Neuroblastoma is one of the most common childhood cancers and is responsible for about 15% of childhood deaths due to cancer. The neuroblastoma tumors arise in cells that develop into and form part of the body’s nervous system. Many researchers have studied the genetics of this disease and have recognised common patterns. In particular, neuroblastomas can occur when a protein called MYCN is over-produced and a tumor suppressor protein called NF1 is lost.

NF1 is a large protein with several distinct parts or domains. The most studied domain of NF1 is called the GRD, and it is mainly responsible for dampening down signals that cause cells to grow, specialize and survive. However, experiments in mice have revealed that this protein uses its other domains to control the normal development of part of the nervous system.

He et al. wanted to know which domains of NF1 are important for suppressing the growth of neuroblastomas. The experiments were conducted in zebrafish that had been engineered to produce an excess of the human version of MYCN. When He et al. also deleted the gene for the zebrafish’s version of NF1, the fish quickly developed neuroblastomas. Supplying the zebrafish with just the GRD of NF1 was enough to supress the growth of the tumors. These experiments show that NF1 uses different domains and signalling pathways to regulate the normal development of part of the nervous system and to prevent formation of neuroblastoma.

These engineered zebrafish represent an animal model of neuroblastoma that mimics the human disease in many ways. This model will make it possible to test new drug combinations and to find more effective treatments for neuroblastoma patients.

Neuroblastoma, a malignant embryonic tumor of childhood, arises in neural crest-derived dopaminergic neuroblasts that generate the peripheral sympathetic nervous system (PSNS). This cancer is the most common noncranial solid tumor in childhood, accounting for 8–10% of all childhood malignancies and 15% of all cancer deaths in children (Maris and Matthay, 1999). Neuroblastoma is genetically heterogeneous, with multiple interacting genetic mutations required to generate fully transformed malignant tumors. As in many other pediatric cancers, resequencing studies have documented a very low frequency of somatic mutations in neuroblastoma (Cheung et al., 2012; Molenaar et al., 2012; Pugh et al., 2013), including ALK (~9.2% of cases), PTPN11 (~2.9%), ATRX (~2.5%) and NF1 (~1%). Amplification and overexpression of the MYCN oncogene occurs in about one-third of patients and is a principal indicator of a poor prognosis (Brodeur et al., 1984; Hansford et al., 2004). Genomic aberrations that inactivate the NF1 tumor suppressor gene, including loss-of-function mutations and deletions, as well as decreased expression levels of the gene, have been identified in 6% of primary neuroblastomas and are predictive of a poor outcome (Hölzel et al., 2010), suggesting an important role for NF1 loss in neuroblastoma tumorigenesis.

The NF1 gene encodes neurofibromin, a 2818 amino acid protein whose main functional domain is the ~330 amino acid GTPase-activating protein-related domain (GRD), which negatively regulates RAS signaling by catalyzing the hydrolysis of RAS-GTP into RAS-GDP (Nur-E-Kamal et al., 1993); thus, one consequence of NF1 loss is the aberrant activation of RAS signaling (Maertens and Cichowski, 2014). Loss of NF1 in neuroblastoma cells has been shown to mediate resistance to retinoic acid via hyperactive RAS signaling, which can be abolished by enforced expression of NF1-GRD (Hölzel et al., 2010). However, it is known that NF1 has other functions in PSNS development besides the downmodulation of RAS signaling, because Nf1 mutant mice die at birth with evidence of massive overgrowth of neural crest tissues, including the sympathetic ganglia, while overexpression of the GRD domain is unable to reverse this overgrowth (Ismat et al., 2006). In addition, studies showed identical or only modestly elevated RAS-GTP levels in NF1-deficient human neuroblastoma cells, in contrast to highly elevated RAS-GTP levels in NF1-deficient Schwannoma tumor cells (Johnson et al., 1993; The et al., 1993). These results, coupled with the numerous mutations of NF1 that cause the disease neurofibromatosis type 1, but do not appear to affect protein stability or GAP function (Abernathy et al., 1997; Fahsold et al., 2000), argue that functional domains outside the GRD may mediate important aspects of neurofibromin function in neuroblastoma tumor suppression.

In earlier work, we identified two separate duplicated nf1 zebrafish genes, nf1a and nf1b, and generated multiple loss-of-function nf1 mutant zebrafish lines affecting both of these alleles (Lee et al., 2010; Padmanabhan et al., 2009; Shin et al., 2012). Mutant larvae carrying at least one wild-type nf1a or nf1b allele are viable, fertile, and show no obvious phenotypes during early development. To gain insight into the cellular and molecular consequences of NF1 loss in neuroblastoma, we used transgenic zebrafish models of neuroblastoma that overexpresses human MYCN in the PSNS (Zhu et al., 2012).

Here, we report that loss of the nf1a orthologue, which is much more highly expressed than nf1b during early PSNS development, greatly accelerates the onset of neuroblastoma induced by MYCN overexpression, with nearly complete penetrance by 5 weeks of age in nf1-deficient zebrafish. Loss of nf1 led to the aberrant activation of RAS signaling in MYCN-induced neuroblastoma, promoting both tumor cell survival and proliferation. We also show that the very aggressive growth properties of MYCN-induced neuroblastomas with loss of nf1 are due to aberrant activation of RAS signaling, because the increased penetrance and rapid growth could be suppressed by overexpressing the intact NF1 GRD domain. These findings establish nf1-deficient zebrafish that overexpress MYCN as an ideal animal model system for investigating new strategies to improve treatment of very high-risk neuroblastomas with aberrant RAS-MAPK activation.

In vivo structure-function analysis with both the wild-type and inactive GRD domain of NF1 revealed that the GAP activity of the GRD domain is required for the tumor suppressor function of NF1 in neuroblastoma. By contrast, the wild-type GRD domain failed to rescue the hypertrophy of sympathoadrenal cells in nf1 mutant embryos, indicating that the role of NF1 in suppressing neuroblastoma tumorigenesis differs from the mechanism that prevents PSNS hyperplasia during normal development.

In this study, we use a zebrafish model to demonstrate that NF1 loss can potentiate the tumorigenic effects of MYCN-overexpression in high-risk neuroblastoma. We show that nf1 deficiency in the fish leads to aberrant activation of RAS-MAPK signaling in MYCN-induced neuroblastoma, which promotes both tumor cell survival and proliferation, leading to marked acceleration of tumor onset and increased tumor penetrance. To establish the underlying mechanism of these observations, we performed in vivo structure-function analyses to show that the tumor suppression function of NF1 is mediated through the GAP activity of its GRD domain. The same rescue construct does not suppress the PSNS overgrowth that accompanies nf1 loss during development, supporting earlier work implicating a different and still-to-be-identified activity of NF1 in the restriction of the normal growth of PSNS neuroblasts during embryogenesis.

We and others have shown that inactivation of the NF1 gene in human neuroblastoma and melanoma cell lines does not result in increased levels of the GTP-bound form of Ras compared to similar lines that express normal levels of the NF1 protein (Johnson et al., 1993; The et al., 1993). Ostensibly, this would seem inconsistent with our current findings in the zebrafish model implicating downregulation of the RAS pathway in NF1-mediated tumor suppression. However, a recent whole-genome sequencing study revealed that loss of NF1 is one of a strikingly high frequency of diverse mutations that hyperactivate the RAS-MAPK signaling pathway in relapsed neuroblastoma (Eleveld et al., 2015). Thus, our inability to demonstrate increased GTP on RAS in NF1-deficient neuroblastoma cell lines may reflect the strong activation of the RAS-MAPK signaling pathway in essentially all high-risk neuroblastomas, if not by NF1 loss then by direct mutation of RAS itself or other types of mutations. This interpretation becomes more appealing when one realizes that neuroblastomas able to grow in vitro as continuous cell lines are invariably from patients with the very highest risk of treatment failure, and often are obtained from tumor biopsies at the time of relapse. The same relationship likely applies to melanoma cell lines as well, since most of these tumors harbor activating mutations in the RAS-MAPK pathway, including BRAF V600E and NRAS Q61L/R, as well as the loss of NF1 in a subset of cases (Cancer Genome Atlas Network, 2015; Hodis et al., 2012).

Studies of neural crest and PSNS development in Nf1 null mice were the first to implicate a GAP-independent activity of Nf1 in restricting the growth of sympathoadrenal cells, as the GRD domain was not able to rescue the overgrowth of sympathetic neuroblasts in the adrenal medulla (Ismat et al., 2006). Our results support those studies, in that the GRD domain expressed in the same zebrafish line that suppressed neuroblastoma pathogenesis failed to suppress sympathetic neuroblast overgrowth in nf1-deficient zebrafish embryos. Thus, GAP-independent activities of NF1 appear to restrict the growth of normal neural crest-derived tissues during development, as the PSNS overgrowth phenotype was not rescued by the same level of GRD restoration that suppressed the accelerated onset of MYCN-driven neuroblastoma (Figures 1 and 7).

The recent discovery that mutations leading to activated RAS-MAPK signaling occur in nearly 80% of relapsed neuroblastomas has clear implications for the selection of targeted therapy for this tumor (Eleveld et al., 2015). Indeed, it suggests that MEK inhibitors and other agents targeting the RAS-MAPK pathway might suppress the outgrowth of resistant clones and therefore should be investigated as part of the initial combination therapy for high-risk neuroblastoma. Our zebrafish model of MYCN-driven neuroblastoma with nf1 loss is ideally suited for the rapid in vivo analysis of the effects of candidate small-molecule inhibitors selected for this purpose. Neuroblastomas can be detected in most MYCN-transgenic fish with nf1a loss by 3 weeks of age, when the fish are very small, making it feasible to test the effectiveness of many drugs and drug combinations for their ability to kill primary neuroblastoma cells in vivo. This advantage of the model is readily apparent in our demonstration of marked antitumor synergy between the MEK inhibitor trametinib and the retinoid isoretinoin in MYCN-overexpressing fish with loss of nf1 (Figure 8). Studies using our model should be a valuable asset in devising new therapeutic strategies for neuroblastomas with mutations affecting the RAS-MAPK pathway, which appear to be a major cause of relapse in children with this devastating tumor.

1. 1. Abernathy CR
   2. Rasmussen SA
   3. Stalker HJ
   4. Zori R
   5. Driscoll DJ
   6. Williams CA
   7. Kousseff BG
   8. Wallace MR

   (1997) NF1 mutation analysis using a combined heteroduplex/sscp approach

   Human Mutation 9:, 548–,554.

   https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-1004(1997)9:6<548::AID-HUMU8>3.0.CO;2-Y

   • Google Scholar
2. 1. Brannan CI
   2. Perkins AS
   3. Vogel KS
   4. Ratner N
   5. Nordlund ML
   6. Reid SW
   7. Buchberg AM
   8. Jenkins NA
   9. Parada LF
   10. Copeland NG

   (1994) Targeted disruption of the neurofibromatosis type-1 gene leads to developmental abnormalities in heart and various neural crest-derived tissues

   Genes & Development 8:1019–1029.

   https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.8.9.1019

   • Google Scholar
3. 1. Brodeur GM
   2. Seeger RC
   3. Schwab M
   4. Varmus HE
   5. Bishop JM

   (1984) Amplification of n-myc in untreated human neuroblastomas correlates with advanced disease stage

   Science 224:1121–1124.

   https://doi.org/10.1126/science.6719137

   • Google Scholar
4. 1. Cancer Genome Atlas Network

   (2015) Genomic classification of cutaneous melanoma

   Cell 161:1681–1696.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2015.05.044

   • Google Scholar
5. 1. Cheung NK
   2. Zhang J
   3. Lu C
   4. Parker M
   5. Bahrami A
   6. Tickoo SK
   7. Heguy A
   8. Pappo AS
   9. Federico S
   10. Dalton J
   11. Cheung IY
   12. Ding L
   13. Fulton R
   14. Wang J
   15. Chen X
   16. Becksfort J
   17. Wu J
   18. Billups CA
   19. Ellison D
   20. Mardis ER
   21. Wilson RK
   22. Downing JR
   23. Dyer MA
   24. St Jude Children's Research Hospital–Washington University Pediatric Cancer Genome Project

   (2012) Association of age at diagnosis and genetic mutations in patients with neuroblastoma

   JAMA 307:1062–1071.

   https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2012.228

   • Google Scholar
6. 1. Eleveld TF
   2. Oldridge DA
   3. Bernard V
   4. Koster J
   5. Daage LC
   6. Diskin SJ
   7. Schild L
   8. Bentahar NB
   9. Bellini A
   10. Chicard M
   11. Lapouble E
   12. Combaret V
   13. Legoix-Né P
   14. Michon J
   15. Pugh TJ
   16. Hart LS
   17. Rader J
   18. Attiyeh EF
   19. Wei JS
   20. Zhang S
   21. Naranjo A
   22. Gastier-Foster JM
   23. Hogarty MD
   24. Asgharzadeh S
   25. Smith MA
   26. Guidry Auvil JM
   27. Watkins TB
   28. Zwijnenburg DA
   29. Ebus ME
   30. van Sluis P
   31. Hakkert A
   32. van Wezel E
   33. van der Schoot CE
   34. Westerhout EM
   35. Schulte JH
   36. Tytgat GA
   37. Dolman ME
   38. Janoueix-Lerosey I
   39. Gerhard DS
   40. Caron HN
   41. Delattre O
   42. Khan J
   43. Versteeg R
   44. Schleiermacher G
   45. Molenaar JJ
   46. Maris JM

   (2015) Relapsed neuroblastomas show frequent RAS-MAPK pathway mutations

   Nature Genetics 47:864–871.

   https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.3333

   • Google Scholar
7. 1. Fahsold R
   2. Hoffmeyer S
   3. Mischung C
   4. Gille C
   5. Ehlers C
   6. Kücükceylan N
   7. Abdel-Nour M
   8. Gewies A
   9. Peters H
   10. Kaufmann D
   11. Buske A
   12. Tinschert S
   13. Nürnberg P

   (2000) Minor lesion mutational spectrum of the entire NF1 gene does not explain its high mutability but points to a functional domain upstream of the gap-related domain

   American Journal of Human Genetics 66:790–818.

   https://doi.org/10.1086/302809

   • Google Scholar
8. 1. Gitler AD
   2. Zhu Y
   3. Ismat FA
   4. Lu MM
   5. Yamauchi Y
   6. Parada LF
   7. Epstein JA

   (2003) Nf1 has an essential role in endothelial cells

   Nature Genetics 33:75–79.

   https://doi.org/10.1038/ng1059

   • Google Scholar
9. 1. Hansford LM
   2. Thomas WD
   3. Keating JM
   4. Burkhart CA
   5. Peaston AE
   6. Norris MD
   7. Haber M
   8. Armati PJ
   9. Weiss WA
   10. Marshall GM

   (2004) Mechanisms of embryonal tumor initiation: Distinct roles for mycn expression and MYCN amplification

   Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101:12664–12669.

   https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0401083101

   • Google Scholar
10. 1. Hodis E
    2. Watson IR
    3. Kryukov GV
    4. Arold ST
    5. Imielinski M
    6. Theurillat JP
    7. Nickerson E
    8. Auclair D
    9. Li L
    10. Place C
    11. Dicara D
    12. Ramos AH
    13. Lawrence MS
    14. Cibulskis K
    15. Sivachenko A
    16. Voet D
    17. Saksena G
    18. Stransky N
    19. Onofrio RC
    20. Winckler W
    21. Ardlie K
    22. Wagle N
    23. Wargo J
    24. Chong K
    25. Morton DL
    26. Stemke-Hale K
    27. Chen G
    28. Noble M
    29. Meyerson M
    30. Ladbury JE
    31. Davies MA
    32. Gershenwald JE
    33. Wagner SN
    34. Hoon DS
    35. Schadendorf D
    36. Lander ES
    37. Gabriel SB
    38. Getz G
    39. Garraway LA
    40. Chin L

    (2012) A landscape of driver mutations in melanoma

    Cell 150:251–263.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2012.06.024

    • Google Scholar
11. 1. Hölzel M
    2. Huang S
    3. Koster J
    4. Ora I
    5. Lakeman A
    6. Caron H
    7. Nijkamp W
    8. Xie J
    9. Callens T
    10. Asgharzadeh S
    11. Seeger RC
    12. Messiaen L
    13. Versteeg R
    14. Bernards R

    (2010) NF1 is a tumor suppressor in neuroblastoma that determines retinoic acid response and disease outcome

    Cell 142:218–229.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2010.06.004

    • Google Scholar
12. 1. Ismat FA
    2. Xu J
    3. Lu MM
    4. Epstein JA

    (2006) The neurofibromin gap-related domain rescues endothelial but not neural crest development in nf1 mice

    The Journal of Clinical Investigation 116:2378–2384.

    https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI28341

    • Google Scholar
13. 1. Johnson MR
    2. Look AT
    3. DeClue JE
    4. Valentine MB
    5. Lowy DR

    (1993) Inactivation of the NF1 gene in human melanoma and neuroblastoma cell lines without impaired regulation of gtp.ras

    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 90:5539–5543.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.90.12.5539

    • Google Scholar
14. 1. Keutmann HT
    2. Ratanabanangkoon K
    3. Pierce MW
    4. Kitzmann K
    5. Ryan RJ

    (1983)

    Phosphorylation of human choriogonadotropin. stoichiometry and sites of phosphate incorporation

    The Journal of Biological Chemistry 258:14521–14526.

    • Google Scholar
15. 1. Langenau DM
    2. Keefe MD
    3. Storer NY
    4. Jette CA
    5. Smith AC
    6. Ceol CJ
    7. Bourque C
    8. Look AT
    9. Zon LI

    (2008) Co-injection strategies to modify radiation sensitivity and tumor initiation in transgenic zebrafish

    Oncogene 27:4242–4248.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/onc.2008.56

    • Google Scholar
16. 1. Lee JS
    2. Padmanabhan A
    3. Shin J
    4. Zhu S
    5. Guo F
    6. Kanki JP
    7. Epstein JA
    8. Look AT
    9. Guo F
    10. Guo F
    11. Guo F

    (2010) Oligodendrocyte progenitor cell numbers and migration are regulated by the zebrafish orthologs of the NF1 tumor suppressor gene

    Human Molecular Genetics 19:4643–4653.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddq395

    • Google Scholar
17. 1. Maertens O
    2. Cichowski K

    (2014) An expanding role for RAS gtpase activating proteins (RAS gaps) in cancer

    Advances in Biological Regulation 55:1–14.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbior.2014.04.002

    • Google Scholar
18. 1. Maris JM
    2. Matthay KK

    (1999)

    Molecular biology of neuroblastoma

    Journal of Clinical Oncology 17:2264.

    • Google Scholar
19. 1. Matthay KK
    2. Reynolds CP
    3. Seeger RC
    4. Shimada H
    5. Adkins ES
    6. Haas-Kogan D
    7. Gerbing RB
    8. London WB
    9. Villablanca JG

    (2009) Long-term results for children with high-risk neuroblastoma treated on a randomized trial of myeloablative therapy followed by 13-cis-retinoic acid: A children's oncology group study

    Journal of Clinical Oncology  27:1007–1013.

    https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2007.13.8925

    • Google Scholar
20. 1. Molenaar JJ
    2. Koster J
    3. Zwijnenburg DA
    4. van Sluis P
    5. Valentijn LJ
    6. van der Ploeg I
    7. Hamdi M
    8. van Nes J
    9. Westerman BA
    10. van Arkel J
    11. Ebus ME
    12. Haneveld F
    13. Lakeman A
    14. Schild L
    15. Molenaar P
    16. Stroeken P
    17. van Noesel MM
    18. Ora I
    19. Santo EE
    20. Caron HN
    21. Westerhout EM
    22. Versteeg R

    (2012) Sequencing of neuroblastoma identifies chromothripsis and defects in neuritogenesis genes

    Nature 483:589–593.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10910

    • Google Scholar
21. 1. Nur-E-Kamal MS
    2. Varga M
    3. Maruta H

    (1993)

    The gtpase-activating NF1 fragment of 91 amino acids reverses v-ha-ras-induced malignant phenotype

    The Journal of Biological Chemistry 268:22331–22337.

    • Google Scholar
22. 1. Padmanabhan A
    2. Lee J-S
    3. Ismat FA
    4. Lu MM
    5. Lawson ND
    6. Kanki JP
    7. Look AT
    8. Epstein JA

    (2009) Cardiac and vascular functions of the zebrafish orthologues of the type I neurofibromatosis gene NFI

    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States Of America 106:22305–22310.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0901932106

    • Google Scholar
23. 1. Park JR
    2. Villablanca JG
    3. London WB
    4. Gerbing RB
    5. Haas-Kogan D
    6. Adkins ES
    7. Attiyeh EF
    8. Maris JM
    9. Seeger RC
    10. Reynolds CP
    11. Matthay KK
    12. Children's Oncology Group

    (2009) Outcome of high-risk stage 3 neuroblastoma with myeloablative therapy and 13-cis-retinoic acid: A report from the children's oncology group

    Pediatric Blood & Cancer 52:44–50.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/pbc.21784

    • Google Scholar
24. 1. Pugh TJ
    2. Morozova O
    3. Attiyeh EF
    4. Asgharzadeh S
    5. Wei JS
    6. Auclair D
    7. Carter SL
    8. Cibulskis K
    9. Hanna M
    10. Kiezun A
    11. Kim J
    12. Lawrence MS
    13. Lichenstein L
    14. McKenna A
    15. Pedamallu CS
    16. Ramos AH
    17. Shefler E
    18. Sivachenko A
    19. Sougnez C
    20. Stewart C
    21. Ally A
    22. Birol I
    23. Chiu R
    24. Corbett RD
    25. Hirst M
    26. Jackman SD
    27. Kamoh B
    28. Khodabakshi AH
    29. Krzywinski M
    30. Lo A
    31. Moore RA
    32. Mungall KL
    33. Qian J
    34. Tam A
    35. Thiessen N
    36. Zhao Y
    37. Cole KA
    38. Diamond M
    39. Diskin SJ
    40. Mosse YP
    41. Wood AC
    42. Ji L
    43. Sposto R
    44. Badgett T
    45. London WB
    46. Moyer Y
    47. Gastier-Foster JM
    48. Smith MA
    49. Guidry Auvil JM
    50. Gerhard DS
    51. Hogarty MD
    52. Jones SJ
    53. Lander ES
    54. Gabriel SB
    55. Getz G
    56. Seeger RC
    57. Khan J
    58. Marra MA
    59. Meyerson M
    60. Maris JM

    (2013) The genetic landscape of high-risk neuroblastoma

    Nature Genetics 45:279–284.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.2529

    • Google Scholar
25. 1. Ruifrok AC
    2. Johnston DA
    3. Johnston DA

    (2001)

    Quantification of histochemical staining by color deconvolution

    Analytical and Quantitative Cytology and Histology 23:291–299.

    • Google Scholar
26. 1. Shin J
    2. Padmanabhan A
    3. de Groh ED
    4. Lee JS
    5. Haidar S
    6. Dahlberg S
    7. Guo F
    8. He S
    9. Wolman MA
    10. Granato M
    11. Lawson ND
    12. Wolfe SA
    13. Kim SH
    14. Solnica-Krezel L
    15. Kanki JP
    16. Ligon KL
    17. Epstein JA
    18. Look AT

    (2012) Zebrafish neurofibromatosis type 1 genes have redundant functions in tumorigenesis and embryonic development

    Disease Models & Mechanisms 5:881–894.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/dmm.009779

    • Google Scholar
27. 1. The I
    2. Murthy AE
    3. Hannigan GE
    4. Jacoby LB
    5. Menon AG
    6. Gusella JF
    7. Bernards A

    (1993) Neurofibromatosis type 1 gene mutations in neuroblastoma

    Nature Genetics 3:62–66.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ng0193-62

    • Google Scholar
28. 1. Weiss WA
    2. Aldape K
    3. Mohapatra G
    4. Feuerstein BG
    5. Bishop JM

    (1997) Targeted expression of MYCN causes neuroblastoma in transgenic mice

    The EMBO Journal 16:2985–2995.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/emboj/16.11.2985

    • Google Scholar
29. 1. Zhu S
    2. Lee JS
    3. Guo F
    4. Shin J
    5. Perez-Atayde AR
    6. Kutok JL
    7. Rodig SJ
    8. Neuberg DS
    9. Helman D
    10. Feng H
    11. Stewart RA
    12. Wang W
    13. George RE
    14. Kanki JP
    15. Look AT

    (2012) Activated ALK collaborates with MYCN in neuroblastoma pathogenesis

    Cancer Cell 21:362–373.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccr.2012.02.010

    • Google Scholar

Author details

1. Shuning He

   Department of Pediatric Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States

   Contribution

   SH, Conception and design, Acquisition of data, Analysis and interpretation of data, Drafting or revising the article

   For correspondence

   shuning_he@dfci.harvard.edu

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

2. Marc R Mansour

   1. Department of Pediatric Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
   2. Department of Hematology, UCL Cancer Institute, University College London, London, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   MRM, Conception and design, Analysis and interpretation of data, Drafting or revising the article

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

3. Mark W Zimmerman

   Department of Pediatric Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States

   Contribution

   MWZ, Acquisition of data, Analysis and interpretation of data

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

4. Dong Hyuk Ki

   Department of Pediatric Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States

   Contribution

   DHK, Acquisition of data, Analysis and interpretation of data

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

5. Hillary M Layden

   Department of Pediatric Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States

   Contribution

   HML, Acquisition of data, Analysis and interpretation of data

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

6. Koshi Akahane

   Department of Pediatric Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States

   Contribution

   KA, Acquisition of data, Analysis and interpretation of data

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

7. Evisa Gjini

   Center for Immuno-Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States

   Contribution

   EG, Acquisition of data, Analysis and interpretation of data

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

8. Eric D de Groh

   1. Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States
   2. Penn Cardiovascular Institute, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States
   3. Institute for Regenerative Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States

   Contribution

   EDdG, Acquisition of data, Contributed unpublished essential data or reagents

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

9. Antonio R Perez-Atayde

   Department of Pathology, Children's Hospital Boston, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States

   Contribution

   ARP-A, Analysis and interpretation of data, Drafting or revising the article

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

10. Shizhen Zhu

    1. Department of Pediatric Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    2. Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, United States
    3. Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, United States

    Contribution

    SZ, Analysis and interpretation of data, Contributed unpublished essential data or reagents

    Competing interests

    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

11. Jonathan A Epstein

    1. Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States
    2. Penn Cardiovascular Institute, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States
    3. Institute for Regenerative Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States

    Contribution

    JAE, Conception and design, Contributed unpublished essential data or reagents

    Competing interests

    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

12. A Thomas Look

    Department of Pediatric Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States

    Contribution

    ATL, Conception and design, Analysis and interpretation of data, Drafting or revising the article

    For correspondence

    thomas_look@dfci.harvard.edu

    Competing interests

    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

    "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7851-8617

• 2,485

  views

• 579

  downloads

• 28

  citations

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