Patricia D B Tiburcio1,2, David L Gillespie1, Randy L Jensen1,2, L Eric Huang3,4. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neurosciences Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84132, USA. 2. Department of Oncological Sciences, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neurosciences Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84132, USA. eric.huang@hsc.utah.edu. 4. Department of Oncological Sciences, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA. eric.huang@hsc.utah.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Somatic mutations of the isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) gene, mostly substituting Arg132 with histidine, are associated with better patient survival, but glioma recurrence and progression are nearly inevitable, resulting in disproportionate morbidity and mortality. Our previous studies demonstrated that in contrast to hemizygous IDH1R132H (loss of wild-type allele), heterozygous IDH1R132H is intrinsically glioma suppressive but its suppression of three-dimensional (3D) growth is negated by extracellular glutamate and reducing equivalent. This study sought to understand the importance of 3D culture in IDH1R132H biology and the underlying mechanism of the glutamate effect. METHODS: RNA sequencing data of IDH1R132H-heterozygous and IDH1R132H-hemizygous glioma cells cultured under two-dimensional (2D) and 3D conditions were subjected to unsupervised hierarchal clustering and gene set enrichment analysis. IDH1R132H-heterozygous and IDH1R132H-hemizygous tumor growth were compared in subcutaneous and intracranial transplantations. Short-hairpin RNA against glutamate dehydrogenase 2 gene (GLUD2) expression was employed to determine the effects of glutamate and the mutant IDH1 inhibitor AGI-5198 on redox potential in IDH1R132H-heterozygous cells. RESULTS: In contrast to IDH1R132H-heterozygous cells, 3D-cultured but not 2D-cultured IDH1R132H-hemizygous cells were clustered with more malignant gliomas, possessed the glioblastoma mesenchymal signature, and exhibited aggressive tumor growth. Although both extracellular glutamate and AGI-5198 stimulated redox potential for 3D growth of IDH1R132H-heterozygous cells, GLUD2 expression was required for glutamate, but not AGI-5198, stimulation. CONCLUSION: 3D culture is more relevant to IDH1R132H glioma biology. The importance of redox homeostasis in IDH1R132H glioma suggests that metabolic pathway(s) can be explored for therapeutic targeting, whereas IDH1R132H inhibitors may have counterproductive consequences in patient treatment.
PURPOSE: Somatic mutations of the isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) gene, mostly substituting Arg132 with histidine, are associated with better patient survival, but glioma recurrence and progression are nearly inevitable, resulting in disproportionate morbidity and mortality. Our previous studies demonstrated that in contrast to hemizygous IDH1R132H (loss of wild-type allele), heterozygous IDH1R132H is intrinsically glioma suppressive but its suppression of three-dimensional (3D) growth is negated by extracellular glutamate and reducing equivalent. This study sought to understand the importance of 3D culture in IDH1R132H biology and the underlying mechanism of the glutamate effect. METHODS: RNA sequencing data of IDH1R132H-heterozygous and IDH1R132H-hemizygous glioma cells cultured under two-dimensional (2D) and 3D conditions were subjected to unsupervised hierarchal clustering and gene set enrichment analysis. IDH1R132H-heterozygous and IDH1R132H-hemizygous tumor growth were compared in subcutaneous and intracranial transplantations. Short-hairpin RNA against glutamate dehydrogenase 2 gene (GLUD2) expression was employed to determine the effects of glutamate and the mutant IDH1 inhibitor AGI-5198 on redox potential in IDH1R132H-heterozygous cells. RESULTS: In contrast to IDH1R132H-heterozygous cells, 3D-cultured but not 2D-cultured IDH1R132H-hemizygous cells were clustered with more malignant gliomas, possessed the glioblastoma mesenchymal signature, and exhibited aggressive tumor growth. Although both extracellular glutamate and AGI-5198 stimulated redox potential for 3D growth of IDH1R132H-heterozygous cells, GLUD2 expression was required for glutamate, but not AGI-5198, stimulation. CONCLUSION: 3D culture is more relevant to IDH1R132H glioma biology. The importance of redox homeostasis in IDH1R132H glioma suggests that metabolic pathway(s) can be explored for therapeutic targeting, whereas IDH1R132H inhibitors may have counterproductive consequences in patient treatment.
Entities:
Keywords:
3D culture; AGI-5198; Glioma; IDH1 mutation; Redox
Authors: Christopher J Pirozzi; Austin B Carpenter; Matthew S Waitkus; Catherine Y Wang; Huishan Zhu; Landon J Hansen; Lee H Chen; Paula K Greer; Jie Feng; Yu Wang; Cheryl B Bock; Ping Fan; Ivan Spasojevic; Roger E McLendon; Darell D Bigner; Yiping He; Hai Yan Journal: Mol Cancer Res Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 5.852
Authors: Charles Chesnelong; Myriam M Chaumeil; Michael D Blough; Mohammad Al-Najjar; Owen D Stechishin; Jennifer A Chan; Russell O Pieper; Sabrina M Ronen; Samuel Weiss; H Artee Luchman; J Gregory Cairncross Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2013-12-22 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: D Williams Parsons; Siân Jones; Xiaosong Zhang; Jimmy Cheng-Ho Lin; Rebecca J Leary; Philipp Angenendt; Parminder Mankoo; Hannah Carter; I-Mei Siu; Gary L Gallia; Alessandro Olivi; Roger McLendon; B Ahmed Rasheed; Stephen Keir; Tatiana Nikolskaya; Yuri Nikolsky; Dana A Busam; Hanna Tekleab; Luis A Diaz; James Hartigan; Doug R Smith; Robert L Strausberg; Suely Kazue Nagahashi Marie; Sueli Mieko Oba Shinjo; Hai Yan; Gregory J Riggins; Darell D Bigner; Rachel Karchin; Nick Papadopoulos; Giovanni Parmigiani; Bert Vogelstein; Victor E Velculescu; Kenneth W Kinzler Journal: Science Date: 2008-09-04 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Stuart J Smith; Martin Wilson; Jennifer H Ward; Cheryl V Rahman; Andrew C Peet; Donald C Macarthur; Felicity R A J Rose; Richard G Grundy; Ruman Rahman Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-12-18 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Patricia D B Tiburcio; Bing Xiao; Yi Chai; Sydney Asper; Sheryl R Tripp; David L Gillespie; Randy L Jensen; L Eric Huang Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2018-10-12
Authors: Mohammed Khurshed; Niels Aarnoudse; Renske Hulsbos; Vashendriya V V Hira; Hanneke W M van Laarhoven; Johanna W Wilmink; Remco J Molenaar; Cornelis J F van Noorden Journal: FASEB J Date: 2018-06-07 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Hai Yan; D Williams Parsons; Genglin Jin; Roger McLendon; B Ahmed Rasheed; Weishi Yuan; Ivan Kos; Ines Batinic-Haberle; Siân Jones; Gregory J Riggins; Henry Friedman; Allan Friedman; David Reardon; James Herndon; Kenneth W Kinzler; Victor E Velculescu; Bert Vogelstein; Darell D Bigner Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-02-19 Impact factor: 176.079
Authors: Chiara Bardella; Osama Al-Dalahmah; Daniel Krell; Pijus Brazauskas; Khalid Al-Qahtani; Marketa Tomkova; Julie Adam; Sébastien Serres; Helen Lockstone; Luke Freeman-Mills; Inga Pfeffer; Nicola Sibson; Robert Goldin; Benjamin Schuster-Böeckler; Patrick J Pollard; Tomoyoshi Soga; James S McCullagh; Christopher J Schofield; Paul Mulholland; Olaf Ansorge; Skirmantas Kriaucionis; Peter J Ratcliffe; Francis G Szele; Ian Tomlinson Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2016-09-29 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Maximilian Clausing; Doreen William; Matthias Preussler; Julia Biedermann; Konrad Grützmann; Susan Richter; Frank Buchholz; Achim Temme; Evelin Schröck; Barbara Klink Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2022-05-21 Impact factor: 6.208
Authors: Patricia D B Tiburcio; Mary C Locke; Srividya Bhaskara; Mahesh B Chandrasekharan; L Eric Huang Journal: Transl Oncol Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 4.243