定义和追踪胰腺导管腺癌患者来源异种移植模型的亚型。

IF 20.1 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Cancer Communications Pub Date : 2024-07-10 DOI:10.1002/cac2.12585
Sangyeop Hyun, Youngmin Han, Jae Yun Moon, Young-Ah Suh, Won-Gun Yun, Wooil Kwon, Jong-Eun Lee, Daeun Kim, Ja-Lok Ku, Jin-Young Jang, Daechan Park
{"title":"定义和追踪胰腺导管腺癌患者来源异种移植模型的亚型。","authors":"Sangyeop Hyun,&nbsp;Youngmin Han,&nbsp;Jae Yun Moon,&nbsp;Young-Ah Suh,&nbsp;Won-Gun Yun,&nbsp;Wooil Kwon,&nbsp;Jong-Eun Lee,&nbsp;Daeun Kim,&nbsp;Ja-Lok Ku,&nbsp;Jin-Young Jang,&nbsp;Daechan Park","doi":"10.1002/cac2.12585","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models have been used to explore therapeutic opportunities for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) [<span>1</span>]. Although original tumor characteristics are altered by cancer-stromal interactions in a PDX-specific manner [<span>2</span>], the implications of clonal evolution from PDAC tumors to PDX are largely unknown.</p><p>In this study, we have conducted a comprehensive genomic analysis using 36 patient-matched PDAC tumor and PDX samples (Figure 1A). The detailed methods regarding this study are described in the Supplementary Materials. The clinical information is summarized in Supplementary Table S1. To compare the somatic mutation profiles of PDAC tumors and PDX, 33 whole exome sequencing data were analyzed by using matched patient blood as a normal control. The proportion of PDX samples with Kirsten Rat Sarcoma Viral Oncogene Homolog (<i>KRAS</i>), Tumor Protein P53 (<i>TP53</i>), Mothers Against Decapentaplegic Homolog 4 (<i>SMAD4</i>), and cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (<i>CDKN2A</i>) mutations increased compared to PDAC tumors, indicating that cancerous clones evolved in PDX from primary tumors (Supplementary Table S2-S5, Figure 1B) [<span>3</span>]. Specifically, the frequency of the <i>KRAS</i> G12D mutation increased during PDX establishment, suggesting that this mutation could be responsible for driving clonal evolution in PDX models (Supplementary Table S2). Next, we observed the high correlation of the variant allele frequencies (VAFs) of commonly mutated genes between matched PDAC tumors and PDX in pairwise comparison (Figure 1C), indicating that the overall mutation rate was conserved during PDX construction. When VAFs were compared at the gene level, VAFs of driver genes significantly increased in PDX compared to primary tumors (Figure 1D). Copy number variation (CNV) profiles of protein-coding genes were also similar between the matched samples (Figure 1E, Supplementary Figure S1), while the copy numbers of driver genes became more evident in PDX compared to primary tumors (Figure 1F). Clonality analysis showed that subclones of primary tumors evolved as monoclonal or polyclonal patterns in matched PDX (Supplementary Figure S2). Despite the lack of investigations into clonal evolution over passages, these results suggest that molecular subtypes of PDX could deviate from PDAC tumors via clonal evolution during PDX model construction.</p><p>To investigate whether conventional PDAC subtyping is applicable to PDX, the molecular subtypes defined by Bailey <i>et al.</i> [<span>5</span>] were assigned to PDAC tumors and PDX. PDAC tumors were clearly clustered according to the Bailey gene signatures, showing the worst prognosis of patients with the squamous subtype as previously reported (Figure 1G). However, PDX clustering based on the Bailey gene signatures exhibited 61% (22/36) conflicting subtypes between the matched PDAC tumor and PDX samples (Supplementary Table S6). In particular, the proportions of aberrantly differentiated endocrine exocrine (ADEX) (<i>n</i> = 4) and immunogenic (<i>n</i> = 2) subtypes were reduced, and gene expression of these two subtypes were not clearly distinguished (Figure 1H), implicating the influence of stromal transition in PDX. Also, no distinct survival group was observed by subtype, suggesting that the application of human subtypes for PDX may result in incorrect clinical interpretations.</p><p>Since Bailey subtyping was invalid for PDX, we defined three PDX-specific molecular subtypes (Figure 1I, Supplementary Figure S3, Supplementary Table S7). Gene ontology analysis showed that Cluster 1 signature was related to extracellular matrix organization, whereas Clusters 2 and 3 were similar to squamous and pancreatic progenitor, respectively, among the Bailey subtypes (Supplementary Figure S4). Particularly, PDX Cluster 2 exhibited enrichment of gene expression signatures, such as hypoxia, glycolysis, and DNA replication, associated with rapid clonal expansion (Supplementary Figure S5). Although the survival difference based on the three PDX subtypes was not statistically significant, the prognosis of patients with Cluster 2 exhibited a more pronounced distinction (Figure 1I) and early recurrence within six months after surgery (Supplementary Table S8). To compare the similarity of gene signatures between PDX subtypes and human subtypes, we collected 12 different signatures of 3 human lineages, including stroma, basal and classical from previous studies [<span>5, 4, 6</span>], and then conducted gene overlap analysis (Figure 1J). The numbers in the heatmap represent the numbers of shared signature genes between PDX subtypes and human subtypes, whereby Clusters 1, 2, and 3 corresponded to the stroma, basal, and classical lineages, respectively. Based on these results, the nomenclature of PDX subtypes were assigned to three clusters: PDX-stroma, PDX-basal, and PDX-classical, respectively. Intriguingly, ADEX and immunogenic subtypes did not have any overlapping gene signatures with the three PDX subtypes. Deconvolution analysis of bulk RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) data in this study was performed using cell type signatures [<span>7</span>], confirming a distinct microenvironment in PDAC tumors and PDX (Figure 1K, Supplementary Figures S6 and S7). Next, the subtypes of 36 PDX samples were compared according to widely used subtyping methods for humans (Figure 1L). Notably, stromal lineages were relatively inconsistent across the subtyping methods compared to the other lineages. These results indicate that PDX-stroma requires their own novel gene signatures owing to the unique stromal environment in mice. Tracing the subtype transition between patient-matched PDAC tumors and PDX revealed a lineage-crossing subtype transition in PDX (Figure 1M). The discordance between subtype lineages were found in 55% (20/36) of patient-matched samples (Supplementary Table S9). These inconsistent patterns of subtype transition imply the PDAC tumor heterogeneity underlying the molecular subtypes. To understand the underlying properties of PDAC tumors, we investigated changes in the gene expression between subgroups that transitioned to different PDX subtypes from the same Bailey subtypes (Figure 1N). Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) was performed using gene signatures of Bailey subtypes as pre-defined gene sets, as depicted in Supplementary Figure S8. The GSEA results demonstrated that regardless of the Bailey subtype of the primary tumor, the squamous gene set was enriched in subgroups of PDAC tumors transitioning to PDX-basal in the PDX model. Likewise, the pancreatic progenitor gene set was enriched in all subgroups, of which the subtypes transitioned to PDX-classical. These results show that the underlying tumor cells with heterogeneity emerged as a lineage-crossing evolution of PDX-adaptive subclones.</p><p>Genetic discrepancies between primary tumors and model systems may be caused not only by clonal evolution but also by differences in tumor cellularity [<span>8, 9</span>]. High tumor cellularities in matched PDX can explain the increase in VAFs and CNVs of the PDAC-associated genes (Supplementary Figure S9). Our PDX model, by implanting a partial primary tumor, might have lesion-derived bias during clonal evolution in PDX due to intra-tumor heterogeneity. To trace spatial bias in clonal evolution within a tissue, multiple PDX construction from a tissue will be an ideal approach. Although ADEX is considered a subtype with acinar cell contamination [<span>10</span>], our results reveal that basal and classical cancer cells resided within ADEX tissues and expanded during PDX construction, leading to subtype transition. PDXs and organoids tend to better preserve the characteristics of original tumors than cell lines. Nevertheless, organoids undergo subtype changes in response to culture media, and PDXs may exhibit changes in an in vivo microenvironment compared to patient tissues.</p><p>To improve the accuracy of interpreting PDX genomics, it is crucial for further studies to incorporate factors such as the time required for PDX establishment and clinical information such as neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Therefore, clonal change and oncogenetic inconsistencies in PDX models should be investigated in a PDAC-PDX-matched manner, and the use of PDX as a preclinical model system requires careful consideration to accurately predict clinical data and drug responsiveness.</p><p>Jin-Young Jang and Daechan Park conceived and designed the study. Youngmin Han, Won-Gun Yun, Wooil Kwon and Jin-Young Jang collected the biospecimens and clinical information. Young-Ah Suh, Ja-Lok Ku and Jong-Eun Lee performed the experiments. Sangyeop Hyun, Jae Yun Moon and Daeun Kim analyzed the NGS data. Sangyeop Hyun, Youngmin Han, Jae Yun Moon, Won-Gun Yun, Daeun Kim, Jin-Young Jang and Daechan Park interpreted the data. Sangyeop Hyun, Youngmin Han, Jae Yun Moon, Jin-Young Jang and Daechan Park wrote the manuscript. All authors reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript.</p><p>All authors declare no conflict of interest.</p><p>This research was supported by Global - Learning &amp; Academic research institution for Master's ·PhD students, Postdocs (G-LAMP) Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (RS-2023-00285390 to Daechan Park), and the NRF grant funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT (RS-2024-00341899 to Daechan 2022R1A2C2011122 to Jin-Young Jang). This research was partially supported by DNA Link, Inc., and there is no conflict of interest.</p><p>This study was conducted with permission from the Institutional Review Board (IRB, SNUH H-1510-048-710) for research ethics. The biospecimens for this study were provided by Seoul National University Hospital (SNUH) Cancer Tissue Bank and the Biobank of SNUH, a member of the Korea Biobank Network. All samples derived from the Cancer Tissue Bank of SNUH were obtained with informed consent under IRB-approved protocols. All animal experiments were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee in the Biomedical Research Institute at Seoul National University Hospital (SNUH-IACUC No. 17-0028-C1A8).</p>","PeriodicalId":9495,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Communications","volume":"44 8","pages":"921-925"},"PeriodicalIF":20.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cac2.12585","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Defining and tracing subtypes of patient-derived xenograft models in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma\",\"authors\":\"Sangyeop Hyun,&nbsp;Youngmin Han,&nbsp;Jae Yun Moon,&nbsp;Young-Ah Suh,&nbsp;Won-Gun Yun,&nbsp;Wooil Kwon,&nbsp;Jong-Eun Lee,&nbsp;Daeun Kim,&nbsp;Ja-Lok Ku,&nbsp;Jin-Young Jang,&nbsp;Daechan Park\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/cac2.12585\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models have been used to explore therapeutic opportunities for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) [<span>1</span>]. Although original tumor characteristics are altered by cancer-stromal interactions in a PDX-specific manner [<span>2</span>], the implications of clonal evolution from PDAC tumors to PDX are largely unknown.</p><p>In this study, we have conducted a comprehensive genomic analysis using 36 patient-matched PDAC tumor and PDX samples (Figure 1A). The detailed methods regarding this study are described in the Supplementary Materials. The clinical information is summarized in Supplementary Table S1. To compare the somatic mutation profiles of PDAC tumors and PDX, 33 whole exome sequencing data were analyzed by using matched patient blood as a normal control. The proportion of PDX samples with Kirsten Rat Sarcoma Viral Oncogene Homolog (<i>KRAS</i>), Tumor Protein P53 (<i>TP53</i>), Mothers Against Decapentaplegic Homolog 4 (<i>SMAD4</i>), and cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (<i>CDKN2A</i>) mutations increased compared to PDAC tumors, indicating that cancerous clones evolved in PDX from primary tumors (Supplementary Table S2-S5, Figure 1B) [<span>3</span>]. Specifically, the frequency of the <i>KRAS</i> G12D mutation increased during PDX establishment, suggesting that this mutation could be responsible for driving clonal evolution in PDX models (Supplementary Table S2). Next, we observed the high correlation of the variant allele frequencies (VAFs) of commonly mutated genes between matched PDAC tumors and PDX in pairwise comparison (Figure 1C), indicating that the overall mutation rate was conserved during PDX construction. When VAFs were compared at the gene level, VAFs of driver genes significantly increased in PDX compared to primary tumors (Figure 1D). Copy number variation (CNV) profiles of protein-coding genes were also similar between the matched samples (Figure 1E, Supplementary Figure S1), while the copy numbers of driver genes became more evident in PDX compared to primary tumors (Figure 1F). Clonality analysis showed that subclones of primary tumors evolved as monoclonal or polyclonal patterns in matched PDX (Supplementary Figure S2). Despite the lack of investigations into clonal evolution over passages, these results suggest that molecular subtypes of PDX could deviate from PDAC tumors via clonal evolution during PDX model construction.</p><p>To investigate whether conventional PDAC subtyping is applicable to PDX, the molecular subtypes defined by Bailey <i>et al.</i> [<span>5</span>] were assigned to PDAC tumors and PDX. PDAC tumors were clearly clustered according to the Bailey gene signatures, showing the worst prognosis of patients with the squamous subtype as previously reported (Figure 1G). However, PDX clustering based on the Bailey gene signatures exhibited 61% (22/36) conflicting subtypes between the matched PDAC tumor and PDX samples (Supplementary Table S6). In particular, the proportions of aberrantly differentiated endocrine exocrine (ADEX) (<i>n</i> = 4) and immunogenic (<i>n</i> = 2) subtypes were reduced, and gene expression of these two subtypes were not clearly distinguished (Figure 1H), implicating the influence of stromal transition in PDX. Also, no distinct survival group was observed by subtype, suggesting that the application of human subtypes for PDX may result in incorrect clinical interpretations.</p><p>Since Bailey subtyping was invalid for PDX, we defined three PDX-specific molecular subtypes (Figure 1I, Supplementary Figure S3, Supplementary Table S7). Gene ontology analysis showed that Cluster 1 signature was related to extracellular matrix organization, whereas Clusters 2 and 3 were similar to squamous and pancreatic progenitor, respectively, among the Bailey subtypes (Supplementary Figure S4). Particularly, PDX Cluster 2 exhibited enrichment of gene expression signatures, such as hypoxia, glycolysis, and DNA replication, associated with rapid clonal expansion (Supplementary Figure S5). Although the survival difference based on the three PDX subtypes was not statistically significant, the prognosis of patients with Cluster 2 exhibited a more pronounced distinction (Figure 1I) and early recurrence within six months after surgery (Supplementary Table S8). To compare the similarity of gene signatures between PDX subtypes and human subtypes, we collected 12 different signatures of 3 human lineages, including stroma, basal and classical from previous studies [<span>5, 4, 6</span>], and then conducted gene overlap analysis (Figure 1J). The numbers in the heatmap represent the numbers of shared signature genes between PDX subtypes and human subtypes, whereby Clusters 1, 2, and 3 corresponded to the stroma, basal, and classical lineages, respectively. Based on these results, the nomenclature of PDX subtypes were assigned to three clusters: PDX-stroma, PDX-basal, and PDX-classical, respectively. Intriguingly, ADEX and immunogenic subtypes did not have any overlapping gene signatures with the three PDX subtypes. Deconvolution analysis of bulk RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) data in this study was performed using cell type signatures [<span>7</span>], confirming a distinct microenvironment in PDAC tumors and PDX (Figure 1K, Supplementary Figures S6 and S7). Next, the subtypes of 36 PDX samples were compared according to widely used subtyping methods for humans (Figure 1L). Notably, stromal lineages were relatively inconsistent across the subtyping methods compared to the other lineages. These results indicate that PDX-stroma requires their own novel gene signatures owing to the unique stromal environment in mice. Tracing the subtype transition between patient-matched PDAC tumors and PDX revealed a lineage-crossing subtype transition in PDX (Figure 1M). The discordance between subtype lineages were found in 55% (20/36) of patient-matched samples (Supplementary Table S9). These inconsistent patterns of subtype transition imply the PDAC tumor heterogeneity underlying the molecular subtypes. To understand the underlying properties of PDAC tumors, we investigated changes in the gene expression between subgroups that transitioned to different PDX subtypes from the same Bailey subtypes (Figure 1N). Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) was performed using gene signatures of Bailey subtypes as pre-defined gene sets, as depicted in Supplementary Figure S8. The GSEA results demonstrated that regardless of the Bailey subtype of the primary tumor, the squamous gene set was enriched in subgroups of PDAC tumors transitioning to PDX-basal in the PDX model. Likewise, the pancreatic progenitor gene set was enriched in all subgroups, of which the subtypes transitioned to PDX-classical. These results show that the underlying tumor cells with heterogeneity emerged as a lineage-crossing evolution of PDX-adaptive subclones.</p><p>Genetic discrepancies between primary tumors and model systems may be caused not only by clonal evolution but also by differences in tumor cellularity [<span>8, 9</span>]. High tumor cellularities in matched PDX can explain the increase in VAFs and CNVs of the PDAC-associated genes (Supplementary Figure S9). Our PDX model, by implanting a partial primary tumor, might have lesion-derived bias during clonal evolution in PDX due to intra-tumor heterogeneity. To trace spatial bias in clonal evolution within a tissue, multiple PDX construction from a tissue will be an ideal approach. Although ADEX is considered a subtype with acinar cell contamination [<span>10</span>], our results reveal that basal and classical cancer cells resided within ADEX tissues and expanded during PDX construction, leading to subtype transition. PDXs and organoids tend to better preserve the characteristics of original tumors than cell lines. Nevertheless, organoids undergo subtype changes in response to culture media, and PDXs may exhibit changes in an in vivo microenvironment compared to patient tissues.</p><p>To improve the accuracy of interpreting PDX genomics, it is crucial for further studies to incorporate factors such as the time required for PDX establishment and clinical information such as neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Therefore, clonal change and oncogenetic inconsistencies in PDX models should be investigated in a PDAC-PDX-matched manner, and the use of PDX as a preclinical model system requires careful consideration to accurately predict clinical data and drug responsiveness.</p><p>Jin-Young Jang and Daechan Park conceived and designed the study. Youngmin Han, Won-Gun Yun, Wooil Kwon and Jin-Young Jang collected the biospecimens and clinical information. Young-Ah Suh, Ja-Lok Ku and Jong-Eun Lee performed the experiments. Sangyeop Hyun, Jae Yun Moon and Daeun Kim analyzed the NGS data. Sangyeop Hyun, Youngmin Han, Jae Yun Moon, Won-Gun Yun, Daeun Kim, Jin-Young Jang and Daechan Park interpreted the data. Sangyeop Hyun, Youngmin Han, Jae Yun Moon, Jin-Young Jang and Daechan Park wrote the manuscript. All authors reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript.</p><p>All authors declare no conflict of interest.</p><p>This research was supported by Global - Learning &amp; Academic research institution for Master's ·PhD students, Postdocs (G-LAMP) Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (RS-2023-00285390 to Daechan Park), and the NRF grant funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT (RS-2024-00341899 to Daechan 2022R1A2C2011122 to Jin-Young Jang). This research was partially supported by DNA Link, Inc., and there is no conflict of interest.</p><p>This study was conducted with permission from the Institutional Review Board (IRB, SNUH H-1510-048-710) for research ethics. The biospecimens for this study were provided by Seoul National University Hospital (SNUH) Cancer Tissue Bank and the Biobank of SNUH, a member of the Korea Biobank Network. All samples derived from the Cancer Tissue Bank of SNUH were obtained with informed consent under IRB-approved protocols. All animal experiments were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee in the Biomedical Research Institute at Seoul National University Hospital (SNUH-IACUC No. 17-0028-C1A8).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9495,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancer Communications\",\"volume\":\"44 8\",\"pages\":\"921-925\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":20.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cac2.12585\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancer Communications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cac2.12585\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Communications","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cac2.12585","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

患者衍生异种移植(PDX)模型已被用于探索胰腺导管腺癌(PDAC)的治疗机会[1]。在本研究中,我们利用 36 例患者匹配的 PDAC 肿瘤和 PDX 样本(图 1A)进行了全面的基因组分析。本研究的详细方法见补充材料。补充表 S1 总结了临床信息。为了比较 PDAC 肿瘤和 PDX 的体细胞突变情况,以匹配的患者血液作为正常对照,分析了 33 个全外显子组测序数据。与PDAC肿瘤相比,PDX样本中出现Kirsten鼠肉瘤病毒癌基因同源物(KRAS)、肿瘤蛋白P53(TP53)、母亲抗截瘫同源物4(SMAD4)和细胞周期蛋白依赖性激酶抑制剂2A(CDKN2A)突变的比例增加,表明PDX中的癌克隆是从原发肿瘤演化而来的(补充表S2-S5,图1B)[3]。具体而言,KRAS G12D 突变的频率在 PDX 建立过程中有所增加,表明该突变可能是 PDX 模型中克隆进化的驱动因素(补充表 S2)。接下来,我们观察到配对的 PDAC 肿瘤和 PDX 之间常见突变基因的变异等位基因频率(VAFs)在配对比较中的高度相关性(图 1C),表明在 PDX 构建过程中总体突变率是一致的。在基因水平上比较VAF时,与原发肿瘤相比,PDX中驱动基因的VAF显著增加(图1D)。配对样本间蛋白编码基因的拷贝数变异(CNV)图谱也相似(图 1E,补充图 S1),而 PDX 中驱动基因的拷贝数比原发肿瘤更明显(图 1F)。克隆性分析表明,原发性肿瘤的亚克隆在匹配的 PDX 中演变为单克隆或多克隆模式(补充图 S2)。为了研究传统的PDAC亚型是否适用于PDX,我们将Bailey等人[5]定义的分子亚型分配给了PDAC肿瘤和PDX。根据Bailey基因特征,PDAC肿瘤被清晰地聚类,如之前报道的那样,鳞状亚型患者的预后最差(图1G)。然而,基于贝利基因特征的 PDX 聚类显示,配对的 PDAC 肿瘤和 PDX 样本中有 61%(22/36)的亚型相互冲突(补充表 S6)。特别是,异常分化的内分泌外分泌亚型(ADEX)(n = 4)和免疫原性亚型(n = 2)的比例降低,这两种亚型的基因表达没有明显区别(图 1H),暗示了 PDX 中基质转换的影响。由于贝利亚型对PDX无效,我们定义了三种PDX特异性分子亚型(图1I,补充图S3,补充表S7)。基因本体分析表明,在贝利亚型中,簇1特征与细胞外基质组织有关,而簇2和簇3分别与鳞状细胞和胰腺原细胞相似(补充图S4)。特别是,PDX 第 2 群表现出与快速克隆扩增相关的基因表达特征的富集,如缺氧、糖酵解和 DNA 复制(补充图 S5)。虽然基于三种 PDX 亚型的生存率差异没有统计学意义,但群集 2 患者的预后表现出更明显的差异(图 1I),且术后 6 个月内早期复发(补充表 S8)。为了比较 PDX 亚型与人类亚型基因特征的相似性,我们从以往的研究[5, 4, 6]中收集了基质型、基底型和经典型等 3 种人系的 12 个不同特征,然后进行了基因重叠分析(图 1J)。热图中的数字代表了PDX亚型与人类亚型之间共享特征基因的数量,其中群组1、2和3分别对应基质、基底和经典系。根据这些结果,PDX 亚型的命名被归入三个群组:PDX-基质型、PDX-基底型和PDX-经典型。耐人寻味的是,ADEX亚型和免疫原性亚型与这三种PDX亚型没有任何重叠的基因特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Defining and tracing subtypes of patient-derived xenograft models in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models have been used to explore therapeutic opportunities for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) [1]. Although original tumor characteristics are altered by cancer-stromal interactions in a PDX-specific manner [2], the implications of clonal evolution from PDAC tumors to PDX are largely unknown.

In this study, we have conducted a comprehensive genomic analysis using 36 patient-matched PDAC tumor and PDX samples (Figure 1A). The detailed methods regarding this study are described in the Supplementary Materials. The clinical information is summarized in Supplementary Table S1. To compare the somatic mutation profiles of PDAC tumors and PDX, 33 whole exome sequencing data were analyzed by using matched patient blood as a normal control. The proportion of PDX samples with Kirsten Rat Sarcoma Viral Oncogene Homolog (KRAS), Tumor Protein P53 (TP53), Mothers Against Decapentaplegic Homolog 4 (SMAD4), and cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (CDKN2A) mutations increased compared to PDAC tumors, indicating that cancerous clones evolved in PDX from primary tumors (Supplementary Table S2-S5, Figure 1B) [3]. Specifically, the frequency of the KRAS G12D mutation increased during PDX establishment, suggesting that this mutation could be responsible for driving clonal evolution in PDX models (Supplementary Table S2). Next, we observed the high correlation of the variant allele frequencies (VAFs) of commonly mutated genes between matched PDAC tumors and PDX in pairwise comparison (Figure 1C), indicating that the overall mutation rate was conserved during PDX construction. When VAFs were compared at the gene level, VAFs of driver genes significantly increased in PDX compared to primary tumors (Figure 1D). Copy number variation (CNV) profiles of protein-coding genes were also similar between the matched samples (Figure 1E, Supplementary Figure S1), while the copy numbers of driver genes became more evident in PDX compared to primary tumors (Figure 1F). Clonality analysis showed that subclones of primary tumors evolved as monoclonal or polyclonal patterns in matched PDX (Supplementary Figure S2). Despite the lack of investigations into clonal evolution over passages, these results suggest that molecular subtypes of PDX could deviate from PDAC tumors via clonal evolution during PDX model construction.

To investigate whether conventional PDAC subtyping is applicable to PDX, the molecular subtypes defined by Bailey et al. [5] were assigned to PDAC tumors and PDX. PDAC tumors were clearly clustered according to the Bailey gene signatures, showing the worst prognosis of patients with the squamous subtype as previously reported (Figure 1G). However, PDX clustering based on the Bailey gene signatures exhibited 61% (22/36) conflicting subtypes between the matched PDAC tumor and PDX samples (Supplementary Table S6). In particular, the proportions of aberrantly differentiated endocrine exocrine (ADEX) (n = 4) and immunogenic (n = 2) subtypes were reduced, and gene expression of these two subtypes were not clearly distinguished (Figure 1H), implicating the influence of stromal transition in PDX. Also, no distinct survival group was observed by subtype, suggesting that the application of human subtypes for PDX may result in incorrect clinical interpretations.

Since Bailey subtyping was invalid for PDX, we defined three PDX-specific molecular subtypes (Figure 1I, Supplementary Figure S3, Supplementary Table S7). Gene ontology analysis showed that Cluster 1 signature was related to extracellular matrix organization, whereas Clusters 2 and 3 were similar to squamous and pancreatic progenitor, respectively, among the Bailey subtypes (Supplementary Figure S4). Particularly, PDX Cluster 2 exhibited enrichment of gene expression signatures, such as hypoxia, glycolysis, and DNA replication, associated with rapid clonal expansion (Supplementary Figure S5). Although the survival difference based on the three PDX subtypes was not statistically significant, the prognosis of patients with Cluster 2 exhibited a more pronounced distinction (Figure 1I) and early recurrence within six months after surgery (Supplementary Table S8). To compare the similarity of gene signatures between PDX subtypes and human subtypes, we collected 12 different signatures of 3 human lineages, including stroma, basal and classical from previous studies [5, 4, 6], and then conducted gene overlap analysis (Figure 1J). The numbers in the heatmap represent the numbers of shared signature genes between PDX subtypes and human subtypes, whereby Clusters 1, 2, and 3 corresponded to the stroma, basal, and classical lineages, respectively. Based on these results, the nomenclature of PDX subtypes were assigned to three clusters: PDX-stroma, PDX-basal, and PDX-classical, respectively. Intriguingly, ADEX and immunogenic subtypes did not have any overlapping gene signatures with the three PDX subtypes. Deconvolution analysis of bulk RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) data in this study was performed using cell type signatures [7], confirming a distinct microenvironment in PDAC tumors and PDX (Figure 1K, Supplementary Figures S6 and S7). Next, the subtypes of 36 PDX samples were compared according to widely used subtyping methods for humans (Figure 1L). Notably, stromal lineages were relatively inconsistent across the subtyping methods compared to the other lineages. These results indicate that PDX-stroma requires their own novel gene signatures owing to the unique stromal environment in mice. Tracing the subtype transition between patient-matched PDAC tumors and PDX revealed a lineage-crossing subtype transition in PDX (Figure 1M). The discordance between subtype lineages were found in 55% (20/36) of patient-matched samples (Supplementary Table S9). These inconsistent patterns of subtype transition imply the PDAC tumor heterogeneity underlying the molecular subtypes. To understand the underlying properties of PDAC tumors, we investigated changes in the gene expression between subgroups that transitioned to different PDX subtypes from the same Bailey subtypes (Figure 1N). Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) was performed using gene signatures of Bailey subtypes as pre-defined gene sets, as depicted in Supplementary Figure S8. The GSEA results demonstrated that regardless of the Bailey subtype of the primary tumor, the squamous gene set was enriched in subgroups of PDAC tumors transitioning to PDX-basal in the PDX model. Likewise, the pancreatic progenitor gene set was enriched in all subgroups, of which the subtypes transitioned to PDX-classical. These results show that the underlying tumor cells with heterogeneity emerged as a lineage-crossing evolution of PDX-adaptive subclones.

Genetic discrepancies between primary tumors and model systems may be caused not only by clonal evolution but also by differences in tumor cellularity [8, 9]. High tumor cellularities in matched PDX can explain the increase in VAFs and CNVs of the PDAC-associated genes (Supplementary Figure S9). Our PDX model, by implanting a partial primary tumor, might have lesion-derived bias during clonal evolution in PDX due to intra-tumor heterogeneity. To trace spatial bias in clonal evolution within a tissue, multiple PDX construction from a tissue will be an ideal approach. Although ADEX is considered a subtype with acinar cell contamination [10], our results reveal that basal and classical cancer cells resided within ADEX tissues and expanded during PDX construction, leading to subtype transition. PDXs and organoids tend to better preserve the characteristics of original tumors than cell lines. Nevertheless, organoids undergo subtype changes in response to culture media, and PDXs may exhibit changes in an in vivo microenvironment compared to patient tissues.

To improve the accuracy of interpreting PDX genomics, it is crucial for further studies to incorporate factors such as the time required for PDX establishment and clinical information such as neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Therefore, clonal change and oncogenetic inconsistencies in PDX models should be investigated in a PDAC-PDX-matched manner, and the use of PDX as a preclinical model system requires careful consideration to accurately predict clinical data and drug responsiveness.

Jin-Young Jang and Daechan Park conceived and designed the study. Youngmin Han, Won-Gun Yun, Wooil Kwon and Jin-Young Jang collected the biospecimens and clinical information. Young-Ah Suh, Ja-Lok Ku and Jong-Eun Lee performed the experiments. Sangyeop Hyun, Jae Yun Moon and Daeun Kim analyzed the NGS data. Sangyeop Hyun, Youngmin Han, Jae Yun Moon, Won-Gun Yun, Daeun Kim, Jin-Young Jang and Daechan Park interpreted the data. Sangyeop Hyun, Youngmin Han, Jae Yun Moon, Jin-Young Jang and Daechan Park wrote the manuscript. All authors reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript.

All authors declare no conflict of interest.

This research was supported by Global - Learning & Academic research institution for Master's ·PhD students, Postdocs (G-LAMP) Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (RS-2023-00285390 to Daechan Park), and the NRF grant funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT (RS-2024-00341899 to Daechan 2022R1A2C2011122 to Jin-Young Jang). This research was partially supported by DNA Link, Inc., and there is no conflict of interest.

This study was conducted with permission from the Institutional Review Board (IRB, SNUH H-1510-048-710) for research ethics. The biospecimens for this study were provided by Seoul National University Hospital (SNUH) Cancer Tissue Bank and the Biobank of SNUH, a member of the Korea Biobank Network. All samples derived from the Cancer Tissue Bank of SNUH were obtained with informed consent under IRB-approved protocols. All animal experiments were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee in the Biomedical Research Institute at Seoul National University Hospital (SNUH-IACUC No. 17-0028-C1A8).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cancer Communications
Cancer Communications Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Cancer Research
CiteScore
25.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
153
审稿时长
4 weeks
期刊介绍: Cancer Communications is an open access, peer-reviewed online journal that encompasses basic, clinical, and translational cancer research. The journal welcomes submissions concerning clinical trials, epidemiology, molecular and cellular biology, and genetics.
期刊最新文献
Anti-tumor drug supervision in China from 2010 to 2024: the evolution and prospect of drug review standards. Issue Information Targeting IL-17A to manage immunotherapy-induced toxicity in melanoma. Epigenomic exploration of disease status of EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer using plasma cell-free DNA hydroxymethylomes. Discovery of a novel viroid-like circular RNA in colorectal cancer.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1