cells. SMA staining shows that the
myoepithelial layer is intact. D. GATA3
and FOXA1 are positive in murine ducts (marked by arrows) but negative in
humanized ducts (marked by an arrowhead). Scale bars A 1 mm, B 100 μm, C
50 μm, D 200 μm.The myoepithelial layer is murine in
humanized glands. Ducts humanized with 4G-shp53 cells were
costained for p63 (red), GFP (green) and DNA (DAPI, blue) (n = 3). All
injected human cells express GFP strongly. Green arrow, human luminal
cells in a humanized duct; red arrow, murinemyoepithelial cells in a
murine duct. Scale bars 50 μm.4G-shp53 cells can undergo secretory
differentiation but do not form normal alveoli. Mice with
human cells engrafted in the ducts were sacrificed on day 1 of lactation
(n = 2). Histopathology (H&E stain) and immunohistochemistry for GFP
show that human cells are present in the ducts but do not spread into the
lactating alveoli. Immunohistochemistry for casein shows that some of the
human cells in the ducts have undergone secretory differentiation. The
structures in the middle of the image are mouse alveoli (open arrowheads);
they do not stain for casein because the antibody is human specific. The
structure on the right is a humanized duct containing cells that do not
express casein (closed arrowheads). The structure on the left is a
humanized duct containing cells that do express casein (arrows). Scale
bars 200 μm.
Discussion
We have shown that genetically defined human mammary epithelial cells expressing
multiple oncogenes can form a morphologically normal luminal layer in the mouse
mammary gland, and that expression of a single additional activated oncogene,
PIK3CA-H1047R, is sufficient to convert them
into invasive ERα + adenocarcinoma cells. Two factors were probably critical to the
success of the approach: the use of oncogenes commonly mutated or amplified in
ERα + breast cancer, and the use of culture medium favoring ERBB3 over EGFR
signaling to prevent squamous metaplasia in
vitro.Previous attempts to make breast cancer models by transformation of normal human
mammary epithelial cells typically led to the formation of overtly squamous tumors
that are unrepresentative of breast cancers seen in humanpatients. Several
arguments implicate EGFR signaling in squamous
metaplasia. First, EGFR is prominently expressed
in the skin [22]. Second, the
myoepithelial layer proliferates at the expense of the luminal layer in short term
organoid culture in media containing commonly used levels of EGF [3]. Third, deletion of Erbb3 in mice leads to loss of the luminal layer and expansion of the
basal/myoepithelial layer [30]. Fourth,
EGFR is preferentially expressed by stem cells
and basal-like tumors, whereas ERBB3 is expressed
by mature luminal cells and luminal tumors (luminal progenitors express both
receptors, presumably because of their intermediate status; Figure 1 and refs [21],[30]). To
attenuate EGFR signaling we replaced EGF in the culture medium with amphiregulin
(AREG), which is 100-fold less active on EGFR [3], and added neuregulin (NRG1), which activates ERBB3 and ERBB4
reviewed in ref [31]. The WIT medium we
used was developed specifically to promote the growth of luminal cells [2], but in our conditions, cell lines established
in EGF-containing WIT medium underwent squamous metaplasia. Furthermore, our cell
lines established in AREG/NRG1 medium grow poorly if transferred back into EGF
medium, suggesting that the AREG/NRG1 combination not only prevents overgrowth of a
confused myoepithelial population but also favors the growth of luminal cells. That
said, we fully agree with Ince et al
[2] that WIT medium favors the growth
of luminal cells; we suspect that the differences between our results and theirs
reflect subtle differences in the formulation of the medium, the origin of the cells
or the choice of transforming genes. Whatever the reason, our results indicate that
replacement of EGF with AREG and NRG1 is a simple modification that makes WIT into
an even more robust luminalizing medium.Transgenicmouse models frequently produce tumors with histological features
rarely seen in humanbreast cancerpatients. The striking feature of PI3K-induced
mouse models is the extent to which they express ERα, despite their unpromising
histology [32]. This points to a role
for PI3K in the regulation of ERα expression, but the cells in our model already
formed ERα + xenografts before infection with the PIK3CA vector. The Kuperwasser group has described a model based on
CCND1, PI3K,
KRAS and TP53 that produces
ERα + tumors [4],[5]. CCND1 is a
strong candidate for driving ERα + tumor formation in both our models, since it is
commonly amplified in ERα + tumors and activates ERα in the absence of hormone
[33],[34]. In addition to the above arguments, the rationale for using
CCND1, PI3K-H1047R, MYC, TERT, BMI1 and
sh-p53 was based on genomic data in luminal
breast cancer and on past experience with mammary transformation protocols.
According to the TCGA consortium, PIK3CA
mutations are seen in 45% of luminal A and 29% of luminal B tumors; TP53 mutations are seen in 29% of luminal B tumors
[35]. MYC was included in the transformation cocktail because Elenbaas
et al reported that the endogenous MYC gene would amplify spontaneously if MYC was not supplied exogenously in their transformation
protocol [36]; and TERT was included to prevent telomere erosion
[1]. BMI1 is preferentially expressed by luminal tumors [12],[37], and cooperates well with MYC [38], but it was
included mainly to prevent unwanted differentiation or genomic instability at early
times after the cells were put into culture [12],[39]; it is
possible that in the new medium it may not be necessary. BMI1 prevents activation of
the p53 and Rb pathways [40], but the
fact that silencing of p53 by RNA interference is required for full transformation
in our model indicates that BMI1 is having at best a partial effect; we suspect this
is because BMI1 is expressed at a low level from
our lentiviral vector. After silencing of p53, the cells from the XS11 mammoplasty
acquired a deletion on 3p21 starting within PBRM1, the gene encoding the BAF180 subunit of the PBAF ATP-dependent
chromatin-remodeling complex [41].
Truncating mutations, as seen here, have previously been described in breast cancer,
where they reduce p21 induction by TGFβ and p53 [25]. We have not performed CGH on multiple independently derived
cell lines so we can not say whether this change is absolutely required for
transformation with CCND1, PI3K-H1047R, MYC,
TERT, BMI1
and sh-p53, but it seems unlikely. Indeed, the
more striking feature is how flat the profiles are after transformation with defined
oncogenes, something we also saw in our previous ER+ model [12].Despite robust ERα expression there was no response to fulvestrant. CCND1 and mutant PIK3CA can confer resistance to endocrine therapy in cell lines but
the relationship between PIK3CA mutation and the
response to endocrine therapy is hotly debated [42]. Paradoxically, PIK3CA
mutations are associated with a gene signature of low mTORC1 signaling and better
outcomes in ERα + breast cancer [43].
It will be interesting to see whether the genetically defined ERα + PIK3CA-mutant model we have developed can shed fresh
light on this problem.Genomic studies indicate that DCIS has a similar mutation profile to invasive
cancer [44], and molecular clock
studies indicate that breast tumors undergo little clonal expansion or genomic
rearrangement until the last driver mutation is acquired [45]. Taken together, these results push the
timeline for acquisition of oncogenic mutations far before the formation of DCIS.
Our data following intraductal injection of 4G-shp53 cells would say that cells with
all but the last driver mutation can form a morphologically normal luminal
epithelium. The 4G-shp53 cells have a growth advantage over the murine luminal cells
they replace but, apart from being bigger than murine luminal cells, they are normal
in appearance. They do not survive after subcutaneous injection, indicating that
mammary ducts provide a more welcoming environment than skin. The microenvironment
of the duct seems to promote glandular differentiation: the transformed cells were
predominantly keratin 18+/keratin 14- while confined to the ducts, but keratin 14
expression increased when they migrated into the stroma. A possible interpretation
is that the murine stroma is programmed to release EGF in amounts appropriate for
murine progenitors but excessive for human progenitors [3]. Alternatively, the fact that occasional human
cells bordering the necrotic core of the largest DCIS lesions expressed p63 suggests
that squamous differentiation may be a cell autonomous effect that normal
myoepithelial cells prevent through release of a diffusible factor.We see humanization of the luminal layer in the mouse ducts after intraductal
injection as a form of tissue engineering where the murinemyoepithelial layer
serves as a scaffold on which to build a human luminal layer. The failure of human
cells to form a normal mammary ductal tree after xenografting into the mouse mammary
fat pad is normally explained by the existence of a species barrier between humanmyoepithelial cells and mouse stromal cells. The Weinberg group has shown that this
barrier can be partially overcome by infiltration of the mouse stroma with human
fibroblasts [28]. Our results indicate
that it may be better to retain the mousemyoepithelial layer and replace only the
luminal layer with human cells. To do this we used an intraductal xenografting
approach developed by Behbod and colleagues, who showed that the approach is
strikingly effective for growth of primary human DCIS cells in the mouse
[10]. The DCIS histology in the mouse
faithfully recapitulated the histology of the human sample from which it was
derived, and included regions where hyperplastic human cells formed single and
multi-layered epithelia [11]. Taken
together, our results suggest that intraductal grafting is a major advance over
previous approaches to model humanbreast cancer biology in the mouse. We were not
able to replace the murine luminal layer with unmodified human cells. Instead we
started with fully transformed cells and removed one oncogene, PIK3CA. Although the
4G-shp53 cells were able to form a morphologically normal luminal layer in the
ducts, they were clearly not functionally normal because they could not form normal
alveolar structures in lactating mice. It will be interesting to test cells
expressing even fewer oncogenes to determine the point at which human cells lose
their competitive advantage over mouse cells, in order to see whether they can fully
humanize the gland and produce functioning alveoli.A weakness of mousetransgenic models in general is the strong tendency for
tumor histology not to resemble that of humanbreast cancer. One reason may be a
fundamental difference in the cell of origin of murine and human mammary tumors.
Recent work in the Blanpain lab has identified a long-lived luminal stem cell
[6] whose human homolog is a strong
candidate for the cell of origin of luminal, molecular apocrine and basal-like humanbreast cancers. The ERα + ELF5+ cell in our cultures could be the preneoplastic
counterpart of this cell. Recent work from the Ormandy lab indicates that ERα and
ELF5 cross-inhibit one another in luminal progenitors, with definitive
hormone-sensing or secretory lineage differentiation ensuing when one factor
triumphs over the other [24]. This is
perfectly consistent with the failure of our transformed cells to respond to
inhibition of ERα with fulvestrant. Drawing parallels between normal lineages and
tumor cells is fraught with difficulty because tumor cells inevitably fail many of
the tests cell biologists use to characterize normal cells, such as differentiation
of progenitors into mature, terminally differentiated cells. Nevertheless, taken
together, our data suggest that injection of genetically engineered human cells into
the mouse mammary ducts may provide a strategy to study the differentiation of
normal and malignant human mammary epithelial cells in a more physiological context
than has hitherto been possible.
Conclusion
In conclusion, we have shown that by altering the balance of EGFR family
signaling in favor of ERBB3/ERBB4 we can prevent squamous metaplasia of mammary
epithelial cells in vitro, that human cells with
multiple defined oncogenic changes can replace the luminal cell layer in the mouse
mammary gland with a morphologically normal luminal layer of human cells, and that
addition of a single activated oncogene, mutant PIK3CA, is sufficient to convert
these cells into invasive ERα + adenocarcinoma cells.Additional file 1: Figure S1: Transformation in svWIT with different mammoplasties (XS03 and
XS05). A&B. Western blots showing expression of the
TERT, BMI1, MYC and CCND1 transgenes (A) and phosphorylation of
AKT on T308 induced by PI3K (B). C&D. Flow cytometry shows the
formation of single populations of EPCAM+ cells after transformation (C,
XS05; D, XS03). The quadrants were defined by the isotype controls.
E&F. 4G-shp53 cells are unable to survive after subcutaneous
xenografting. Only the cells superinfected with the PIK3CA vector survive and form tumors (E,
XS05; F, XS03; n = 5). G. DCIS after intraductal injection of XS05
4G-shp53-PI3K cells (H&E staining and IHC for ERα Ki67, GFP, p63,
SMA and keratins). Scale bars 100 μm. (TIFF 8310 kb) (TIFF 8
MB)Additional file 2: Figure S2: Western blots showing expression
of the transgenes in 4G and parental cells (A) and lack of FOXA1 and
GATA3 expression in 4G cells (B). MCF7 cells were used as a positive
control for the FOXA1 and GATA3 blots. p4-p6, different passages of the
4G cells in svWIT medium. (TIFF 1460 kb) (TIFF 1 MB)Below are the links to the authors’ original submitted files for
images.Authors’ original file for figure 1Authors’ original file for figure 2Authors’ original file for figure 3Authors’ original file for figure 4Authors’ original file for figure 5Authors’ original file for figure 6Authors’ original file for figure 7Authors’ original file for figure 8Authors’ original file for figure 9Authors’ original file for figure 10Authors’ original file for figure 11Authors’ original file for figure 12Authors’ original file for figure 13Authors’ original file for figure 14
Authors: Charlotte Kuperwasser; Tony Chavarria; Min Wu; Greg Magrane; Joe W Gray; Loucinda Carey; Andrea Richardson; Robert A Weinberg Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2004-03-29 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: B Elenbaas; L Spirio; F Koerner; M D Fleming; D B Zimonjic; J L Donaher; N C Popescu; W C Hahn; R A Weinberg Journal: Genes Dev Date: 2001-01-01 Impact factor: 11.361
Authors: Dalia M Abd El-Rehim; Sarah E Pinder; Claire E Paish; J Bell; R W Blamey; John F R Robertson; Robert I Nicholson; Ian O Ellis Journal: J Pathol Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 7.996
Authors: Marina A Glukhova; Nancy Hynes; Maria dM Vivanco; Renée van Amerongen; Robert B Clarke; Mohamed Bentires-Alj Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2015-09-02 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Hugo Villanueva; Sandra Grimm; Sagar Dhamne; Kimal Rajapakshe; Adriana Visbal; Christel M Davis; Erik A Ehli; Sean M Hartig; Cristian Coarfa; Dean P Edwards Journal: J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia Date: 2018-10-18 Impact factor: 2.673