Jian Teng1,2,3, Cintia C da Hora1,2,3, Rami S Kantar1,2,3, Ichiro Nakano4, Hiroaki Wakimoto5, Tracy T Batchelor2,6, E Antonio Chiocca7, Christian E Badr1,2,3, Bakhos A Tannous1,2,3. 1. Experimental Therapeutics and Molecular Imaging Laboratory, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 2. Department of Neurology, Neuro-Oncology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 3. Neuroscience Program, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 4. Department of Neurological Surgery, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA. 5. Department of Neurosurgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 6. Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 7. Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Abstract
Background: Molecular profile of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) revealed 4 subtypes, 2 of which, proneural and mesenchymal, have been predominantly observed, with the latter displaying a more aggressive phenotype and increased therapeutic resistance. Single-cell RNA sequencing revealed that multiple subtypes actually reside within the same tumor, suggesting cellular heterogeneity in GBM. Further, plasticity between these 2 subtypes is observed during tumor recurrence and in response to radiation therapy. Methods: Patient-derived GBM stemlike cells were cultured as neurospheres. These cells were differentiated in serum by attaching to the culture dishes. The "floating" cells that were not attached/differentiated were harvested from the conditioned medium. The characteristics of these cells were studied with limiting dilution assays and immunofluorescence staining. Cell growth and nuclear factor-kappaB (NFkB) activation were monitored using bioluminescent assays as well as quantitative polymerase chain reaction and western blotting. In vivo tumorigenesis was evaluated in orthotopic xenograft models using bioluminescence imaging. Results: Patient-derived GBM stemlike cells undergo differentiation by attaching to the culture dish in serum-containing medium. We observed that a small subset of these cells escape this adhesion/differentiation and grow as floating cells. These cells displayed enhanced cancer stem cell properties with a molecular and phenotypic mesenchymal signature, including resistance to radiation and targeted therapies, a more aggressive tumor formation, and NFkB activation. Conclusion: Our results endorse inherent intratumor molecular subtype heterogeneity in glioblastoma and provide a valuable approach to study phenotypic plasticity, which could be applied to find novel therapeutic strategies to eradicate this aggressive tumor and can be extended to other cancer types.
Background: Molecular profile of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) revealed 4 subtypes, 2 of which, proneural and mesenchymal, have been predominantly observed, with the latter displaying a more aggressive phenotype and increased therapeutic resistance. Single-cell RNA sequencing revealed that multiple subtypes actually reside within the same tumor, suggesting cellular heterogeneity in GBM. Further, plasticity between these 2 subtypes is observed during tumor recurrence and in response to radiation therapy. Methods:Patient-derived GBM stemlike cells were cultured as neurospheres. These cells were differentiated in serum by attaching to the culture dishes. The "floating" cells that were not attached/differentiated were harvested from the conditioned medium. The characteristics of these cells were studied with limiting dilution assays and immunofluorescence staining. Cell growth and nuclear factor-kappaB (NFkB) activation were monitored using bioluminescent assays as well as quantitative polymerase chain reaction and western blotting. In vivo tumorigenesis was evaluated in orthotopic xenograft models using bioluminescence imaging. Results:Patient-derived GBM stemlike cells undergo differentiation by attaching to the culture dish in serum-containing medium. We observed that a small subset of these cells escape this adhesion/differentiation and grow as floating cells. These cells displayed enhanced cancer stem cell properties with a molecular and phenotypic mesenchymal signature, including resistance to radiation and targeted therapies, a more aggressive tumor formation, and NFkB activation. Conclusion: Our results endorse inherent intratumor molecular subtype heterogeneity in glioblastoma and provide a valuable approach to study phenotypic plasticity, which could be applied to find novel therapeutic strategies to eradicate this aggressive tumor and can be extended to other cancer types.
Authors: Thomas Wurdinger; Christian Badr; Lisa Pike; Ruben de Kleine; Ralph Weissleder; Xandra O Breakefield; Bakhos A Tannous Journal: Nat Methods Date: 2008-01-20 Impact factor: 28.547
Authors: A B Hjelmeland; Q Wu; J M Heddleston; G S Choudhary; J MacSwords; J D Lathia; R McLendon; D Lindner; A Sloan; J N Rich Journal: Cell Death Differ Date: 2010-12-03 Impact factor: 15.828
Authors: Brian J Gill; David J Pisapia; Hani R Malone; Hannah Goldstein; Liang Lei; Adam Sonabend; Jonathan Yun; Jorge Samanamud; Jennifer S Sims; Matei Banu; Athanassios Dovas; Andrew F Teich; Sameer A Sheth; Guy M McKhann; Michael B Sisti; Jeffrey N Bruce; Peter A Sims; Peter Canoll Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2014-08-11 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Hiroaki Wakimoto; Santosh Kesari; Christopher J Farrell; William T Curry; Cecile Zaupa; Manish Aghi; Toshihiko Kuroda; Anat Stemmer-Rachamimov; Khalid Shah; Ta-Chiang Liu; Deva S Jeyaretna; Jason Debasitis; Jan Pruszak; Robert L Martuza; Samuel D Rabkin Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2009-04-07 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Mario L Suvà; Esther Rheinbay; Shawn M Gillespie; Anoop P Patel; Hiroaki Wakimoto; Samuel D Rabkin; Nicolo Riggi; Andrew S Chi; Daniel P Cahill; Brian V Nahed; William T Curry; Robert L Martuza; Miguel N Rivera; Nikki Rossetti; Simon Kasif; Samantha Beik; Sabah Kadri; Itay Tirosh; Ivo Wortman; Alex K Shalek; Orit Rozenblatt-Rosen; Aviv Regev; David N Louis; Bradley E Bernstein Journal: Cell Date: 2014-04-10 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Esther Rheinbay; Mario L Suvà; Shawn M Gillespie; Hiroaki Wakimoto; Anoop P Patel; Mohammad Shahid; Ozgur Oksuz; Samuel D Rabkin; Robert L Martuza; Miguel N Rivera; David N Louis; Simon Kasif; Andrew S Chi; Bradley E Bernstein Journal: Cell Rep Date: 2013-05-23 Impact factor: 9.423
Authors: Mona N Oliveira; Barbara Breznik; Micheli M Pillat; Ricardo L Pereira; Henning Ulrich; Tamara T Lah Journal: Cancer Microenviron Date: 2019-08-16
Authors: Jian Teng; Seyedali Hejazi; Lotte Hiddingh; Litia Carvalho; Mark C de Gooijer; Hiroaki Wakimoto; Marco Barazas; Marie Tannous; Andrew S Chi; David P Noske; Pieter Wesseling; Thomas Wurdinger; Tracy T Batchelor; Bakhos A Tannous Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2018-04-09 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Markus W Schweiger; Mao Li; Alberta Giovanazzi; Renata L Fleming; Elie I Tabet; Ichiro Nakano; Thomas Würdinger; Ennio Antonio Chiocca; Tian Tian; Bakhos A Tannous Journal: Adv Biosyst Date: 2020-06-09
Authors: Christian E Badr; Cintia Carla da Hora; Aleksandar B Kirov; Elie Tabet; Romain Amante; Semer Maksoud; Antoinette E Nibbs; Evelyn Fitzsimons; Myriam Boukhali; John W Chen; Norman H L Chiu; Ichiro Nakano; Wilhelm Haas; Ralph Mazitschek; Bakhos A Tannous Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2020-05-08 Impact factor: 5.100
Authors: Tamara Lah Turnšek; Xuanmao Jiao; Metka Novak; Sriharsha Jammula; Gina Cicero; Anthony W Ashton; David Joyce; Richard G Pestell Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2021-04-24 Impact factor: 5.923