Squamous trans-differentiation of pancreatic cancer cells promotes stromal inflammation

Abstract

A highly aggressive subset of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas undergo trans-differentiation into the squamous lineage during disease progression. Here, we investigated whether squamous trans-differentiation of human and mouse pancreatic cancer cells can influence the phenotype of non-neoplastic cells in the tumor microenvironment. Conditioned media experiments revealed that squamous pancreatic cancer cells secrete factors that recruit neutrophils and convert pancreatic stellate cells into cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) that express inflammatory cytokines at high levels. We use gain- and loss-of-function approaches to show that squamous-subtype pancreatic tumor models become enriched with neutrophils and inflammatory CAFs in a p63-dependent manner. These effects occur, at least in part, through p63-mediated activation of enhancers at pro-inflammatory cytokine loci, which includes IL1A and CXCL1 as key targets. Taken together, our findings reveal enhanced tissue inflammation as a consequence of squamous trans-differentiation in pancreatic cancer, thus highlighting an instructive role of tumor cell lineage in reprogramming the stromal microenvironment.

Data availability

The RNA-seq and ChIP-seq data in this study is available in the Gene Expression Omnibus database https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/ with accession number GSE140484.

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Tim DD Somerville

    Cancer and Molecular Biology, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Giulia Biffi

    Cancer and Molecular Biology, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. Juliane Daßler-Plenker

    Cancer and Molecular Biology, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Stella K Hur

    Cancer and Molecular Biology, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Xue-Yan He

    Cancer and Molecular Biology, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Krysten E Vance

    Eppley Institute for Research in Cancer and Allied Diseases, University of Nebraska, Omaha, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Koji Miyabayashi

    Cancer and Molecular Biology, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  8. Yali Xu

    Cancer and Molecular Biology, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  9. Diogo Maia-Silva

    Cancer and Molecular Biology, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  10. Olaf Klingbeil

    Cancer and Molecular Biology, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  11. Osama E Demerdash

    Cancer and Molecular Biology, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  12. Jonathan B Preall

    Cancer and Molecular Biology, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  13. Michael A Hollingsworth

    Eppley Institute, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  14. Mikala Egeblad

    Cancer and Molecular Biology, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, 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
    David A Tuveson, an advisor to Surface, Leap, and Cygnal and has stock ownership in Surface and Leap.
  16. Christopher R Vakoc

    Cancer and Molecular Biology, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    For correspondence
    vakoc@cshl.edu
    Competing interests
    Christopher R Vakoc, has received funding from Boehringer-Ingelheim and is an advisor to KSQ Therapeutics..
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1158-7180

Funding

New York State Department of Health (C150158)

  • Tim DD Somerville

National Cancer Institute (U10CA180944)

  • David A Tuveson

National Cancer Institute (U01CA210240)

  • David A Tuveson

National Cancer Institute (U01CA224013)

  • David A Tuveson

National Cancer Institute (1R01CA188134)

  • David A Tuveson

National Cancer Institute (1R01CA190092)

  • David A Tuveson

Pershing Square Foundation

  • Christopher R Vakoc

National Cancer Institute (5P01CA013106-Project 4)

  • Christopher R Vakoc

National Cancer Institute (CA229699)

  • Christopher R Vakoc

Pancreatic Cancer Action Network (16-20-25-VAKO)

  • Christopher R Vakoc

Lustgarten Foundation

  • David A Tuveson

National Cancer Institute (5P30CA45508)

  • David A Tuveson

National Cancer Institute (5P50CA101955)

  • David A Tuveson

National Cancer Institute (P20CA192996)

  • David A Tuveson

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All animal procedures and studies were approved by the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC protocol number 19-16-8).

Copyright

© 2020, Somerville 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

  • 6,946
    views
  • 989
    downloads
  • 67
    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. Tim DD Somerville
  2. Giulia Biffi
  3. Juliane Daßler-Plenker
  4. Stella K Hur
  5. Xue-Yan He
  6. Krysten E Vance
  7. Koji Miyabayashi
  8. Yali Xu
  9. Diogo Maia-Silva
  10. Olaf Klingbeil
  11. Osama E Demerdash
  12. Jonathan B Preall
  13. Michael A Hollingsworth
  14. Mikala Egeblad
  15. David A Tuveson
  16. Christopher R Vakoc
(2020)
Squamous trans-differentiation of pancreatic cancer cells promotes stromal inflammation
eLife 9:e53381.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.53381

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.53381

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    Bruno Bockorny, Lakshmi Muthuswamy ... Senthil K Muthuswamy
    Tools and Resources

    Pancreatic cancer has the worst prognosis of all common tumors. Earlier cancer diagnosis could increase survival rates and better assessment of metastatic disease could improve patient care. As such, there is an urgent need to develop biomarkers to diagnose this deadly malignancy. Analyzing circulating extracellular vesicles (cEVs) using ‘liquid biopsies’ offers an attractive approach to diagnose and monitor disease status. However, it is important to differentiate EV-associated proteins enriched in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) from those with benign pancreatic diseases such as chronic pancreatitis and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN). To meet this need, we combined the novel EVtrap method for highly efficient isolation of EVs from plasma and conducted proteomics analysis of samples from 124 individuals, including patients with PDAC, benign pancreatic diseases and controls. On average, 912 EV proteins were identified per 100 µL of plasma. EVs containing high levels of PDCD6IP, SERPINA12, and RUVBL2 were associated with PDAC compared to the benign diseases in both discovery and validation cohorts. EVs with PSMB4, RUVBL2, and ANKAR were associated with metastasis, and those with CRP, RALB, and CD55 correlated with poor clinical prognosis. Finally, we validated a seven EV protein PDAC signature against a background of benign pancreatic diseases that yielded an 89% prediction accuracy for the diagnosis of PDAC. To our knowledge, our study represents the largest proteomics profiling of circulating EVs ever conducted in pancreatic cancer and provides a valuable open-source atlas to the scientific community with a comprehensive catalogue of novel cEVs that may assist in the development of biomarkers and improve the outcomes of patients with PDAC.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Lingjie Zhang, Tong Deng ... Hai-Jun Wen
    Research Article

    A central goal of cancer genomics is to identify, in each patient, all the cancer-driving mutations. Among them, point mutations are referred to as cancer-driving nucleotides (CDNs), which recur in cancers. The companion study shows that the probability of i recurrent hits in n patients would decrease exponentially with i; hence, any mutation with i ≥ 3 hits in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database is a high-probability CDN. This study characterizes the 50–150 CDNs identifiable for each cancer type of TCGA (while anticipating 10 times more undiscovered ones) as follows: (i) CDNs tend to code for amino acids of divergent chemical properties. (ii) At the genic level, far more CDNs (more than fivefold) fall on noncanonical than canonical cancer-driving genes (CDGs). Most undiscovered CDNs are expected to be on unknown CDGs. (iii) CDNs tend to be more widely shared among cancer types than canonical CDGs, mainly because of the higher resolution at the nucleotide than the whole-gene level. (iv) Most important, among the 50–100 coding region mutations carried by a cancer patient, 5–8 CDNs are expected but only 0–2 CDNs have been identified at present. This low level of identification has hampered functional test and gene-targeted therapy. We show that, by expanding the sample size to 105, most CDNs can be identified. Full CDN identification will then facilitate the design of patient-specific targeting against multiple CDN-harboring genes.