1
|
Mangiola S, McCoy P, Modrak M, Souza-Fonseca-Guimaraes F, Blashki D, Stuchbery R, Keam SP, Kerger M, Chow K, Nasa C, Le Page M, Lister N, Monard S, Peters J, Dundee P, Williams SG, Costello AJ, Neeson PJ, Pal B, Huntington ND, Corcoran NM, Papenfuss AT, Hovens CM. Transcriptome sequencing and multi-plex imaging of prostate cancer microenvironment reveals a dominant role for monocytic cells in progression. BMC Cancer 2021; 21:846. [PMID: 34294073 PMCID: PMC8296706 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-08529-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2021] [Accepted: 06/23/2021] [Indexed: 01/30/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prostate cancer is caused by genomic aberrations in normal epithelial cells, however clinical translation of findings from analyses of cancer cells alone has been very limited. A deeper understanding of the tumour microenvironment is needed to identify the key drivers of disease progression and reveal novel therapeutic opportunities. RESULTS In this study, the experimental enrichment of selected cell-types, the development of a Bayesian inference model for continuous differential transcript abundance, and multiplex immunohistochemistry permitted us to define the transcriptional landscape of the prostate cancer microenvironment along the disease progression axis. An important role of monocytes and macrophages in prostate cancer progression and disease recurrence was uncovered, supported by both transcriptional landscape findings and by differential tissue composition analyses. These findings were corroborated and validated by spatial analyses at the single-cell level using multiplex immunohistochemistry. CONCLUSIONS This study advances our knowledge concerning the role of monocyte-derived recruitment in primary prostate cancer, and supports their key role in disease progression, patient survival and prostate microenvironment immune modulation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stefano Mangiola
- Bioinformatics Division, The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Medical Biology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Patrick McCoy
- Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Martin Modrak
- Institute of Microbiology of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Fernando Souza-Fonseca-Guimaraes
- University of Queensland Diamantina Institute, Translational Research Institute, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Daniel Blashki
- The Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Ryan Stuchbery
- Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Simon P Keam
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia
| | - Michael Kerger
- Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Ken Chow
- Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Chayanica Nasa
- Flow Cytometry Facility, The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Melanie Le Page
- Flow Cytometry Facility, The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Natalie Lister
- Cancer Program, Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Anatomy and Developmental Biology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
| | - Simon Monard
- Flow Cytometry Facility, The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Justin Peters
- Epworth Center of Cancer Research, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
| | - Phil Dundee
- Epworth Center of Cancer Research, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
| | - Scott G Williams
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia
| | - Anthony J Costello
- Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Paul J Neeson
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia
| | - Bhupinder Pal
- The Olivia Newton-John Cancer Research Institute, Heidelberg, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Nicholas D Huntington
- Cancer Program, Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Anatomy and Developmental Biology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
| | - Niall M Corcoran
- Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Urology, Frankston Hospital, Frankston, Victoria, Australia
| | - Anthony T Papenfuss
- Bioinformatics Division, The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
- Department of Medical Biology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
- Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia.
- School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, 3010, Australia.
| | - Christopher M Hovens
- Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Urology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
LoPresti EF, Goidell J, Mola JM, Page ML, Specht CD, Stuligross C, Weber MG, Williams NM, Karban R. A lever action hypothesis for pendulous hummingbird flowers: experimental evidence from a columbine. Ann Bot 2020; 125:59-65. [PMID: 31402377 PMCID: PMC6948206 DOI: 10.1093/aob/mcz134] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2019] [Revised: 07/15/2019] [Accepted: 08/01/2019] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Pendulous flowers (due to a flexible pedicel) are a common, convergent trait of hummingbird-pollinated flowers. However, the role of flexible pedicels remains uncertain despite several functional hypotheses. Here we present and test the 'lever action hypothesis': flexible pedicels allow pendulous flowers to move upwards from all sides, pushing the stigma and anthers against the underside of the feeding hummingbird regardless of which nectary is being visited. METHODS To test whether this lever action increased pollination success, we wired emasculated flowers of serpentine columbine, Aquilegia eximia, to prevent levering and compared pollination success of immobilized flowers with emasculated unwired and wire controls. KEY RESULTS Seed set was significantly lower in wire-immobilized flowers than unwired control and wire control flowers. Video analysis of visits to wire-immobilized and unwired flowers demonstrated that birds contacted the stigmas and anthers of immobilized flowers less often than those of flowers with flexible pedicels. CONCLUSIONS We conclude that flexible pedicels permit the levering of reproductive structures onto a hovering bird. Hummingbirds, as uniquely large, hovering pollinators, differ from flies or bees which are too small to cause levering of flowers while hovering. Thus, flexible pedicels may be an adaptation to hummingbird pollination, in particular due to hummingbird size. We further speculate that this mechanism is effective only in radially symmetric flowers; in contrast, zygomorphic hummingbird-pollinated flowers are usually more or less horizontally oriented rather than having pendulous flowers and flexible pedicels.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E F LoPresti
- Department of Plant Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA
- Department of Entomology, UC-Davis, Davis, CA, USA
| | - J Goidell
- Department of Entomology, UC-Davis, Davis, CA, USA
| | - J M Mola
- Department of Entomology, UC-Davis, Davis, CA, USA
| | - M L Page
- Department of Entomology, UC-Davis, Davis, CA, USA
| | - C D Specht
- School of Integrative Plant Sciences, Section of Plant Biology and the L.H. Bailey Hortorium, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
| | - C Stuligross
- Department of Entomology, UC-Davis, Davis, CA, USA
| | - M G Weber
- Department of Plant Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA
| | - N M Williams
- Department of Entomology, UC-Davis, Davis, CA, USA
| | - R Karban
- Department of Entomology, UC-Davis, Davis, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|