Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25975820›Full record

ArticleCell communication and signaling : CCS2015

Stimulus-dependent differences in signalling regulate epithelial-mesenchymal plasticity and change the effects of drugs in breast cancer cell lines.

Joseph Cursons, Karl-Johan Leuchowius, Mark Waltham, Eva Tomaskovic-Crook, Momeneh Foroutan, Cameron P Bracken, Andrew Redfern, Edmund J Crampin, Ian Street, Melissa J Davis and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cell communication and signaling : CCS, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Synergic activity of FGFR2 and MEK inhibitors in the treatment of FGFR2-amplified cancers of unknown primary.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Joseph CursonsSystems Biology Laboratory, Melbourne School of Engineering, University of Melbourne, Building 193, Parkville, VIC, 3010, Australia. joseph.cursons@unimelb.edu.au.
Karl-Johan LeuchowiusThe Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, 1G Royal Parade, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia. leuchowius@wehi.edu.au.
Mark WalthamSt. Vincent's Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. mwaltham@unimelb.edu.au.
Eva Tomaskovic-CrookSt. Vincent's Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. evatc@uow.edu.au.
Momeneh ForoutanSystems Biology Laboratory, Melbourne School of Engineering, University of Melbourne, Building 193, Parkville, VIC, 3010, Australia. mforoutan@student.unimelb.edu.au.
Cameron P BrackenCentre for Cancer Biology, SA Pathology and University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, 5000, Australia. Cameron.Bracken@health.sa.gov.au.
Andrew RedfernRoyal Perth Hospital, Perth, Australia. Andrew.Redfern@health.wa.gov.au.
Edmund J CrampinSystems Biology Laboratory, Melbourne School of Engineering, University of Melbourne, Building 193, Parkville, VIC, 3010, Australia. edmund.crampin@unimelb.edu.au.
Ian StreetThe Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, 1G Royal Parade, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia. istreet@wehi.EDU.AU.
Melissa J DavisSystems Biology Laboratory, Melbourne School of Engineering, University of Melbourne, Building 193, Parkville, VIC, 3010, Australia. melissa.davis@unimelb.edu.au.
Erik W ThompsonSt. Vincent's Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. e2.thompson@qut.edu.au.
University of Melbourne · AUSt Vincents Institute of Medical Research · AUWalter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research · AURoyal Perth Hospital · AUUniversity of South Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe normal process of epithelial mesenchymal transition (EMT) is subverted by carcinoma cells to facilitate metastatic spread. Cancer cells rarely undergo a full conversion to the mesenchymal phenotype, and instead adopt positions along the epithelial-mesenchymal axis, a propensity we refer to as epithelial mesenchymal plasticity (EMP). EMP is associated with increased risk of metastasis in breast cancer and consequent poor prognosis. Drivers towards the mesenchymal state in malignant cells include growth factor stimulation or exposure to hypoxic conditions.

methodsWe have examined EMP in two cell line models of breast cancer: the PMC42 system (PMC42-ET and PMC42-LA sublines) and MDA-MB-468 cells. Transition to a mesenchymal phenotype was induced across all three cell lines using epidermal growth factor (EGF) stimulation, and in MDA-MB-468 cells by hypoxia. We used RNA sequencing to identify gene expression changes that occur as cells transition to a more-mesenchymal phenotype, and identified the cell signalling pathways regulated across these experimental systems. We then used inhibitors to modulate signalling through these pathways, verifying the conclusions of our transcriptomic analysis.

resultsWe found that EGF and hypoxia both drive MDA-MB-468 cells to phenotypically similar mesenchymal states. Comparing the transcriptional response to EGF and hypoxia, we have identified differences in the cellular signalling pathways that mediate, and are influenced by, EMT. Significant differences were observed for a number of important cellular signalling components previously implicated in EMT, such as HBEGF and VEGFA. We have shown that EGF- and hypoxia-induced transitions respond differently to treatment with chemical inhibitors (presented individually and in combinations) in these breast cancer cells. Unexpectedly, MDA-MB-468 cells grown under hypoxic growth conditions became even more mesenchymal following exposure to certain kinase inhibitors that prevent growth-factor induced EMT, including the mTOR inhibitor everolimus and the AKT1/2/3 inhibitor AZD5363.

conclusionsWhile resulting in a common phenotype, EGF and hypoxia induced subtly different signalling systems in breast cancer cells. Our findings have important implications for the use of kinase inhibitor-based therapeutic interventions in breast cancers, where these heterogeneous signalling landscapes will influence the therapeutic response.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCell HypoxiaCell Line, TumorEpidermal Growth FactorEpithelial-Mesenchymal TransitionEverolimusFemaleHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsNeoplasm MetastasisProto-Oncogene Proteins c-aktPyrimidinesPyrrolesSignal TransductionSirolimusTOR Serine-Threonine KinasescapivasertibEpidermal Growth FactorEverolimusImmunosuppressive AgentsMTOR protein, humanProto-Oncogene Proteins c-aktPyrimidinesPyrrolesSirolimusTOR Serine-Threonine Kinases

Identifiers

PMID25975820
PMCPMC4432969
OpenAlexW2160670827

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.