Synthetic lethality between the cohesin subunits STAG1 and STAG2 in diverse cancer contexts

  1. Petra van der Lelij
  2. Simone Lieb
  3. Julian Jude
  4. Gordana Wutz
  5. Catarina P Santos
  6. Katrina Falkenberg
  7. Andreas Schlattl
  8. Jozef Ban
  9. Raphaela Schwentner
  10. Thomas Hoffmann
  11. Heinrich Kovar
  12. Francisco X Real
  13. Todd Waldman
  14. Mark A Pearson
  15. Norbert Kraut
  16. Jan-Michael Peters
  17. Johannes Zuber
  18. Mark Petronczki  Is a corresponding author
  1. Research Institute of Molecular Pathology, Austria
  2. Boehringer Ingelheim RCV, Austria
  3. Research Institute of Molecular Pathology, Austria
  4. Spanish National Cancer Research Centre, Spain
  5. Children's Cancer Research Institute, Austria
  6. Georgetown University School of Medicine, United States

Abstract

Recent genome analyses have identified recurrent mutations in the cohesin complex in a wide range of human cancers. Here we demonstrate that the most frequently mutated subunit of the cohesin complex, STAG2, displays a strong synthetic lethal interaction with its paralog STAG1. Mechanistically, STAG1 loss abrogates sister chromatid cohesion in STAG2 mutated but not in wild-type cells leading to mitotic catastrophe, defective cell division and apoptosis. STAG1 inactivation inhibits the proliferation of STAG2 mutated but not wild-type bladder cancer and Ewing sarcoma cell lines. Restoration of STAG2 expression in a mutated bladder cancer model alleviates the dependency on STAG1. Thus, STAG1 and STAG2 support sister chromatid cohesion to redundantly ensure cell survival. STAG1 represents a vulnerability of cancer cells carrying mutations in the major emerging tumor suppressor STAG2 across different cancer contexts. Exploiting synthetic lethal interactions to target recurrent cohesin mutations in cancer, e.g. by inhibiting STAG1, holds the promise for the development of selective therapeutics.

Data availability

The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Petra van der Lelij

    Research Institute of Molecular Pathology, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Simone Lieb

    Boehringer Ingelheim RCV, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    Simone Lieb, Simone Lieb is a full-time employee of Boehringer Ingelheim RCV..
  3. Julian Jude

    Research Institute of Molecular Pathology, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9091-9867
  4. Gordana Wutz

    Research Institute of Molecular Pathology, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Catarina P Santos

    Spanish National Cancer Research Centre, Madrid, Spain
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Katrina Falkenberg

    Research Institute of Molecular Pathology, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Andreas Schlattl

    Boehringer Ingelheim RCV, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    Andreas Schlattl, Andreas Schlattl is a full-time employee of Boehringer Ingelheim RCV..
  8. Jozef Ban

    Children's Cancer Research Institute, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  9. Raphaela Schwentner

    Children's Cancer Research Institute, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6839-0322
  10. Thomas Hoffmann

    Research Institute of Molecular Pathology, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  11. Heinrich Kovar

    Children's Cancer Research Institute, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  12. Francisco X Real

    Spanish National Cancer Research Centre, Madrid, Spain
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  13. Todd Waldman

    Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer center, Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  14. Mark A Pearson

    Boehringer Ingelheim RCV, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    Mark A Pearson, Mark Pearson is a full-time employee of Boehringer Ingelheim RCV..
  15. Norbert Kraut

    Boehringer Ingelheim RCV, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    Norbert Kraut, Norbert Kraut is a full-time employee of Boehringer Ingelheim RCV..
  16. Jan-Michael Peters

    Research Institute of Molecular Pathology, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  17. Johannes Zuber

    Research Institute of Molecular Pathology, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8810-6835
  18. Mark Petronczki

    Boehringer Ingelheim RCV, Vienna, Austria
    For correspondence
    mark_paul.petronczki@boehringer-ingelheim.com
    Competing interests
    Mark Petronczki, Full-time employee of Boehringer Ingelheim RCV.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0139-5692

Funding

Austrian Science Fund (SFB-F34)

  • Jan-Michael Peters

National Institutes of Health (R01CA169345)

  • Todd Waldman

Innovation Grant from Alex's Lemonade Stand

  • Todd Waldman

Boehringer Ingelheim RCV

  • Simone Lieb
  • Andreas Schlattl
  • Mark A Pearson
  • Norbert Kraut
  • Mark Petronczki

Austrian Science Fund (Wittgenstein award Z196-B20)

  • Jan-Michael Peters

Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG-834223)

  • Jan-Michael Peters

Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG-852936)

  • Jan-Michael Peters

Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG-840283)

  • Jan-Michael Peters

European Research Council (ERC no. 336860)

  • Johannes Zuber

Austrian Science Fund (SFB grant F4710)

  • Johannes Zuber

Austrian Science Fund (ERA-Net grant I 1225-B19)

  • Heinrich Kovar

Fundación Científica Asociación Española Contra el Cancer

  • Francisco X Real

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Andrea Musacchio, Max Planck Institute of Molecular Physiology, Germany

Version history

  1. Received: March 19, 2017
  2. Accepted: July 3, 2017
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: July 10, 2017 (version 1)
  4. Accepted Manuscript updated: July 13, 2017 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record published: July 27, 2017 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2017, van der Lelij 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

  • 6,500
    Page views
  • 1,123
    Downloads
  • 68
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Scopus, Crossref, 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)

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. Petra van der Lelij
  2. Simone Lieb
  3. Julian Jude
  4. Gordana Wutz
  5. Catarina P Santos
  6. Katrina Falkenberg
  7. Andreas Schlattl
  8. Jozef Ban
  9. Raphaela Schwentner
  10. Thomas Hoffmann
  11. Heinrich Kovar
  12. Francisco X Real
  13. Todd Waldman
  14. Mark A Pearson
  15. Norbert Kraut
  16. Jan-Michael Peters
  17. Johannes Zuber
  18. Mark Petronczki
(2017)
Synthetic lethality between the cohesin subunits STAG1 and STAG2 in diverse cancer contexts
eLife 6:e26980.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.26980

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.26980

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    Wanyoung Lim, Inwoo Hwang ... Sungsu Park
    Research Article

    Chemoresistance is a major cause of treatment failure in many cancers. However, the life cycle of cancer cells as they respond to and survive environmental and therapeutic stress is understudied. In this study, we utilized a microfluidic device to induce the development of doxorubicin-resistant (DOXR) cells from triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) cells within 11 days by generating gradients of DOX and medium. In vivo chemoresistant xenograft models, an unbiased genome-wide transcriptome analysis, and a patient data/tissue analysis all showed that chemoresistance arose from failed epigenetic control of the nuclear protein-1 (NUPR1)/histone deacetylase 11 (HDAC11) axis, and high NUPR1 expression correlated with poor clinical outcomes. These results suggest that the chip can rapidly induce resistant cells that increase tumor heterogeneity and chemoresistance, highlighting the need for further studies on the epigenetic control of the NUPR1/HDAC11 axis in TNBC.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Computational and Systems Biology
    Bingrui Li, Fernanda G Kugeratski, Raghu Kalluri
    Research Article

    Non-invasive early cancer diagnosis remains challenging due to the low sensitivity and specificity of current diagnostic approaches. Exosomes are membrane-bound nanovesicles secreted by all cells that contain DNA, RNA, and proteins that are representative of the parent cells. This property, along with the abundance of exosomes in biological fluids makes them compelling candidates as biomarkers. However, a rapid and flexible exosome-based diagnostic method to distinguish human cancers across cancer types in diverse biological fluids is yet to be defined. Here, we describe a novel machine learning-based computational method to distinguish cancers using a panel of proteins associated with exosomes. Employing datasets of exosome proteins from human cell lines, tissue, plasma, serum, and urine samples from a variety of cancers, we identify Clathrin Heavy Chain (CLTC), Ezrin, (EZR), Talin-1 (TLN1), Adenylyl cyclase-associated protein 1 (CAP1), and Moesin (MSN) as highly abundant universal biomarkers for exosomes and define three panels of pan-cancer exosome proteins that distinguish cancer exosomes from other exosomes and aid in classifying cancer subtypes employing random forest models. All the models using proteins from plasma, serum, or urine-derived exosomes yield AUROC scores higher than 0.91 and demonstrate superior performance compared to Support Vector Machine, K Nearest Neighbor Classifier and Gaussian Naive Bayes. This study provides a reliable protein biomarker signature associated with cancer exosomes with scalable machine learning capability for a sensitive and specific non-invasive method of cancer diagnosis.