1. Cell Biology
  2. Cancer Biology
Download icon

Tumor microenvironment derived exosomes pleiotropically modulate cancer cell metabolism

  1. Hongyun Zhao
  2. Lifeng Yang
  3. Joelle Baddour
  4. Abhinav Achreja
  5. Vincent Bernard
  6. Tyler Moss
  7. Juan Marini
  8. Thavisha Tudawe
  9. Elena G Seviour
  10. F Anthony San Lucas
  11. Hector Alvarez
  12. Sonal Gupta
  13. Sourindra N Maiti
  14. Laurence Cooper
  15. Donna Peehl
  16. Prahlad T Ram
  17. Anirban Maitra
  18. Deepak Nagrath  Is a corresponding author
  1. Rice University, United States
  2. University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, United States
  3. University of Texas, MD Anderson, United States
  4. Baylor College of Medicine, United States
  5. Departments of Pathology and Translational Molecular Pathology, Ahmad Center for Pancreatic Cancer Research, United States
  6. Stanford University, United States
Research Article
  • Cited 399
  • Views 17,504
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2016;5:e10250 doi: 10.7554/eLife.10250

Abstract

Cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) are a major cellular component of tumor microenvironment in most solid cancers. Altered cellular metabolism is a hallmark of cancer, and much of the published literature has focused on neoplastic cell-autonomous processes for these adaptations. We demonstrate that exosomes secreted by patient-derived CAFs can strikingly reprogram the metabolic machinery following their uptake by cancer cells. We find that CAF-derived exosomes (CDEs) inhibit mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation, thereby increasing glycolysis and glutamine-dependent reductive carboxylation in cancer cells. Through 13C-labeled isotope labeling experiments we elucidate that exosomes supply amino acids to nutrient-deprived cancer cells in a mechanism similar to macropinocytosis, albeit without the previously described dependence on oncogenic-Kras signaling. Using intra-exosomal metabolomics, we provide compelling evidence that CDEs contain intact metabolites, including amino acids, lipids, and TCA-cycle intermediates that are avidly utilized by cancer cells for central carbon metabolism and promoting tumor growth under nutrient deprivation or nutrient stressed conditions.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Hongyun Zhao

    Laboratory for Systems Biology of Human Diseases, Rice University, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Lifeng Yang

    Laboratory for Systems Biology of Human Diseases, Rice University, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Joelle Baddour

    Laboratory for Systems Biology of Human Diseases, Rice University, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Abhinav Achreja

    Laboratory for Systems Biology of Human Diseases, Rice University, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Vincent Bernard

    Departments of Pathology and Translational Molecular Pathology, Ahmad Center for Pancreatic Cancer Research, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Tyler Moss

    Department of Systems Biology, University of Texas, MD Anderson, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Juan Marini

    Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Thavisha Tudawe

    Department of Chemical and Biomolecular engineering, Rice University, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Elena G Seviour

    Department of Systems Biology, University of Texas, MD Anderson, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. F Anthony San Lucas

    Departments of Pathology and Translational Molecular Pathology, Ahmad Center for Pancreatic Cancer Research, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Hector Alvarez

    Departments of Pathology and Translational Molecular Pathology, Departments of Pathology and Translational Molecular Pathology, Ahmad Center for Pancreatic Cancer Research, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Sonal Gupta

    Departments of Pathology and Translational Molecular Pathology, Ahmad Center for Pancreatic Cancer Research, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Sourindra N Maiti

    Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Laurence Cooper

    Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Donna Peehl

    Department of Urology, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Prahlad T Ram

    Department of Systems Biology, University of Texas, MD Anderson, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Anirban Maitra

    Departments of Pathology and Translational Molecular Pathology, Ahmad Center for Pancreatic Cancer Research, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Deepak Nagrath

    Laboratory for Systems Biology of Human Diseases, Rice University, Houston, United States
    For correspondence
    dn7@rice.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Chi Van Dang, University of Pennsylvania, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: July 21, 2015
  2. Accepted: February 26, 2016
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: February 27, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: April 13, 2016 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2016, Zhao 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

  • 17,504
    Page views
  • 5,942
    Downloads
  • 399
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, Scopus, PubMed Central.

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)

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

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

  1. Further reading

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Physics of Living Systems
    Jacopo Di Russo et al.
    Research Article

    Nanometer-scale properties of the extracellular matrix influence many biological processes, including cell motility. While much information is available for single-cell migration, to date, no knowledge exists on how the nanoscale presentation of extracellular matrix receptors influences collective cell migration. In wound healing, basal keratinocytes collectively migrate on a fibronectin-rich provisional basement membrane to re-epithelialize the injured skin. Among other receptors, the fibronectin receptor integrin α5β1 plays a pivotal role in this process. Using a highly specific integrin α5β1 peptidomimetic combined with nanopatterned hydrogels, we show that keratinocyte sheets regulate their migration ability at an optimal integrin α5β1 nanospacing. This efficiency relies on the effective propagation of stresses within the cell monolayer independent of substrate stiffness. For the first time, this work highlights the importance of extracellular matrix receptor nanoscale organization required for efficient tissue regeneration.

    1. Cell Biology
    Lisa M Strong et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Autophagy is a cellular process that degrades cytoplasmic cargo by engulfing it in a double-membrane vesicle, known as the autophagosome, and delivering it to the lysosome. The ATG12–5–16L1 complex is responsible for conjugating members of the ubiquitin-like ATG8 protein family to phosphatidylethanolamine in the growing autophagosomal membrane, known as the phagophore. ATG12–5–16L1 is recruited to the phagophore by a subset of the phosphatidylinositol 3-phosphate-binding seven-bladedß -propeller WIPI proteins. We determined the crystal structure of WIPI2d in complex with the WIPI2 interacting region (W2IR) of ATG16L1 comprising residues 207–230 at 1.85 Å resolution. The structure shows that the ATG16L1 W2IR adopts an alpha helical conformation and binds in an electropositive and hydrophobic groove between WIPI2 ß-propeller blades 2 and 3. Mutation of residues at the interface reduces or blocks the recruitment of ATG12–5–16 L1 and the conjugation of the ATG8 protein LC3B to synthetic membranes. Interface mutants show a decrease in starvation-induced autophagy. Comparisons across the four human WIPIs suggest that WIPI1 and 2 belong to a W2IR-binding subclass responsible for localizing ATG12–5–16 L1 and driving ATG8 lipidation, whilst WIPI3 and 4 belong to a second W34IR-binding subclass responsible for localizing ATG2, and so directing lipid supply to the nascent phagophore. The structure provides a framework for understanding the regulatory node connecting two central events in autophagy initiation, the action of the autophagic PI 3-kinase complex on the one hand and ATG8 lipidation on the other.