Tumor Metastasis: Fishing for drugs
About 90% of all cancer-related deaths are caused by metastasis, which is when cancer cells spread to other parts of the body to form new tumors (Chaffer and Weinberg, 2011; Suhail et al., 2019). Yet, the majority of currently available therapeutics do not inhibit metastasis, and only target the primary tumor where the cancer initially arises from.
To screen anti-cancer drugs, researchers often carry out experiments on mice or cells grown in the laboratory. While these model systems have led to effective treatments, they have limitations when it comes to testing drugs that block metastasis. For instance, cells cultured in the laboratory cannot accurately replicate tumor progression in humans (Katt et al., 2016), and metastasis can take at least several weeks to appear in mouse models, which are expensive to create and maintain (Simons and Brayton, 2017). Now, in eLife, Joji Nakayama, Zhiyuan Gong and co-workers report an innovative zebrafish model for screening anti-metastasis drugs (Nakayama et al., 2021).
The zebrafish was introduced to the research field in 1972, and has become a powerful model system for cancer research, due to its relative transparency, high reproduction rates, and genetic similarity to humans (Brown et al., 2017; Chen et al., 2021; Fazio et al., 2020; Gamble et al., 2021; Hason and Bartůněk, 2019). Early in development, cells in the zebrafish embryo undergo a morphological change and migrate inwards via a process called epiboly (Bruce and Heisenberg, 2020). The way these healthy cells move is similar to how cancer cells travel across tissues during metastasis. Hence, Nakayama et al. proposed that small-molecule inhibitors that interrupt epiboly may also suppress metastasis.
The team (who are based at the National University of Singapore, the National Cancer Center in Japan and other institutes in Singapore and Japan) found that some of the genes expressed during zebrafish epiboly are also activated during tumor metastasis. This finding provides the experimental support that zebrafish epiboly can serve as a model for tumor cell movement. So, Nakayama et al. developed a zebrafish screening platform, which they used to test 1,280 drugs that had already been approved by a government agency, such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or the European Medicines Agency (EMA).
The screen was carried out on zebrafish embryos exposed to a specific drug at four hours post-fertilization (Figure 1A). Nakayama et al. found that 132 of the drugs tested induced a delay in epiboly after five hours of treatment. Several of these drugs had previously been reported to inhibit molecular mechanisms associated with metastasis (Liu et al., 2013; Nakayama et al., 2020).
Nakayama et al. then used cell-based assays to test whether 62 of these 132 ‘positive hits’ (which also delay epiboly in vitro) can suppress the migration of cancer cells (Figure 1B). The tumor cells were placed in a chamber with or without the drug, and the team recorded how many could crawl into the neighboring compartment after a few hours of treatment. This revealed that 20 of the drugs that disrupted epiboly also impeded the movement of human cancer cells.
Finally, Nakayama et al. tested if one of the epiboly-interrupting drugs called Pizotifen could also impair tumor cell movement in living animals: this drug was selected because its primary target (serotonin receptor 2C) is highly expressed in human cancer cells during metastasis. To do this, they injected fluorescently labelled cancer cells into zebrafish embryos, and found that fish exposed to Pizotifen experienced significantly less metastasis than fish treated with a placebo. Similar observations were made in mice that had cancer cells injected into their breast-like tissue, half of which were treated with a daily dose of Pizotifen, and half of which received a placebo (Figure 1B).
The screening platform created by Nakayama et al. makes it easy to rapidly find new drugs that suppress metastasis, while circumventing the limitations of cell culture and mouse model systems. In addition, zebrafish injected with human cancer cells can serve as an additional means for narrowing down which drugs to test in mouse models. Having zebrafish join the drug discovery platform will hopefully result in more and better treatments for patients with metastatic cancers.
References
-
Zebrafish xenograft models of cancer and metastasis for drug discoveryExpert Opinion on Drug Discovery 12:379–389.https://doi.org/10.1080/17460441.2017.1297416
-
Mechanisms of zebrafish epiboly: a current viewCurrent Topics in Developmental Biology 136:319–341.https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.ctdb.2019.07.001
-
A perspective on cancer cell metastasisScience 331:1559–1564.https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1203543
-
Benefits of zebrafish xenograft models in cancer researchFrontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology 9:616551.https://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2021.616551
-
Zebrafish patient avatars in cancer biology and precision cancer therapyNature Reviews Cancer 20:263–273.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41568-020-0252-3
-
In vitro tumor models: advantages, disadvantages, variables, and selecting the right platformFrontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology 4:12.https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2016.00012
-
BookChapter 3 - Challenges and Limitations of Mouse Xenograft Models of CancerIn: Simons BW, editors. Patient Derived Tumor Xenograft Models: Promise, Potential and Practice. Academic Press. pp. 25–36.https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-804010-2.00003-5
-
Systems biology of cancer metastasisCell Systems 9:109–127.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cels.2019.07.003
Article and author information
Author details
Acknowledgements
HF acknowledges grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH; CA215059), the American Cancer Society (RSG-17-204-01-TBG), the National Science Foundation (1911253), and Boston University; CK thanks the diversity grant support from the National Institutes of Health (NIH; CA215059S); and EH is grateful for the Undergraduate Research of Program Award from Boston University.
Publication history
Copyright
© 2022, Kemet et al.
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
Metrics
-
- 988
- views
-
- 96
- downloads
-
- 0
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
Download links
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)
Further reading
-
- Developmental Biology
- Genetics and Genomics
We present evidence implicating the BAF (BRG1/BRM Associated Factor) chromatin remodeler in meiotic sex chromosome inactivation (MSCI). By immunofluorescence (IF), the putative BAF DNA binding subunit, ARID1A (AT-rich Interaction Domain 1 a), appeared enriched on the male sex chromosomes during diplonema of meiosis I. Germ cells showing a Cre-induced loss of ARID1A arrested in pachynema and failed to repress sex-linked genes, indicating a defective MSCI. Mutant sex chromosomes displayed an abnormal presence of elongating RNA polymerase II coupled with an overall increase in chromatin accessibility detectable by ATAC-seq. We identified a role for ARID1A in promoting the preferential enrichment of the histone variant, H3.3, on the sex chromosomes, a known hallmark of MSCI. Without ARID1A, the sex chromosomes appeared depleted of H3.3 at levels resembling autosomes. Higher resolution analyses by CUT&RUN revealed shifts in sex-linked H3.3 associations from discrete intergenic sites and broader gene-body domains to promoters in response to the loss of ARID1A. Several sex-linked sites displayed ectopic H3.3 occupancy that did not co-localize with DMC1 (DNA meiotic recombinase 1). This observation suggests a requirement for ARID1A in DMC1 localization to the asynapsed sex chromatids. We conclude that ARID1A-directed H3.3 localization influences meiotic sex chromosome gene regulation and DNA repair.
-
- Cell Biology
- Developmental Biology
Eukaryotic cells depend on exocytosis to direct intracellularly synthesized material toward the extracellular space or the plasma membrane, so exocytosis constitutes a basic function for cellular homeostasis and communication between cells. The secretory pathway includes biogenesis of secretory granules (SGs), their maturation and fusion with the plasma membrane (exocytosis), resulting in release of SG content to the extracellular space. The larval salivary gland of Drosophila melanogaster is an excellent model for studying exocytosis. This gland synthesizes mucins that are packaged in SGs that sprout from the trans-Golgi network and then undergo a maturation process that involves homotypic fusion, condensation, and acidification. Finally, mature SGs are directed to the apical domain of the plasma membrane with which they fuse, releasing their content into the gland lumen. The exocyst is a hetero-octameric complex that participates in tethering of vesicles to the plasma membrane during constitutive exocytosis. By precise temperature-dependent gradual activation of the Gal4-UAS expression system, we have induced different levels of silencing of exocyst complex subunits, and identified three temporarily distinctive steps of the regulated exocytic pathway where the exocyst is critically required: SG biogenesis, SG maturation, and SG exocytosis. Our results shed light on previously unidentified functions of the exocyst along the exocytic pathway. We propose that the exocyst acts as a general tethering factor in various steps of this cellular process.