Genome-wide CRISPR screening reveals genetic modifiers of mutant EGFR dependence in human NSCLC

Abstract

EGFR-mutant NSCLCs frequently respond to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). However, the responses are not durable, and the magnitude of tumor regression is variable, suggesting the existence of genetic modifiers of EGFR dependency. Here, we applied a genome-wide CRISPR-Cas9 screening to identify genetic determinants of EGFR TKI sensitivity and uncovered putative candidates. We show that knockout of RIC8A, essential for G-alpha protein activation, enhanced EGFR TKI-induced cell death. Mechanistically, we demonstrate that RIC8A is a positive regulator of YAP signaling, activation of which rescued the EGFR TKI sensitizing phenotype resulting from RIC8A knockout. We also show that knockout of ARIH2, or other components in the Cullin-5 E3 complex, conferred resistance to EGFR inhibition, in part by promoting nascent protein synthesis through METAP2. Together, these data uncover a spectrum of previously unidentified regulators of EGFR TKI sensitivity in EGFR-mutant human NSCLC, providing insights into the heterogeneity of EGFR TKI treatment responses.

Data availability

The mass spectrometry proteomics data have been deposited to the ProteomeXchange Consortium via the PRIDE partner repository with the dataset identifier PXD014198. CRISPR-Cas9 screen data were summarized in Supplementary File 1 and Supplementary File 2.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Hao Zeng

    Chemical Biology and Therapeutics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, United States
    For correspondence
    hao-1.zeng@novartis.com
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4967-9555
  2. Johnny Castillo-Cabrera

    Chemical Biology and Therapeutics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Mika Manser

    Oncology Disease Area, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Bo Lu

    Chemical Biology and Therapeutics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Zinger Yang

    Chemical Biology and Therapeutics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8543-4841
  6. Vaik Strande

    Analytical Sciences and Imaging, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Basel, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Damien Begue

    Analytical Sciences and Imaging, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Basel, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Raffaella Zamponi

    Chemical Biology and Therapeutics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Shumei Qiu

    Oncology Disease Area, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Frederic Sigoillot

    Chemical Biology and Therapeutics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Qiong Wang

    Chemical Biology and Therapeutics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Alicia Lindeman

    Chemical Biology and Therapeutics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. John S Reece-Hoyes

    Chemical Biology and Therapeutics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Carsten Russ

    Chemical Biology and Therapeutics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Debora Bonenfant

    Analytical Sciences and Imaging, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Basel, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Xiaomo Jiang

    Chemical Biology and Therapeutics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Youzhen Wang

    Oncology Disease Area, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Feng Cong

    Chemical Biology and Therapeutics, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, United States
    For correspondence
    feng.cong@novartis.com
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Funding

No external funding was received for this work.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All animal work was performed in accordance with Novartis Animal Care and Use Committee (ACUC) regulations and guidelines (reference number 120137). All animals were allowed to acclimate in the Novartis animal facility with access to food and water ad libitum for 3 days prior to manipulation. All cell lines were confirmed as mycoplasma- and rodent pathogens-negative (IMPACT VIII PCR Profile, IDEXX) before implantation.

Copyright

© 2019, Zeng 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

  • 9,328
    views
  • 1,215
    downloads
  • 36
    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. Hao Zeng
  2. Johnny Castillo-Cabrera
  3. Mika Manser
  4. Bo Lu
  5. Zinger Yang
  6. Vaik Strande
  7. Damien Begue
  8. Raffaella Zamponi
  9. Shumei Qiu
  10. Frederic Sigoillot
  11. Qiong Wang
  12. Alicia Lindeman
  13. John S Reece-Hoyes
  14. Carsten Russ
  15. Debora Bonenfant
  16. Xiaomo Jiang
  17. Youzhen Wang
  18. Feng Cong
(2019)
Genome-wide CRISPR screening reveals genetic modifiers of mutant EGFR dependence in human NSCLC
eLife 8:e50223.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.50223

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.50223

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Arman Angaji, Michel Owusu ... Johannes Berg
    Research Article

    In growing cell populations such as tumours, mutations can serve as markers that allow tracking the past evolution from current samples. The genomic analyses of bulk samples and samples from multiple regions have shed light on the evolutionary forces acting on tumours. However, little is known empirically on the spatio-temporal dynamics of tumour evolution. Here, we leverage published data from resected hepatocellular carcinomas, each with several hundred samples taken in two and three dimensions. Using spatial metrics of evolution, we find that tumour cells grow predominantly uniformly within the tumour volume instead of at the surface. We determine how mutations and cells are dispersed throughout the tumour and how cell death contributes to the overall tumour growth. Our methods shed light on the early evolution of tumours in vivo and can be applied to high-resolution data in the emerging field of spatial biology.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Susanne Tilk, Judith Frydman ... Dmitri A Petrov
    Research Article

    In asexual populations that don’t undergo recombination, such as cancer, deleterious mutations are expected to accrue readily due to genome-wide linkage between mutations. Despite this mutational load of often thousands of deleterious mutations, many tumors thrive. How tumors survive the damaging consequences of this mutational load is not well understood. Here, we investigate the functional consequences of mutational load in 10,295 human tumors by quantifying their phenotypic response through changes in gene expression. Using a generalized linear mixed model (GLMM), we find that high mutational load tumors up-regulate proteostasis machinery related to the mitigation and prevention of protein misfolding. We replicate these expression responses in cancer cell lines and show that the viability in high mutational load cancer cells is strongly dependent on complexes that degrade and refold proteins. This indicates that the upregulation of proteostasis machinery is causally important for high mutational burden tumors and uncovers new therapeutic vulnerabilities.