Back

Differential metabolic adaptations define responses of winner and loser oncogenic mutant stem cells in skin epidermis in vivo

Hemalatha, A.; Li, Z.; Tai, K.; Gonzalez, D. G.; Lathrop, E.; Gil, D.; Matte-Martone, C.; Ganesan, S.; Yun, S.; Gonzalez, L. E.; Skala, M. C.; Perry, R. J.; Greco, V.

2022-11-23 cancer biology
10.1101/2022.11.21.517380 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Skin epithelial stem cells detect and correct aberrancies induced by oncogenic mutations. Different oncogenes invoke different mechanisms of epithelial tolerance: while wild-type cells outcompete {beta}-catenin-Gain-of-Function ({beta}catGOF) mutant cells, HrasG12V mutant cells outcompete wild-type cells1,2. Here we ask how metabolic states change as wild-type stem cells interface with mutant cells, and how this ultimately drives different cell competition outcomes. By adapting our live-imaging platform to track endogenous redox ratio (NAD(P)H/FAD) with single cell resolution in the same mice over time, we show that wild-type epidermal stem cells maintain robust redox ratio despite their heterogeneous cell cycle states. We discover that both {beta}catGOF and HrasG12V models lead to a rapid drop in redox ratios. However, the "winner" cells in each model (wild-type in {beta}catGOF and mutant in HrasG12V), rapidly recover their redox ratios, irrespective of the mutation induced. Using mass spectrometry (13C-LC-MS/MS)3, we find that both mutants increase flux through the oxidative tricarboxylic acid cycle, but the "winner" HrasG12V cells and the "loser" {beta}catGOF cells modulate glycolytic flux differently. Hence, we reveal the metabolic adaptations that define the hallmarks of winners and losers during cell competition in vivo and uncover the nodes of regulation unique to each cell fate.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.