Abstract

Germline inactivating mutations in Folliculin (FLCN) cause Birt–Hogg–Dubé (BHD) syndrome, a rare autosomal dominant disorder predisposing to kidney tumors. FLCN is a conserved, essential gene linked to diverse cellular processes but the mechanisms by which FLCN prevents kidney cancer remain unknown. Here we show that deleting FLCN activates TFE3, upregulating its downstream E-box genes in human renal tubular epithelial cells (RPTEC/TERT1), including RRAGD and GPNMB, without modifying mTORC1 activity. Surprisingly, deletion of FLCN or its binding partners FNIP1/FNIP2 also induces interferon response genes, but independently of interferon. Mechanistically, FLCN loss promotes STAT2 recruitment to chromatin and slows cellular proliferation. Our integrated analysis identifies STAT1/2 signaling as a novel target of FLCN in renal cells and BHD tumors. STAT1/2 activation appears to counterbalance TFE3-directed hyper-proliferation and may influence the immune response. These findings shed light on unique roles of FLCN in human renal tumorigenesis and pinpoint candidate prognostic biomarkers.

Data availability

Data files of transcriptomic and proteomic data are provided as supplementary table 1. Raw data files deposited on Dryad Digital Repository (RNAseq): doi:10.5061/dryad.6djh9w0zsProteomeXchange (Mass Spec) under accession number PXD021346

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Iris E Glykofridis

    Clinical Genetics, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    For correspondence
    i.glykofridis@amsterdamumc.nl
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1829-2403
  2. Jaco C Knol

    Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Jesper A Balk

    Clinical Genetics, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Denise Westland

    Molecular Cancer Research, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Thang V Pham

    Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Sander R Piersma

    Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Sinéad M Lougheed

    Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Sepide Derakhshan

    Oncode Institute, Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Puck Veen

    Clinical Genetics, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Martin A Rooimans

    Clinical Genetics, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Saskia E van Mil

    Clinical Genetics, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Franziska Böttger

    Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Pino J Poddighe

    Clinical Genetics, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Irma van de Beek

    Clinical Genetics, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Jarno Drost

    Oncode Institute, Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Fried JT Zwartkruis

    Molecular Cancer Research, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Renee X de Menezes

    Biostatistics Unit, NKI-AvL, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Hanne EJ Meijers-Heijboer

    Clinical Genetics, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. Arjan C Houweling

    Clinical Genetics, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  20. Connie R Jimenez

    Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    For correspondence
    c.jimenez@amsterdamumc.nl
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  21. Rob MF Wolthuis

    Clinical Genetics, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    For correspondence
    r.wolthuis@amsterdamumc.nl
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3109-1588

Funding

KWF Kankerbestrijding/Alpe d'Huzes Bas Mulder Award

  • Jarno Drost

Foundation Children Cancer Free (Core Funding)

  • Sepide Derakhshan

Oncode Institute

  • Jarno Drost

Cancer Center Amsterdam (CCA2018-5-51)

  • Iris E Glykofridis
  • Rob MF Wolthuis

Cancer Center Amsterdam (Core Funding Mass Spectrometry Infrastructure)

  • Jaco C Knol
  • Thang V Pham
  • Sander R Piersma
  • Connie R Jimenez

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

Ethics

Human subjects: BHD T1 and BHD T2 tumor samples were obtained with informed consent. Both tissues are leftover material from surgery and are stored in our BHD biobank (2019.359 at AmsterdamUMC).

Copyright

© 2021, Glykofridis 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

  • 2,640
    views
  • 310
    downloads
  • 16
    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. Iris E Glykofridis
  2. Jaco C Knol
  3. Jesper A Balk
  4. Denise Westland
  5. Thang V Pham
  6. Sander R Piersma
  7. Sinéad M Lougheed
  8. Sepide Derakhshan
  9. Puck Veen
  10. Martin A Rooimans
  11. Saskia E van Mil
  12. Franziska Böttger
  13. Pino J Poddighe
  14. Irma van de Beek
  15. Jarno Drost
  16. Fried JT Zwartkruis
  17. Renee X de Menezes
  18. Hanne EJ Meijers-Heijboer
  19. Arjan C Houweling
  20. Connie R Jimenez
  21. Rob MF Wolthuis
(2021)
Loss of FLCN-FNIP1/2 induces a non-canonical interferon response in human renal tubular epithelial cells
eLife 10:e61630.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.61630

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.61630

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Immunology and Inflammation
    Simei Go, Constantinos Demetriou ... Eric O Neill
    Research Article

    The immunosuppressive microenvironment in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) prevents tumor control and strategies to restore anti-cancer immunity (i.e. by increasing CD8 T-cell activity) have had limited success. Here, we demonstrate how inducing localized physical damage using ionizing radiation (IR) unmasks the benefit of immunotherapy by increasing tissue-resident natural killer (trNK) cells that support CD8 T activity. Our data confirms that targeting mouse orthotopic PDAC tumors with IR together with CCR5 inhibition and PD1 blockade reduces E-cadherin positive tumor cells by recruiting a hypoactive NKG2D-ve NK population, phenotypically reminiscent of trNK cells, that supports CD8 T-cell involvement. We show an equivalent population in human single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) PDAC cohorts that represents immunomodulatory trNK cells that could similarly support CD8 T-cell levels in a cDC1-dependent manner. Importantly, a trNK signature associates with survival in PDAC and other solid malignancies revealing a potential beneficial role for trNK in improving adaptive anti-tumor responses and supporting CCR5 inhibitor (CCR5i)/αPD1 and IR-induced damage as a novel therapeutic approach.

    1. Cancer Biology
    Hyungtai Sim, Hyun Jung Park ... Murim Choi
    Research Article

    Clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP) allows estimation of clonal dynamics and documentation of somatic mutations in the hematopoietic system. Recent studies utilizing large cohorts of the general population and patients have revealed significant associations of CHIP burden with age and disease status, including in cancer and chronic diseases. An increasing number of cancer patients are treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), but the association of ICI response in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with CHIP burden remains to be determined. We collected blood samples from 100 metastatic NSCLC patients before and after ICI for high-depth sequencing of the CHIP panel and 63 samples for blood single-cell RNA sequencing. Whole exome sequencing was performed in an independent replication cohort of 180 patients. The impact of CHIP status on the immunotherapy response was not significant. However, metastatic lung cancer patients showed higher CHIP prevalence (44/100 for patients vs. 5/42 for controls; p = 0.01). In addition, lung squamous cell carcinoma (LUSC) patients showed increased burden of larger clones compared to lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) patients (8/43 for LUSC vs. 2/50 for LUAD; p = 0.04). Furthermore, single-cell RNA-seq analysis of the matched patients showed significant enrichment of inflammatory pathways mediated by NF-κB in myeloid clusters of the severe CHIP group. Our findings suggest minimal involvement of CHIP mutation and clonal dynamics during immunotherapy but a possible role of CHIP as an indicator of immunologic response in NSCLC patients.