Back

A Multi-Omic Phenobank Reveals Axes of Glioblastoma Growth, Invasion, and Therapeutic Vulnerability

Krona, C.; Kundu, S.; Rosen, E.; Kruse, F.; Skeppas, M.; Babacic, H.; Larsson, I.; Elfineh, L.; Lü, M. J. S.; Escriva Conde, M.; Elgendy, R.; Dave, Z.; Doroszko, M.; Rut-Halldorsdottir, K.; Cao, X.; Ramachandra, R.; Olausson, K. H.; Nilsson, M.; Weischenfeldt, J.; Wikström, J.; Pernemalm, M.; Sundström, A.; Uppman, I.; Mangukiya, H. B.; Nelander, S.

2026-07-09 cancer biology
10.1101/2025.03.25.645260 bioRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundGlioblastoma (GBM) invasion is clinically decisive but difficult to model systematically. Existing patient-derived xenograft (PDX) resources rarely couple reproducible in vivo invasion phenotypes with matched multi-omic profiles at scale, limiting mechanistic insight and phenotype-informed therapeutic hypotheses. MethodsWe established the HGCC Phenobank, comprising 65 patient-derived GBM stem-like cultures with matched multi-omic profiling and orthotopic engraftment in 449 mice. Blinded histopathology quantified ten invasion traits per case. These phenotypes were integrated with RNA sequencing, DNA methylation, and mass-spectrometry-based proteomics. Multi-Omic Factor Analysis (MOFA) identified latent molecular programs. Phenotype-specific RNA signatures were matched to LINCS drug-perturbation profiles and validated in 3D gliomasphere and ex vivo brain-slice assays. ResultsTwo dominant, reproducible invasion modes emerged across models: diffuse parenchymal infiltration and perivascular/condensed growth. Proneural cultures formed more aggressive tumors in immunodeficient mice, and mouse survival showed a modest correlation with patient survival in matched cases (Pearson r = 0.1832, p = 0.045). MOFA identified 15 latent factors; Factor 1, enriched for ASCL1/OLIG1/OLIG2 programs and associated with TP53/DCHS2/WNK2 alterations, was linked to increased tumor formation, diffuse invasion, and shorter mouse survival, and stratified GBM patients in TCGA and in our matched patient cohort. Drug-signature matching separated mechanisms targeting diffuse versus perivascular invasion. Experimental validation confirmed phenotype-selective sensitivities, and inhibitors PIK-75 and buparlisib suppressed invasion dynamics across representative models in 3D and brain-slice assays. ConclusionsThe HGCC Phenobank provides the first openly available PDX resource that systematically links GBM invasion phenotypes to multi-omic programs and therapeutic predictions. This framework enables reproducible model selection, mechanistic dissection of invasion modes, and phenotype-guided therapeutic discovery. Key PointsO_LIDiffuse and perivascular invasion define orthogonal GBM axes C_LIO_LIASCL1/OLIG factor links initiation, diffuse growth, and survival C_LIO_LIPhenotype-matched drugs validated; PIK-75 and buparlisib curb invasion dynamics C_LI Importance of the StudyGlioblastoma invasion varies substantially between patients, yet existing patient-derived xeno-graft resources rarely combine reproducible in vivo phenotyping with matched multi-omic profiling at scale. The HGCC Phenobank addresses this gap with standardized, blinded scoring of ten invasion traits across 449 orthotopic xenografts from 65 molecularly characterized GBM stem-like cultures, integrated with transcriptomic, methylomic, and proteomic data. We identify two dominant, reproducible invasion modes and a cross-modal neurodevelopmental program, the ASCL1/OLIG1/2-associated Factor 1, that links tumor initiation, diffuse growth, and survival in mice, and stratifies GBM patients in TCGA and in our matched patient cohort. In a spatially resolved xenograft section, Factor 1 signal localizes to the invasive tumor periphery. By matching phenotype-specific RNA signatures to drug-induced transcriptional responses, we show that invasion phenotypes nominate selective vulnerabilities, exemplified by PIK-75. This openly shared resource enables reproducible model selection, mechanistic dissection of invasion programs, and phenotype-guided therapeutic discovery.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Neuro-Oncology
36 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
15.0%
2
Cancer Cell
42 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.6%
3
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 18%
9.7%
4
Genome Medicine
183 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
6.2%
5
Nature Cancer
39 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
5.1%
6
Cancer Research
130 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.8%
50% of probability mass above
7
Cell Reports
1498 papers in training set
Top 8%
4.8%
8
Cancer Discovery
66 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.2%
9
Genome Biology
637 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.6%
10
Neuro-Oncology Advances
25 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.4%
11
Cell Reports Medicine
153 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
12
Nature Genetics
286 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
13
Advanced Science
286 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.4%
14
Molecular Cell
350 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
15
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 32%
1.3%
16
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 25%
1.1%
17
Acta Neuropathologica Communications
89 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
18
JCI Insight
277 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.1%
19
EMBO Molecular Medicine
95 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
20
Journal of Neuro-Oncology
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.0%
21
Nature
645 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.0%
22
Clinical Cancer Research
64 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
23
PNAS Nexus
159 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
24
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 65%
0.8%
25
npj Precision Oncology
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
26
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
27
Molecular Cancer
16 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.6%
28
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 65%
0.6%
29
Acta Neuropathologica
58 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%