Back

Epithelial Stem Cell Fate Determines Chemoradiotherapy Response in Rectal Cancer

Li, N.; Ishaqwala, F.; Wright, T. A.; Wilkinson, A.; Vlckova, P.; Trevers, K.; O'Sullivan, R.; Crampsie, S.; Basiarz, E.; Vanderkamp, S.; McCulloch, A. K.; Dobric, A.; Krishnaswamy, S.; Vanhaesebroeck, B.; Glasgow Serial Sampling Consortium, ; Roxburgh, C. S. D.; Hawkins, M.; Tape, C. J.

2026-07-15 cancer biology
10.64898/2026.07.15.736775 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Rectal cancers are often treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), yet 85% of patients do not achieve a pathological complete response. To identify the molecular determinants of CRT response, we profiled the single-cell signalling, DNA-damage, cell-cycle, apoptotic, and cell-fate responses of 2,769 patient-derived organoid cultures treated with CRT, cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs), and signal-rewiring agents. We find that CRT response is determined by stem cell-fate. CRT triggers comparable DNA-damage in isogenic proliferative (proCSC) and revival (revCSC) colonic stem cells, but proCSC retain damage and die whereas revCSC resolve damage and persist. Both CRT and CAFs drive proCSC to a common treatment-resistant revCSC fate and high revCSC predicts worse survival in patients. Pharmacologically constraining stem-cell plasticity increases CRT sensitivity, and Spatial Perturbation of ARrayed Tumour Assembloids (SPARTA) confirms YAP/TEAD inhibition improves chemotherapy responses in human stromal-tumour models. These results suggest that cancer cell-fate, not genotoxic damage itself, ultimately governs response to standard-of-care chemoradiotherapy. HIGHLIGHTSO_LIRectal cancer stem cell-fate determines chemoradiotherapy-induced apoptosis C_LIO_LIproCSCs retain DNA-damage and die, whereas revCSCs repair damage and persist C_LIO_LICAFs and chemoradiotherapy converge on a common chemo-radioresistant revCSC state C_LIO_LISPARTA reveals TEAD inhibition blocks DNA-repair persisters in stromal assembloids C_LI

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 14%
12.7%
2
Cancer Discovery
66 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
8.8%
3
Nature Cancer
39 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.8%
4
Cancer Cell
42 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.6%
5
Nature Genetics
286 papers in training set
Top 1%
6.2%
6
Nature
645 papers in training set
Top 3%
5.4%
7
Cancer Research
130 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.8%
50% of probability mass above
8
Cell Stem Cell
62 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.3%
9
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 11%
3.2%
10
Cell Reports
1498 papers in training set
Top 13%
3.2%
11
Cell
431 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.1%
12
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 45%
2.1%
13
Nature Cell Biology
118 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
14
The EMBO Journal
309 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.9%
15
Genome Medicine
183 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
16
Developmental Cell
196 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
17
Journal of Clinical Investigation
179 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
18
Clinical Cancer Research
64 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
19
Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
40 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.1%
20
Molecular Cell
350 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
21
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 36%
1.1%
22
Gastroenterology
42 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.1%
23
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 28%
0.9%
24
Cancer Research Communications
51 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
25
Nature Ecology & Evolution
18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
26
Gut
40 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.8%
27
EMBO Reports
263 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
28
Cell Reports Medicine
153 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
29
Science
477 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.6%
30
Cancer Letters
35 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%