Different states of stemness of glioblastoma stem cells sustain glioblastoma subtypes indicating novel clinical biomarkers and high-efficacy customized therapies.
Anti-GBM patient-tailored strategies
Glioblastoma
Glioblastoma stem cells (GSCs)
Stemness-related therapeutic biomarkers
Journal
Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR
ISSN: 1756-9966
Titre abrégé: J Exp Clin Cancer Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8308647
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
21 Sep 2023
21 Sep 2023
Historique:
received:
07
06
2023
accepted:
26
08
2023
medline:
25
9
2023
pubmed:
22
9
2023
entrez:
22
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most malignant among gliomas with an inevitable lethal outcome. The elucidation of the physiology and regulation of this tumor is mandatory to unravel novel target and effective therapeutics. Emerging concepts show that the minor subset of glioblastoma stem cells (GSCs) accounts for tumorigenicity, representing the true target for innovative therapies in GBM. Here, we isolated and established functionally stable and steadily expanding GSCs lines from a large cohort of GBM patients. The molecular, functional and antigenic landscape of GBM tissues and their derivative GSCs was highlited in a side-by-side comprehensive genomic and transcriptomic characterization by ANOVA and Fisher's exact tests. GSCs' physio-pathological hallmarks were delineated by comparing over time in vitro and in vivo their expansion, self-renewal and tumorigenic ability with hierarchical linear models for repeated measurements and Kaplan-Meier method. Candidate biomarkers performance in discriminating GBM patients' classification emerged by classification tree and patients' survival analysis. Here, distinct biomarker signatures together with aberrant functional programs were shown to stratify GBM patients as well as their sibling GSCs population into TCGA clusters. Of importance, GSCs cells were demonstrated to fully resemble over time the molecular features of their patient of origin. Furthermore, we pointed out the existence of distinct GSCs subsets within GBM classification, inherently endowed with different self-renewal and tumorigenic potential. Particularly, classical GSCs were identified by more undifferentiated biological hallmarks, enhanced expansion and clonal capacity as compared to the more mature, relatively slow-propagating mesenchymal and proneural cells, likely endowed with a higher potential for infiltration either ex vivo or in vivo. Importantly, the combination of DCX and EGFR markers, selectively enriched among GSCs pools, almost exactly predicted GBM patients' clusters together with their survival and drug response. In this study we report that an inherent enrichment of distinct GSCs pools underpin the functional inter-cluster variances displayed by GBM patients. We uncover two selectively represented novel functional biomarkers capable of discriminating GBM patients' stratification, survival and drug response, setting the stage for the determination of patient-tailored diagnostic and prognostic strategies and, mostly, for the design of appropriate, patient-selective treatment protocols.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most malignant among gliomas with an inevitable lethal outcome. The elucidation of the physiology and regulation of this tumor is mandatory to unravel novel target and effective therapeutics. Emerging concepts show that the minor subset of glioblastoma stem cells (GSCs) accounts for tumorigenicity, representing the true target for innovative therapies in GBM.
METHODS
METHODS
Here, we isolated and established functionally stable and steadily expanding GSCs lines from a large cohort of GBM patients. The molecular, functional and antigenic landscape of GBM tissues and their derivative GSCs was highlited in a side-by-side comprehensive genomic and transcriptomic characterization by ANOVA and Fisher's exact tests. GSCs' physio-pathological hallmarks were delineated by comparing over time in vitro and in vivo their expansion, self-renewal and tumorigenic ability with hierarchical linear models for repeated measurements and Kaplan-Meier method. Candidate biomarkers performance in discriminating GBM patients' classification emerged by classification tree and patients' survival analysis.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Here, distinct biomarker signatures together with aberrant functional programs were shown to stratify GBM patients as well as their sibling GSCs population into TCGA clusters. Of importance, GSCs cells were demonstrated to fully resemble over time the molecular features of their patient of origin. Furthermore, we pointed out the existence of distinct GSCs subsets within GBM classification, inherently endowed with different self-renewal and tumorigenic potential. Particularly, classical GSCs were identified by more undifferentiated biological hallmarks, enhanced expansion and clonal capacity as compared to the more mature, relatively slow-propagating mesenchymal and proneural cells, likely endowed with a higher potential for infiltration either ex vivo or in vivo. Importantly, the combination of DCX and EGFR markers, selectively enriched among GSCs pools, almost exactly predicted GBM patients' clusters together with their survival and drug response.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
In this study we report that an inherent enrichment of distinct GSCs pools underpin the functional inter-cluster variances displayed by GBM patients. We uncover two selectively represented novel functional biomarkers capable of discriminating GBM patients' stratification, survival and drug response, setting the stage for the determination of patient-tailored diagnostic and prognostic strategies and, mostly, for the design of appropriate, patient-selective treatment protocols.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37735434
doi: 10.1186/s13046-023-02811-0
pii: 10.1186/s13046-023-02811-0
pmc: PMC10512479
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
244Subventions
Organisme : Ministero della Salute
ID : GR-2011-02351534
Organisme : Ministero della Salute
ID : Progetto Ricerca Corrente 2018-20
Organisme : Ministero della Salute
ID : Progetto Ricerca Corrente 2020-2023
Organisme : Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro
ID : IG-22027
Informations de copyright
© 2023. Italian National Cancer Institute ‘Regina Elena’.
Références
Nature. 2006 Dec 7;444(7120):756-60
pubmed: 17051156
Nat Commun. 2019 Apr 16;10(1):1787
pubmed: 30992437
Acta Neuropathol Commun. 2019 Nov 29;7(1):203
pubmed: 31815646
Cancer Cell. 2012 Dec 11;22(6):765-80
pubmed: 23238013
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Mar 5;110(10):4009-14
pubmed: 23412337
Sci Rep. 2019 Mar 20;9(1):4902
pubmed: 30894629
Genes (Basel). 2020 Feb 06;11(2):
pubmed: 32041307
Nature. 2001 Nov 1;414(6859):105-11
pubmed: 11689955
Cancer Cell. 2006 Mar;9(3):157-73
pubmed: 16530701
Oncotarget. 2015 Dec 1;6(38):40896-906
pubmed: 26503470
Stem Cells Int. 2019 Oct 29;2019:5831240
pubmed: 31781242
EBioMedicine. 2019 Jun;44:346-360
pubmed: 31056474
Nature. 2012 Aug 23;488(7412):522-6
pubmed: 22854781
Genome Res. 2015 Mar;25(3):316-27
pubmed: 25650244
Neuro Oncol. 2021 Feb 25;23(2):199-213
pubmed: 33173943
Cancer Cell. 2019 Apr 15;35(4):692-704.e12
pubmed: 30905762
Cancer Cell. 2010 Jan 19;17(1):98-110
pubmed: 20129251
Cancer Cell. 2010 May 18;17(5):510-22
pubmed: 20399149
Cell Oncol (Dordr). 2019 Dec;42(6):801-813
pubmed: 31292920
J Neurosci. 1996 Feb 1;16(3):1091-100
pubmed: 8558238
Cancer Cell. 2021 Apr 12;39(4):509-528.e20
pubmed: 33577785
Nat Genet. 2016 Jul;48(7):768-76
pubmed: 27270107
Ann Oncol. 2009 May;20 Suppl 4:126-8
pubmed: 19454432
Oncol Lett. 2022 Dec 15;25(2):46
pubmed: 36644133
J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2020 Dec 14;39(1):285
pubmed: 33317591
Trends Cancer. 2020 Mar;6(3):223-235
pubmed: 32101725
Bioinformatics. 2011 Jun 15;27(12):1739-40
pubmed: 21546393
Nat Cancer. 2021 Feb;2(2):157-173
pubmed: 35122077
Stem Cells Int. 2015;2015:427518
pubmed: 26136784
J Neurooncol. 2019 Apr;142(2):337-345
pubmed: 30680510
Nat Med. 2019 Jan;25(1):176-187
pubmed: 30531922
Cancer Cell. 2017 Jul 10;32(1):42-56.e6
pubmed: 28697342
Lancet Oncol. 2012 Sep;13(9):916-26
pubmed: 22877848
J Comp Neurol. 2003 Dec 1;467(1):1-10
pubmed: 14574675
Bioinformatics. 2016 Dec 1;32(23):3688-3690
pubmed: 27503224
Cancer Res. 2017 Feb 15;77(4):996-1007
pubmed: 28011620
Front Oncol. 2021 Jun 21;11:694941
pubmed: 34235085
J Intern Med. 2014 Jul;276(1):25-40
pubmed: 24708237
Oncotarget. 2017 Jun 27;8(26):42214-42225
pubmed: 28178682
Cancer Cell. 2017 Mar 13;31(3):326-341
pubmed: 28292436
Science. 2014 Jun 20;344(6190):1396-401
pubmed: 24925914
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019 Sep 17;116(38):19098-19108
pubmed: 31471491
Int J Mol Sci. 2021 Dec 08;22(24):
pubmed: 34948016
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016 Dec 13;113(50):14330-14335
pubmed: 27911828
Brain Tumor Pathol. 2021 Jan;38(1):1-3
pubmed: 33398472
Oncogene. 2004 Sep 20;23(43):7267-73
pubmed: 15378086
J Clin Oncol. 2017 Jul 20;35(21):2428-2431
pubmed: 28640710
Neuro Oncol. 2018 Oct 1;20(suppl_4):iv1-iv86
pubmed: 30445539
Neurochem Res. 2008 Dec;33(12):2407-15
pubmed: 18493853
Cell. 2013 Oct 10;155(2):462-77
pubmed: 24120142
Cancer Cell. 2003 Apr;3(4):347-61
pubmed: 12726861
Cell. 2019 Aug 8;178(4):835-849.e21
pubmed: 31327527
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Dec 9;100(25):15178-83
pubmed: 14645703
Pharmacol Ther. 2015 Aug;152:63-82
pubmed: 25944528
Nature. 2008 Oct 23;455(7216):1061-8
pubmed: 18772890
Exp Neurol. 1999 Mar;156(1):71-83
pubmed: 10192778
Oncoimmunology. 2019 Aug 22;8(11):e1655360
pubmed: 31646100
Cancer Res. 2004 Oct 1;64(19):7011-21
pubmed: 15466194
J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2022 Apr 12;41(1):139
pubmed: 35414102