Dissecting cell type-specific metabolism in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

  1. Allison N Lau
  2. Zhaoqi Li
  3. Laura V Danai
  4. Anna M Westermark
  5. Alicia M Darnell
  6. Raphael Ferreira
  7. Vasilena Gocheva
  8. Sharanya Sivanand
  9. Evan C Lien
  10. Kiera M Sapp
  11. Jared R Mayers
  12. Giulia Biffi
  13. Christopher R Chin
  14. Shawn M Davidson
  15. David A Tuveson
  16. Tyler Jacks
  17. Nicholas J Matheson
  18. Omer Yilmaz
  19. Matthew G Vander Heiden  Is a corresponding author
  1. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, United States
  2. University of Massachusetts, Amherst, United States
  3. Harvard Medical School, United States
  4. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, United States
  5. University of Cambridge, United Kingdom

Abstract

Tumors are composed of many different cell types including cancer cells, fibroblasts, and immune cells. Dissecting functional metabolic differences between cell types within a mixed population can be challenging due to the rapid turnover of metabolites relative to the time needed to isolate cells. To overcome this challenge, we traced isotope-labeled nutrients into macromolecules that turn over more slowly than metabolites. This approach was used to assess differences between cancer cell and fibroblast metabolism in murine pancreatic cancer organoid-fibroblast co-cultures and tumors. Pancreatic cancer cells exhibited increased pyruvate carboxylation relative to fibroblasts, and this flux depended on both pyruvate carboxylase and malic enzyme 1 activity. Consequently, expression of both enzymes in cancer cells was necessary for organoid and tumor growth, demonstrating that dissecting the metabolism of specific cell populations within heterogeneous systems can identify dependencies that may not be evident from studying isolated cells in culture or bulk tissue.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Allison N Lau

    Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Zhaoqi Li

    Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. Laura V Danai

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Amherst, MA, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Anna M Westermark

    Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Alicia M Darnell

    Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Raphael Ferreira

    Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9881-6232
  7. Vasilena Gocheva

    Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  8. Sharanya Sivanand

    Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  9. Evan C Lien

    Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  10. Kiera M Sapp

    Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  11. Jared R Mayers

    Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8607-1787
  12. Giulia Biffi

    Cancer and Molecular Biology, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  13. Christopher R Chin

    Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  14. Shawn M Davidson

    Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  15. David A Tuveson

    Cancer and Molecular Biology, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  16. Tyler Jacks

    Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research and the Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    Tyler Jacks, T.J. is a member of the Board of Directors of Amgen and Thermo Fisher Scientific, is a co-Founder of Dragonfly Therapeutics and T2 Biosystems, and is a scientific advisor of SQZ Biotech, and Skyhawk Therapeutics..
  17. Nicholas J Matheson

    Department of Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3318-1851
  18. Omer Yilmaz

    Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  19. Matthew G Vander Heiden

    Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    For correspondence
    mvh@mit.edu
    Competing interests
    Matthew G Vander Heiden, Reviewing editor, eLife; is a scientific advisor for Agios Pharmaceuticals, Aeglea Biotherapeutics, iTeos Therapeutics, and Auron Therapeutics.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6702-4192

Funding

Damon Runyon Cancer Research Foundation (DRG-2241-15)

  • Allison N Lau

National Cancer Institute (U54CA163109)

  • Vasilena Gocheva

Human Frontiers Science Program (LT000195/2015-L)

  • Giulia Biffi

EMBO (ALTF 1203-2014)

  • Giulia Biffi

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • Tyler Jacks
  • Matthew G Vander Heiden

MRC (CSF MR/P008801/1)

  • Nicholas J Matheson

NHSBT (WPA15-02)

  • Nicholas J Matheson

NIHR Cambridge BRC

  • Nicholas J Matheson

National Institutes of Health (R01CA211184)

  • Omer Yilmaz

National Institutes of Health (R01CA034992)

  • Omer Yilmaz

Lustgarten Foundation

  • Matthew G Vander Heiden

Damon Runyon Cancer Research Foundation (DRG-2367-19)

  • Sharanya Sivanand

Stand Up To Cancer

  • Matthew G Vander Heiden

MIT Center for Precision Cancer Medicine

  • Matthew G Vander Heiden

Ludwig Center at MIT

  • Tyler Jacks
  • Matthew G Vander Heiden

Emerald Foundation

  • Matthew G Vander Heiden

National Cancer Institute (R01CA168653)

  • Matthew G Vander Heiden

National Cancer Institute (R01CA201276)

  • Matthew G Vander Heiden

National Cancer Institute (R35CA242379)

  • Matthew G Vander Heiden

National Cancer Institute (P30CA14051)

  • Matthew G Vander Heiden

Damon Runyon Cancer Research Foundation (DRG-2299-17)

  • Evan C Lien

National Cancer Institute (K99CA234221)

  • Allison N Lau

National Institutes of Health (T32GM007287)

  • Zhaoqi Li
  • Kiera M Sapp

Jane Coffin Childs Memorial Fund for Medical Research

  • Alicia M Darnell
  • Vasilena Gocheva

Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research

  • Raphael Ferreira

Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation

  • Raphael Ferreira

Barbro Osher Pro Suecia Foundation

  • Raphael Ferreira

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Ralph DeBerardinis, UT Southwestern Medical Center, United States

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All animal studies were approved by the MIT Committee on Animal Care under protocol #0119-001-22.

Version history

  1. Received: March 9, 2020
  2. Accepted: July 9, 2020
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: July 10, 2020 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: August 5, 2020 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2020, Lau et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 6,812
    views
  • 1,199
    downloads
  • 60
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Allison N Lau
  2. Zhaoqi Li
  3. Laura V Danai
  4. Anna M Westermark
  5. Alicia M Darnell
  6. Raphael Ferreira
  7. Vasilena Gocheva
  8. Sharanya Sivanand
  9. Evan C Lien
  10. Kiera M Sapp
  11. Jared R Mayers
  12. Giulia Biffi
  13. Christopher R Chin
  14. Shawn M Davidson
  15. David A Tuveson
  16. Tyler Jacks
  17. Nicholas J Matheson
  18. Omer Yilmaz
  19. Matthew G Vander Heiden
(2020)
Dissecting cell type-specific metabolism in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma
eLife 9:e56782.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.56782

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.56782

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Ting Zhang, Alisa Ambrodji ... Steven M Offer
    Research Article

    Enhancers are critical for regulating tissue-specific gene expression, and genetic variants within enhancer regions have been suggested to contribute to various cancer-related processes, including therapeutic resistance. However, the precise mechanisms remain elusive. Using a well-defined drug-gene pair, we identified an enhancer region for dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD, DPYD gene) expression that is relevant to the metabolism of the anti-cancer drug 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). Using reporter systems, CRISPR genome-edited cell models, and human liver specimens, we demonstrated in vitro and vivo that genotype status for the common germline variant (rs4294451; 27% global minor allele frequency) located within this novel enhancer controls DPYD transcription and alters resistance to 5-FU. The variant genotype increases recruitment of the transcription factor CEBPB to the enhancer and alters the level of direct interactions between the enhancer and DPYD promoter. Our data provide insight into the regulatory mechanisms controlling sensitivity and resistance to 5-FU.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Epidemiology and Global Health
    Lijun Bian, Zhimin Ma ... Guangfu Jin
    Research Article

    Background:

    Age is the most important risk factor for cancer, but aging rates are heterogeneous across individuals. We explored a new measure of aging-Phenotypic Age (PhenoAge)-in the risk prediction of site-specific and overall cancer.

    Methods:

    Using Cox regression models, we examined the association of Phenotypic Age Acceleration (PhenoAgeAccel) with cancer incidence by genetic risk group among 374,463 participants from the UK Biobank. We generated PhenoAge using chronological age and nine biomarkers, PhenoAgeAccel after subtracting the effect of chronological age by regression residual, and an incidence-weighted overall cancer polygenic risk score (CPRS) based on 20 cancer site-specific polygenic risk scores (PRSs).

    Results:

    Compared with biologically younger participants, those older had a significantly higher risk of overall cancer, with hazard ratios (HRs) of 1.22 (95% confidence interval, 1.18–1.27) in men, and 1.26 (1.22–1.31) in women, respectively. A joint effect of genetic risk and PhenoAgeAccel was observed on overall cancer risk, with HRs of 2.29 (2.10–2.51) for men and 1.94 (1.78–2.11) for women with high genetic risk and older PhenoAge compared with those with low genetic risk and younger PhenoAge. PhenoAgeAccel was negatively associated with the number of healthy lifestyle factors (Beta = –1.01 in men, p<0.001; Beta = –0.98 in women, p<0.001).

    Conclusions:

    Within and across genetic risk groups, older PhenoAge was consistently related to an increased risk of incident cancer with adjustment for chronological age and the aging process could be retarded by adherence to a healthy lifestyle.

    Funding:

    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (82230110, 82125033, 82388102 to GJ; 82273714 to MZ); and the Excellent Youth Foundation of Jiangsu Province (BK20220100 to MZ).