Abstract

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) continues to show no improvement in survival rates. One aspect of PDAC is elevated ATP levels, pointing to the purinergic axis as a potential attractive therapeutic target. Mediated in part by highly druggable extracellular proteins, this axis plays essential roles in fibrosis, inflammation response and immune function. Analysing the main members of the PDAC extracellular purinome using publicly available databases discerned which members may impact patient survival. P2RY2 presents as the purinergic gene with the strongest association with hypoxia, the highest cancer cell-specific expression and the strongest impact on overall survival. Invasion assays using a 3D spheroid model revealed P2Y2 to be critical in facilitating invasion driven by extracellular ATP. Using genetic modification and pharmacological strategies we demonstrate mechanistically that this ATP-driven invasion requires direct protein-protein interactions between P2Y2 and αV integrins. DNA-PAINT super-resolution fluorescence microscopy reveals that P2Y2 regulates the amount and distribution of integrin αV in the plasma membrane. Moreover, receptor-integrin interactions were required for effective downstream signalling, leading to cancer cell invasion. This work elucidates a novel GPCR-integrin interaction in cancer invasion, highlighting its potential for therapeutic targeting.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting file, or online resources are fully referenced.Human PDAC tumour data were generated by TCGA Research Network (https://www.cancer.gov/tcga) and by the Clinical Proteomic Tumour Analysis Consortium (https://www.proteomics.cancer.gov). The Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) Project was used for the analysis of normal pancreatic tissue samples (https://gtexportal.org).

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Elena Tomas Bort

    Centre for Tumour Biology, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7897-8891
  2. Megan Daisy Joseph

    London Centre for Nanotechnology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8313-8467
  3. Qiaoying Wang

    Centre for Tumour Biology, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Edward Philip Carter

    Centre for Tumour Biology, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4499-1101
  5. Nicolas Jaime Roth

    Centre for Tumour Biology, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Jessica Gibson

    Centre for Tumour Biology, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Ariana Samadi

    Centre for Tumour Biology, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Hemant M Kocher

    Centre for Tumour Biology, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Sabrina Simoncelli

    London Centre for Nanotechnology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7089-7667
  10. Peter J McCormick

    Centre for Endocrinology, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    p.mccormick@qmul.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2225-5181
  11. Richard Philip Grose

    Centre for Tumour Biology, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    r.p.grose@qmul.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4738-0173

Funding

Cancer Research UK (A27781)

  • Edward Philip Carter

Cancer Research UK (A25137)

  • Edward Philip Carter
  • Richard Philip Grose

Medical Research Council (MRC0227)

  • Elena Tomas Bort

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/T008709/1)

  • Megan Daisy Joseph

Royal Society (DHF\R1\191019)

  • Sabrina Simoncelli

Royal Society (RGS\R2\202038)

  • Sabrina Simoncelli

Medical Research Council (MR/N014308/1)

  • Nicolas Jaime Roth

Pancreatic Cancer Research Fund (Tissue Bank Grant)

  • Hemant M Kocher

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

Copyright

© 2023, Tomas Bort 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

  • 2,411
    views
  • 410
    downloads
  • 6
    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. Elena Tomas Bort
  2. Megan Daisy Joseph
  3. Qiaoying Wang
  4. Edward Philip Carter
  5. Nicolas Jaime Roth
  6. Jessica Gibson
  7. Ariana Samadi
  8. Hemant M Kocher
  9. Sabrina Simoncelli
  10. Peter J McCormick
  11. Richard Philip Grose
(2023)
Purinergic GPCR-integrin interactions drive pancreatic cancer cell invasion
eLife 12:e86971.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.86971

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.86971

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Medicine
    Patrick Brandt, Dawayne Whittington ... Rebekah L Layton
    Research Article

    A doctoral-level internship program was developed at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill with the intent to create customizable experiential learning opportunities for biomedical trainees to support career exploration, preparation, and transition into their postgraduate professional roles. We report the outcomes of this program over a 5-year period. During that 5-year period, 123 internships took place at over 70 partner sites, representing at least 20 academic, for-profit, and non-profit career paths in the life sciences. A major goal of the program was to enhance trainees’ skill development and expertise in careers of interest. The benefits of the internship program for interns, host/employer, and supervisor/principal investigator were assessed using a mixed-methods approach, including surveys with closed- and open-ended responses as well as focus group interviews. Balancing stakeholder interests is key to creating a sustainable program with widespread support; hence, the level of support from internship hosts and faculty members were the key metrics analyzed throughout. We hypothesized that once a successful internship program was implemented, faculty culture might shift to be more accepting of internships; indeed, the data quantifying faculty attitudes support this. Furthermore, host motivation and performance expectations of interns were compared with results achieved, and this data revealed both expected and surprising benefits to hosts. Data suggests a myriad of benefits for each stakeholder group, and themes are cataloged and discussed. Program outcomes, evaluation data, policies, resources, and best practices developed through the implementation of this program are shared to provide resources that facilitate the creation of similar internship programs at other institutions. Program development was initially spurred by National Institutes of Health pilot funding, thereafter, successfully transitioning from a grant-supported model, to an institutionally supported funding model to achieve long-term programmatic sustainability.

    1. Cancer Biology
    Ke Ning, Yuanyuan Xie ... Ling Yu
    Research Article

    For traditional laboratory microscopy observation, the multi-dimensional, real-time, in situ observation of three-dimensional (3D) tumor spheroids has always been the pain point in cell spheroid observation. In this study, we designed a side-view observation petri dish/device that reflects light, enabling in situ observation of the 3D morphology of cell spheroids using conventional inverted laboratory microscopes. We used a 3D-printed handle and frame to support a first-surface mirror, positioning the device within a cell culture petri dish to image cell spheroid samples. The imaging conditions, such as the distance between the mirror and the 3D spheroids, the light source, and the impact of the culture medium, were systematically studied to validate the in situ side-view observation. The results proved that placing the surface mirror adjacent to the spheroids enables non-destructive in situ real-time tracking of tumor spheroid formation, migration, and fusion dynamics. The correlation between spheroid thickness and dark core appearance under light microscopy and the therapeutic effects of chemotherapy doxorubicin and natural killer cells on spheroids’ 3D structure was investigated.