Quantitative analysis of tumour spheroid structure

  1. Alexander P Browning
  2. Jesse A Sharp
  3. Ryan J Murphy
  4. Gency Gunasingh
  5. Brodie Lawson
  6. Kevin Burrage
  7. Nikolas K Haass
  8. Matthew Simpson  Is a corresponding author
  1. Queensland University of Technology, Australia
  2. University of Queensland, Australia

Abstract

Tumour spheroids are common in vitro experimental models of avascular tumour growth. Compared with traditional two-dimensional culture, tumour spheroids more closely mimic the avascular tumour microenvironment where spatial differences in nutrient availability strongly influence growth. We show that spheroids initiated using significantly different numbers of cells grow to similar limiting sizes, suggesting that avascular tumours have a limiting structure; in agreement with untested predictions of classical mathematical models of tumour spheroids. We develop a novel mathematical and statistical framework to study the structure of tumour spheroids seeded from cells transduced with fluorescent cell cycle indicators, enabling us to discriminate between arrested and cycling cells and identify an arrested region. Our analysis shows that transient spheroid structure is independent of initial spheroid size, and the limiting structure can be independent of seeding density. Standard experimental protocols compare spheroid size as a function of time; however, our analysis suggests that comparing spheroid structure as a function of overall size produces results that are relatively insensitive to variability in spheroid size. Our experimental observations are made using two melanoma cell lines, but our modelling framework applies across a wide range of spheroid culture conditions and cell lines.

Data availability

Code, data, and interactive figures are available as a Julia module on GitHub (https://github.com/ap-browning/Spheroids). Code used to process the experimental images is available on Zenodo (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5121093).

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Alexander P Browning

    School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Jesse A Sharp

    School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Ryan J Murphy

    School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Gency Gunasingh

    The University of Queensland Diamantina Institute, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Brodie Lawson

    School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Kevin Burrage

    School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Nikolas K Haass

    4The University of Queensland Diamantina Institute, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3928-5360
  8. Matthew Simpson

    School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
    For correspondence
    matthew.simpson@qut.edu.au
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6254-313X

Funding

Australian Research Council (DP200100177)

  • Nikolas K Haass
  • Matthew Simpson

ARC Centre of Excellence for Mathematical and Statistical Frontiers (CE140100049)

  • Alexander P Browning
  • Jesse A Sharp

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Jennifer Flegg, The University of Melbourne, Australia

Publication history

  1. Received: August 13, 2021
  2. Accepted: November 26, 2021
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: November 29, 2021 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: January 7, 2022 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2021, Browning 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

  • 1,068
    Page views
  • 207
    Downloads
  • 4
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

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. Alexander P Browning
  2. Jesse A Sharp
  3. Ryan J Murphy
  4. Gency Gunasingh
  5. Brodie Lawson
  6. Kevin Burrage
  7. Nikolas K Haass
  8. Matthew Simpson
(2021)
Quantitative analysis of tumour spheroid structure
eLife 10:e73020.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.73020

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Cancer Biology
    David J Hosfield et al.
    Research Article

    Chemical manipulation of estrogen receptor alpha ligand binding domain structural mobility tunes receptor lifetime and influences breast cancer therapeutic activities. Selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) extend ERα cellular lifetime/accumulation. They are antagonists in the breast but agonists in the uterine epithelium and/or in bone. Selective estrogen receptor degraders/downregulators (SERDs) reduce ERα cellular lifetime/accumulation and are pure antagonists. Activating somatic ESR1 mutations Y537S and D538G enable resistance to first-line endocrine therapies. SERDs have shown significant activities in ESR1 mutant setting while few SERMs have been studied. To understand whether chemical manipulation of ERα cellular lifetime and accumulation influences antagonistic activity, we studied a series of methylpyrollidine lasofoxifene derivatives that maintained the drug's antagonistic activities while uniquely tuning ERα cellular accumulation. These molecules were examined alongside a panel of antiestrogens in live cell assays of ERα cellular accumulation, lifetime, SUMOylation, and transcriptional antagonism. High-resolution x-ray crystal structures of WT and Y537S ERα ligand binding domain in complex with the methylated lasofoxifene derivatives or representative SERMs and SERDs show that molecules that favor a highly buried helix 12 antagonist conformation achieve the greatest transcriptional suppression activities in breast cancer cells harboring WT/Y537S ESR1. Together these results show that chemical reduction of ERα cellular lifetime is not necessarily the most crucial parameter for transcriptional antagonism in ESR1 mutated breast cancer cells. Importantly, our studies show how small chemical differences within a scaffold series can provide compounds with similar antagonistic activities, but with greatly different effects of the cellular lifetime of the ERα, which is crucial for achieving desired SERM or SERD profiles.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Cancer Biology
    Yanchun Zhang et al.
    Research Article

    Tyrosine phosphorylation, orchestrated by tyrosine kinases and phosphatases, modulates a multi-layered signaling network in a time- and space-dependent manner. Dysregulation of this post-translational modification is inevitably associated with pathological diseases. Our previous work has demonstrated that non-receptor tyrosine kinase FER is upregulated in ovarian cancer, knocking down which attenuates metastatic phenotypes. However, due to the limited number of known substrates in the ovarian cancer context, the molecular basis for its pro-proliferation activity remains enigmatic. Here, we employed mass spectrometry and biochemical approaches to identify insulin receptor substrate 4 (IRS4) as a novel substrate of FER. FER engaged its kinase domain to associate with the PH and PTB domains of IRS4. Using a proximity-based tagging system in ovarian carcinoma-derived OVCAR-5 cells, we determined that FER-mediated phosphorylation of Tyr779 enables IRS4 to recruit PIK3R2/p85β, the regulatory subunit of PI3K, and activate the PI3K-AKT pathway. Rescuing IRS4-null ovarian tumor cells with phosphorylation-defective mutant, but not WT IRS4 delayed ovarian tumor cell proliferation both in vitro and in vivo. Overall, we revealed a kinase-substrate mode between FER and IRS4, and the pharmacological inhibition of FER kinase may be beneficial for ovarian cancer patients with PI3K-AKT hyperactivation.