| Literature DB >> 31221965 |
Nan Jin1,2, Aiwei Bi1,2, Xiaojing Lan1, Jun Xu1,2, Xiaomin Wang1,2, Yingluo Liu1,2, Ting Wang1,2, Shuai Tang1, Hanlin Zeng1,2, Ziqi Chen1,2, Minjia Tan2,3, Jing Ai1,2, Hua Xie1,2, Tao Zhang1,2, Dandan Liu2,4, Ruimin Huang2,4, Yue Song5, Elaine Lai-Han Leung6, Xiaojun Yao6, Jian Ding1,2, Meiyu Geng7,8, Shu-Hai Lin9, Min Huang10,11.
Abstract
One of the biggest hurdles for the development of metabolism-targeted therapies is to identify the responsive tumor subsets. However, the metabolic vulnerabilities for most human cancers remain unclear. Establishing the link between metabolic signatures and the oncogenic alterations of receptor tyrosine kinases (RTK), the most well-defined cancer genotypes, may precisely direct metabolic intervention to a broad patient population. By integrating metabolomics and transcriptomics, we herein show that oncogenic RTK activation causes distinct metabolic preference. Specifically, EGFR activation branches glycolysis to the serine synthesis for nucleotide biosynthesis and redox homeostasis, whereas FGFR activation recycles lactate to fuel oxidative phosphorylation for energy generation. Genetic alterations of EGFR and FGFR stratify the responsive tumors to pharmacological inhibitors that target serine synthesis and lactate fluxes, respectively. Together, this study provides the molecular link between cancer genotypes and metabolic dependency, providing basis for patient stratification in metabolism-targeted therapies.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31221965 PMCID: PMC6586626 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-10427-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Commun ISSN: 2041-1723 Impact factor: 14.919
Fig. 1Oncogenic RTK differentially reprogram metabolic phenotypes. a Immunoblotting analysis. Cells were treated with indicated RTK inhibitors (100 nM) for 1 h. b IL3 dependence analysis. Cell growth fold changes with or without IL3 were plotted by counting cell numbers. Data were means of triplicates; error bars represented SD. c Cell sensitivity to RTK inhibition. Cells were treated with indicated RTK inhibitors for 72 h and cell viability was analyzed using CCK8 assay. Data were means of duplicates; error bars represented SD. d Oxygen consumption rate (OCR) and extracellular acidification rate (ECAR) measurement using Seahorse XF96 analyzer. Data were means of triplicates; error bars represented SD. e Heatmap depicting the metabolite intensities in the metabolomics data. Rows indicate different metabolites, and columns indicate different cells (n = 3 per cell line). The log transformed metabolite intensities are Z scored/standardized. f Principal component analysis (PCA). Three-dimensional clustergram depicts the internal structure of metabolomics data set with respect to variance by MetaboAnalyst 4.0. g Tracer scheme illustrating the flux of [U-13C6]-glucose (orange), [U-13C5]-glutamine (green) or [U-13C16]-palmitate (gray). Cells were cultured in the presence of [U-13C6]-glucose (12 h), [U-13C5]-glutamine (24 h) or [U-13C16]-palmitate (24 h) prior to mass spectrometry analysis. h Heatmap depicting representative 13C-labeled fraction contribution of the metabolite isotopologues. Rows indicate different metabolites and columns indicate different cells (n = 3 per cell line). The log transformed metabolite intensities are Z scored/standardized. i Glucose/glutamine dependence analysis. Cells were cultured in RPMI-1640 with or without glucose (GLC)/glutamine (GLN) for 3 days. Cell growth fold changes were plotted by counting cell numbers. Data were means of triplicates; error bars represented SD. j Transcriptome analysis. KEGG pathway enrichment analysis of differentially transcribed clusters in a heatmap of transcriptome profiling by RNA-seq. The different clusters are color-coded in Supplementary Fig. 1p. Bars show the enrichment score of pathways and are presented according to p value using Fisher's exact test (p < 0.05). See the complete list of KEGG pathways in Supplementary Dataset 6. Source data are provided as a Source Data file
Fig. 2EGFR activation promotes the serine synthesis pathway. a GO enrichment analysis of upregulated metabolic genes in EGFR-mutant lung cancer patients. Data were from 740 lung adenocarcinoma datasets from TCGA database (cutoff fold change > 2 and p < 0.01 versus EGFR wildtype cancer). Gene ratio represents the proportion of counted genes in the enriched pathway. b Sensitivity to PHGDH inhibition. Cell viability was measured using CCK-8 assay after treatment with CBR5884 (20 µM) for 72 h. Data were means of triplicates; error bars represented SD. c Sensitivity of a panel of cancer cells to PHGDH inhibition. Cells with indicated genetic alterations were treated with CBR5884 at 6.25, 12.5 or 25 µM for 6 days. Heatmap depicts the inhibition rate of the cell growth. d, e Tumor growth curve of PC9 xenograft and LU-01-0251 PDX. Mice were dosed with NCT-503 (40 mg/kg) or Gefitinib (5 mg/kg for PC9, 1 mg/kg for LU-01-0251) daily for indicated days (n = 8 for PC9, n = 6 for LU-01-0251). Data were means and error bars represented SEM. f Tracer scheme illustrating the flux of [U-13C6]-glucose to purine nucleosides. g 13C enrichment of purine nucleosides after [U-13C6]-glucose labeling for 24 h. h Serine dependence analysis. Cell viability was measured by counting cell numbers after 3-day culture. i Transcript analysis in BAF3-RTK cells compared with BAF3 cells. j, PSPH or PHGDH expression between EGFR mutant and wildtype subtypes. Data source was as described in a. k Immunohistochemistry analysis of tumor tissues from LU-01-0251 PDX as described in e. Tumor samples were collected at 6 h after the last dosing. Scale bar, 20 μm. l Upper: The occurrence of EGFR activating mutation and/or PSPH amplification in TCGA data sets; Lower: The alteration of EGFR and PSPH gene in NSCLC patients. m Cell growth measurement. Cells numbers were counted after transfected with indicated siRNAs for 72 h. Data were means of triplicates; error bars represented SD. For all bar graphs, ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05, n.s. ≥ 0.05 for two-tailed Student’s t test. Source data are provided as a Source Data file
The sequences of primers used for RT-qPCR analysis
| Gene | Organism | Forward primer | Reverse primer |
|---|---|---|---|
| GLUT1 | Mus musculus | 5′-CTTCACTGTGGTGTCGCTGT-3′ | 5′-UUCUCCGAACGUGUCACGUTT-3′ |
| HK2 | Mus musculus | 5′-TGATCGCCTGCTTATTCACGG-3′ | 5′-AACCGCCTAGAAATCTCCAGA-3′ |
| PFKL | Mus musculus | 5′-GGAGGCGAGAACATCAAGCC-3′ | 5′-CGGCCTTCCCTCGTAGTGA-3′ |
| PKM2 | Mus musculus | 5′-GCCGCCTGGACATTGACTC-3′ | 5′-CCATGAGAGAAATTCAGCCGAG-3′ |
| LDHA | Mus musculus | 5′-TGTCTCCAGCAAAGACTACTGT-3′ | 5′-GACTGTACTTGACAATGTTGGGA-3′ |
| PHGDH | Mus musculus | 5′-CGGCAGAATTGGAAGAGAGGT-3′ | 5′-AGGAGTGGGGTATGGACAGTT-3′ |
| PSPH | Mus musculus | 5′-CATCTCTGGTGGCTTTCGGA-3′ | 5′-TTTCCTTTCCCACCCGACTC-3′ |
| PSAT1 | Mus musculus | 5′-GGTGTGATTTTCGCTGGTGC-3′ | 5′-AGGACTGATGGGCACTCTCT-3′ |
| SHMT1 | Mus musculus | 5′-CAGGGCTCTGTCTGATGCAC-3′ | 5′-CGTAACGCGCTCTTGTCAC-3′ |
| SHMT2 | Mus musculus | 5′-ATGCCCTATAAGCTCAATCCCC-3′ | 5′-TCTCATGCGTGCATAGTCAATG-3′ |
| MTHFD1 | Mus musculus | 5′-GCGGAGAGGATGAGATCATAGA-3′ | 5′-GTCACCCCGTCCACATCTT-3′ |
| MTHFD2 | Mus musculus | 5′-AGTGCGAAATGAAGCCGTTG-3′ | 5′-GACTGGCGGGATTGTCACC-3′ |
| GAPDH | Mus musculus | 5′-AGGTCGGTGTGAACGGATTTG-3′ | 5′-TGTAGACCATGTAGTTGAGGTCA-3′ |
| GLUT1 | Homo sapiens | 5′-TCACTGTCGTGTCGCTGTTT-3′ | 5′-GGCCACGATGCTCAGATAGG-3′ |
| LDHA | Homo sapiens | 5′-GGCCTGTGCCATCAGTATCT-3′ | 5′-GAAAAGGCTGCCATGTTGGA-3′ |
| PHGDH | Homo sapiens | 5′-CACGACAGGCTTGCTGAATGA-3′ | 5′-CTTCCGTAAACACGTCCAGTG-3′ |
| PSPH | Homo sapiens | 5′-GCATAAGGGAGCTGGTAAGTCG-3′ | 5′-ACCTGCATATTCACCGTTAAAGT-3′ |
| HIF1A | Homo sapiens | 5′-ACCTTCATCGGAAACTCCAAAG-3′ | 5′-CTGTTAGGCTGGGAAAAGTTAGG-3′ |
| MYC | Homo sapiens | 5′-GGCTCCTGGCAAAAGGTCA-3′ | 5′-CTGCGTAGTTGTGCTGATGT-3′ |
| ATF4 | Homo sapiens | 5′-ATGACCGAAATGAGCTTCCTG-3′ | 5′-GCTGGAGAACCCATGAGGT-3′ |
| NRF2 | Homo sapiens | 5′-TTCCCGGTCACATCGAGAG-3′ | 5′v-TCCTGTTGCATACCGTCTAAATC-3′ |
| β-actin | Homo sapiens | 5′-GGGACCTGACTGACTACCTC-3′ | 5′-ATCTTCATTGTGCTGGGTG-3′ |
siRNA targeting sequence
| Gene | Organism | Sequence sense (5′−3′) |
|---|---|---|
| NC | Homo sapiens | UUCUCCGAACGUGUCACGUTT |
| siEGFR | Homo sapiens | CUCCAGAGGAUGUUCAAUATT |
| siFGFR1 | Homo sapiens | GACUUCACUGGUGUCAGAUTT |
| siPHGDH #1 | Homo sapiens | UAGCAAAGAGGAGCUGAUATT |
| siPHGDH #2 | Homo sapiens | GACUUCACUGGUGUCAGAUTT |
| siPSPH #1 | Homo sapiens | GGCAACAAGUCAAGGAUAATT |
| siPSPH #2 | Homo sapiens | GGAGUAUUGUAGAGCAUGUTT |
| siMYC #1 | Homo sapiens | CUCAACGUUAGCUUCACCATT |
| siMYC #2 | Homo sapiens | GUGCAGCCGUAUUUCUACUTT |
| siHIF1A #1 | Homo sapiens | CUCCCUAUAUCCCAAUGGATT |
| siHIF1A #2 | Homo sapiens | CGAGGAAGAACUAUGAACATT |
| siATF4 #1 | Homo sapiens | CUCCCAGAAAGUUUAACAATT |
| siATF4 #2 | Homo sapiens | CUGCUUACGUUGCCAUGAUT |
| CBFB #1 | Homo sapiens | GAAGCAAGUUCGAGAACGATT |
| CBFB #2 | Homo sapiens | CAGGAACCAAUCUGUCUCUTT |
| CBFB #3 | Homo sapiens | CAGGCAAGGUAUAUUUGAATT |
| CEBPA #1 | Homo sapiens | CCUUCAACGACGAGUUCCUTT |
| CEBPA #2 | Homo sapiens | CGGUGGACAAGAACAGCAATT |
| CEBPA #3 | Homo sapiens | GCUGACCAGUGACAAUGACTT |
| CTCF #1 | Homo sapiens | GGUGGAGACACUAGAACAATT |
| CTCF #3 | Homo sapiens | GUGCAAUUGAGAACAUUAUTT |
| CTCF #2 | Homo sapiens | GGUCUGCUAUCAGAGGUUATT |
| E2F4 #1 | Homo sapiens | CGGCGGAUUUACGACAUUATT |
| E2F4 #2 | Homo sapiens | CACCUGAAGAUUUGCUCCATT |
| E2F4 #3 | Homo sapiens | CGGGAGACCACGAUUAUAUTT |
| ETS1 #1 | Homo sapiens | GUGGUUUCCAGUCCAAUUATT |
| ETS1 #2 | Homo sapiens | GUCCCACUAUUAACUCCAATT |
| ETS1 #3 | Homo sapiens | CGCUAUACCUCGGAUUACUTT |
| FOS #1 | Homo sapiens | GGGAUAGCCUCUCUUACUATT |
| FOS #2 | Homo sapiens | GACAGACCAACUAGAAGAUTT |
| FOS #3 | Homo sapiens | CAAGGUGGAACAGUUAUCUTT |
| FOXO1 #1 | Homo sapiens | CCUACACAGCAAGUUCAUUTT |
| FOXO1 #2 | Homo sapiens | CCAUGGACAACAACAGUAATT |
| FOXO1 #3 | Homo sapiens | GCUCAAAUGCUAGUACUAUTT |
| GATA4 #1 | Homo sapiens | GUAGAUAUGUUUGACGACUTT |
| GATA4 #2 | Homo sapiens | GCCUCUACCACAAGAUGAATT |
| GATA4 #3 | Homo sapiens | GAAUAAAUCUAAGACACCATT |
| GTF2B #1 | Homo sapiens | CCAAGAGUCACAUGUCCAATT |
| GTF2B #2 | Homo sapiens | GGUUGUAGGUGACCGGGUUTT |
| GTF2B #3 | Homo sapiens | GCAGUUCUGAUCGGGCAAUTT |
| HNF4A #1 | Homo sapiens | ACACCACCCUGGAAUUUGATT |
| HNF4A #2 | Homo sapiens | CAUGUACUCCUGCAGAUUUTT |
| HNF4A #3 | Homo sapiens | GCAGCUGCUGGUUCUCGUUTT |
| IRF5 #1 | Homo sapiens | GACGGAGAUAACACCAUCUTT |
| IRF5 #2 | Homo sapiens | CGAGAGAAGAAGCUCAUUATT |
| IRF5 #3 | Homo sapiens | GCAUGGUGGAGCAAUUCAATT |
| MAF #1 | Homo sapiens | GAACUGGCAAUGAGCAACUTT |
| MAF #2 | Homo sapiens | CUGGAAGACUACUACUGGATT |
| MAF #3 | Homo sapiens | GACGCGUACAAGGAGAAAUTT |
| MEF2A #1 | Homo sapiens | GGAGGACAGAUUCAGCAAATT |
| MEF2A #2 | Homo sapiens | GGGAAUGGAUUUGUAAACUTT |
| MEF2A #3 | Homo sapiens | GCCCUUCUGUAAAGCGAAUTT |
| MITF #1 | Homo sapiens | CCACCAAGUACCACAUACATT |
| MITF #2 | Homo sapiens | GUGGACUAUAUCCGAAAGUTT |
| MITF #3 | Homo sapiens | GACCUAACCUGUACAACAATT |
| NOTCH1 #1 | Homo sapiens | GUCCAGGAAACAACUGCAATT |
| NOTCH1 #2 | Homo sapiens | GGGAGCAUGUGUAACAUCATT |
| NOTCH1 #3 | Homo sapiens | GGGCUAACAAAGAUAUGCATT |
| NR1H2 #1 | Homo sapiens | CCCAGAUCCCGAAGAGGAATT |
| NR1H2 #2 | Homo sapiens | CCAGCUAACAGCGGCUCAATT |
| NR1H2 #3 | Homo sapiens | GCCUGCAGGUGGAGUUCAUTT |
| NFIC #1 | Homo sapiens | CCGACUUCCAGGAGAGCUUTT |
| NFIC #2 | Homo sapiens | CCACGAGUAGCAGCCGCAATT |
| NFIC #3 | Homo sapiens | GCAACUGGACGGAGGACAUTT |
| PPARG #1 | Homo sapiens | ACUCCACAUUACGAAGACATT |
| PPARG #2 | Homo sapiens | CCUCAUGGCAAUUGAAUGUTT |
| PPARG #3 | Homo sapiens | CUGGCCUCCUUGAUGAAUATT |
| SOX2 #1 | Homo sapiens | CUGCAGUACAACUCCAUGATT |
| SOX2 #2 | Homo sapiens | CCACCUACAGCAUGUCCUATT |
| SOX2 #3 | Homo sapiens | GGACAUGAUCAGCAUGUAUTT |
| SREBF1 #1 | Homo sapiens | GGAGGCUUCUCUACAGGAATT |
| SREBF1 #2 | Homo sapiens | CCUUGGUGCUUCUCUUUGUTT |
| SREBF1 #3 | Homo sapiens | GCCUGACCAUCUGUGAGAATT |
| TCF7 #1 | Homo sapiens | GCAUGUACAAAGAGACCGUTT |
| TCF7 #2 | Homo sapiens | CCACCCAUCCUUGAUGCUATT |
| TCF7 #3 | Homo sapiens | CCGCAACCUGAAGACACAATT |
| TEAD1 #1 | Homo sapiens | CUGCCAUUCAUAACAAGCUTT |
| TEAD1 #2 | Homo sapiens | GGCAUGCCAACCAUUCUUATT |
| TEAD1 #3 | Homo sapiens | GUGGUAACAAACAGGGAUATT |
Fig. 3FGFR activation enhances aerobic glycolysis and recycles lactate. a Lactate production and lactate release. b Enrichment of 13C-labled intermediate metabolites. Cells were cultured in the presence of [U-13C6]-glucose for 24 h. c Competitive uptake of glucose and lactate. Cells were cultured with both [U-13C3]-lactate (5 mM) and label-free glucose (10 mM) for 24 h. Left, Tracing map of [U-13C3]-lactate. Right, Enrichment of 13C-labled intermediate metabolites. d The incorporation percentage of lactate to the TCA cycle in NCI-H1581 xenograft tumors (n = 6). Left, Scheme for co-infusions of [U-13C6]-glucose and [3-13C]-lactate and the tracing map. Right, Fraction enrichment of the intermediates. e OCR measurement. Cells were treated with AZD4547 (100 nM, 24 h), Oxamate (10 mM, 6 h) or GSK2837808A (20 μM, 6 h). f, g ATP production and ROS level. NCI-H1581 cells were treated as indicated in e. h Transcript analysis of BAF3-RTK cells normalized by that in BAF3 cells. i The comparison of glycolytic gene expression between FGFR amplified and diploid cancer. Data were from 740 lung adenocarcinoma patients in TCGA data sets. j Immunohistochemistry analysis of tumor tissues from NSCLC PDX tumors. Shown are the representative fields from one section per tumor tissue (2 independent tumor tissues per PDX model). Scale bar, 20μm. k Scatter plot showing the inhibition rate of PHGDH inhibitor (PHGDHi) CBR5884 (12.5 μM) and LDH inhibitor (LDHi) GSK2837808A (50 μM). Cells were treated for 6 days. l Left: tumor growth curve of SNU16 xenograft model. Right: glucose-derived metabolites in tumor tissue. See the dosing regimen in Methods. Data were means (n = 6) and error bars represented SEM. m Tumor growth curve of LU6429 PDX model and grouped scatter plot of individual mice relative tumor volume on Day 21. See the dosing regimen in Methods. Data in a, b, e-h were means of triplicates and error bars represented SD. Data in c, d, l, m were means and error bars represented SEM. For all bar graphs, ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05, n.s. ≥ 0.05 for two-tailed Student’s t test. Source data are provided as a Source Data file
Fig. 4ATF4 and c-Myc orchestrate metabolic reprogramming. a Metabolic gene expression upon the depletion of candidate transcription factors (TFs). The Y-axis indicates the transcription factors and X-axis shows relative mRNA levels of metabolic genes. Gene expression was measured by RT-qPCR after transfected with indicated siRNA for 72 h. NC, negative control. Data were means of duplicates; error bars represented SD. b RT-qPCR transcript analysis. Cells were treated with AZD4547 (100 nM) or Gefitinib (100 nM) for 24 h and the mRNA level of indicated TFs was measured by RT-qPCR. The expression level of indicated genes was normalized by that of the untreated group (CON). Data were means of triplicates; error bars represented SD. c Immunohistochemistry analysis. PC9 xenograft models were treated with NCT-503 (40 mg/kg) or Gefitinib (5 mg/kg) daily for 15 days (n = 8). Tumor samples were collected at 6 h after last dosing. Scale bar, 20 μm. d Cell viability assay. Cells were transfected with two independent siRNAs targeting indicated TFs for 72 h and the cell viability was analyzed by counting cell numbers. Data were means of duplicates; error bars represented SD. e A network model describing the TF-targeted metabolic genes interactions. f RT-qPCR transcript analysis. Cells were transfected with indicated siRNA for 72 h and metabolic gene expression was measured by RT-qPCR. Data were means of triplicates; error bars represented SD. g Intracellular pyruvate and lactate levels. RT112 cells were transfected with indicated siRNA for 48 h and pyruvate and lactate aboundance was measured using GC/MS. h Analysis of [U-13C6]-glucose-derived serine. PC9 cells were transfected with indicated siRNA for 48 h followed by 24 h-culture in the presence of [U-13C6]-glucose. Serine isotopologue M3 was measured by GC-MS. Gefitinib treatment (100 nM, 24 h) was used as a positive control. Data in g, h were means of triplicates; error bars represented SEM. i Diagram depicting RTK-driven transcriptional reprogramming to orchestrate metabolic changes. For all bar graphs, ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05, n.s. ≥ 0.05 for two-tailed Student’s t test. Source data are provided as a Source Data file