Research Area: Cell Biology

A Summer of Science

Victor Rivera-Santana, a chemistry major at the University of Puerto Rico at Mayagüez, visited MIT Biology for 10 weeks to investigate protein form and function.

August 30, 2018

Victor Rivera-Santana grew up on the western edge of Puerto Rico, in what he refers to as an “atmosphere of science.” His mother is a professor of animal science at the University of Puerto Rico at Mayagüez, and in elementary school he would attend her lectures about the effects of environment and hormones on animal behavior. Three years ago, Rivera-Santana enrolled there as an undergraduate, and has been studying chemistry ever since — with the exception of this past summer, when he became a full-fledged member of the MIT Biology Department for 10 weeks during MIT’s Summer Research Program in Biology (MSRP­-Bio).

Rivera-Santana remembers being drawn to basic research because of its simple, pure, and noble nature, stemming from the creativity of the researcher. “Science almost always has an application, so the fact that researchers in basic science are not looking for an application per se doesn’t mean their work won’t have one in the future,” he says. “The researcher fulfills his or her own curiosity, and afterwards someone else can find a way to put that into practice in society.”

A rising senior, Rivera-Santana chose chemistry because he enjoyed analyzing the minute building blocks of life, but wasn’t sure which field he would ultimately pursue. With chemistry, he could engineer the major to encompass biology and physics as well, which would give him “a taste of everything.”

At first he didn’t know what post-graduation life might hold. However, two weeks into the MSRP-Bio program he’d made up his mind: a PhD. “I like the people, I like the passion, and most importantly I like the research — everything is so interesting it’s hard to pick,” he says.

Rivera-Santana applied to MSRP-Bio early last January because he had it on good authority from three independent sources that this was the program for him. First a good friend and former MSRP-Bio student suggested it, then his professor, and finally his father.

He had two main expectations coming in. First, that everyone would be intimidating and aloof. “Boy was I wrong,” he says. “The MIT faculty are really accessible and engage you as a potential researcher. You can stop them as they’re walking down the hall, or ask them questions during the scheduled Q&A sessions.”

Second, he expected everyone would be hardworking, irrespective of their area of focus. “I was very pleased to find that’s the case,” he says. “I have not met one person at MIT who would not go the extra mile to do their job correctly.”

Rivera-Santana worked in Thomas Schwartz’s lab, investigating an aggregate of proteins known as the nuclear pore complex (NPC), which is embedded in the nuclear envelope and controls the passage of proteins, RNAs, and even ribosomal subunits between the cytoplasm and the nucleus. Although the NPC is vital to cellular survival, its structure is not yet fully understood.

The Schwartz lab goes bit by bit, studying each of its components and their interactions with one another. Rivera-Santana concentrated on one NPC protein in particular, Nup93, parsing its role and design. He hopes this work will eventually help scientists understand the complex as a whole, “because as the name says, it’s complex.”

Rivera-Santana studied four different variants of Nup93, working to express each variant by itself in bacteria. Most of his days in lab went by “either very slowly or very quickly.” He would spend the beginning of the week growing the bacteria to express his proteins — a relatively low-key process since the bacteria “essentially take care of themselves.” The latter half of the week, though, when he began the purification process, was more fast-paced. It involved extracting and purifying the proteins from the bacterial cytosol, while at the same time taking steps to prevent the proteins from becoming damaged, such as keeping them at low temperatures by performing the purification steps in the cold room.

“Purifying is the really challenging part, but it’s also the most fun,” Rivera-Santana says. “I had to work at four degrees Celsius, and I’m from Puerto Rico so you can just imagine how I bear the temperature,” he adds.

Looking back, his most exciting summer experience was purifying his first protein. “I just felt this bundle of joy well up inside me,” he says. “When I ran it through the gel to check its identity and I saw that beautiful blob of ‘ink’ that told me I had my protein, I just felt so happy.”

While Rivera-Santana thoroughly enjoyed his experiences in lab, he was also thrilled to meet other budding researchers and explore Boston’s museums and brick buildings. His proudest moment was cooking his first meal for his new MSRP-Bio friends (a classic Puerto Rican dish: rice, beans, chicken, and plantains). He enjoys putting smiles on people’s faces, “especially when those grins are full of food.” After all, MSRP-Bio isn’t just about being at MIT; it’s also about meeting people and being part of the community.

He also learned he could live by himself, thousands of miles from his family. And he’s prepared to do it again next summer, perhaps in the same lab. “I’m definitely considering doing MSRP-Bio again,” he says. “And I’m certainly also thinking about MIT for graduate school.”

Until then, the three things he’ll miss the most — in no particularly order — are his MSRP-Bio cohort, his lab mentor, and the tasty East Coast cherries.

Photo credit: Raleigh McElvery
Exploring cancer metabolism

Matthew Vander Heiden seeks new cancer treatments that exploit tumor cells’ abnormal metabolism.

Anne Trafton | MIT News Office
August 28, 2018

Nearly 100 years ago, the German chemist Otto Warburg discovered that cancer cells metabolize nutrients differently than most normal cells. His discovery launched the field of cancer metabolism research, but interest in this area waned; by the 1970s most cancer scientists had shifted their focus to the genetic mutations that drive cancer development.

In the past decade or so, interest in cancer metabolism has resurged, and the first drugs that target cancer cells’ abnormal metabolism were approved to treat leukemia in 2017.

“Cancer metabolism is a very sophisticated field at this point,” says Matthew Vander Heiden, an associate professor of biology at MIT. “We have a lot better understanding of what nutrients cancer cells use and what determines how those nutrients are used. This has led to different ways to think about drugs.”

Vander Heiden, who is also a member of MIT’s Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, is one of the people responsible for the recent surge in cancer metabolism research. As a graduate student and postdoc, he published some of the first studies of how cancer cells alter their metabolism, and now his lab at MIT is devoted to the topic.

“All of the time that I was in grad school and working as a postdoc, I was never working in a lab that was dedicated to studying metabolism. So my vision, if someone gave me a job, was to set up a lab that could really be built in a way that would allow us to ask questions about metabolism,” he says.

Metabolism and cancer

Vander Heiden grew up in a small town in Wisconsin, and unlike most of his high school classmates, he headed out of state for college, to the University of Chicago. He was interested in science, so decided on a pre-med track. A work-study job in a plant biology lab led him to discover that he also enjoyed doing research.

“At that point I already had this idea I was going to go to medical school, but then the idea of MD/PhD came up, and I ended up going down that path,” Vander Heiden says.

While in the MD/PhD program at the University of Chicago Medical School, he worked in the lab of Craig Thompson, now president of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. At that time, Thompson was studying the biochemical regulation of apoptosis, the programmed cell death pathway. For his PhD thesis, Vander Heiden investigated the function of a protein called Bcl-x, which is a regulator of apoptosis found in the membranes of mitochondria — cell organelles responsible for generating energy.

“That project really got me thinking about how the mitochondria work and how metabolism works,” Vander Heiden recalls. “At the time, I came to the realization that we don’t understand cell metabolism anywhere near as well as we thought we did, and someone should really study this.”

After finishing his degrees, he spent five years doing clinical training, then decided to pursue research in cancer metabolism.

“Altered metabolism has been known about in cancer for 100 years, but few people were studying it,” Vander Heiden says. “The challenge was finding a lab that would allow me to study metabolism and cancer, which in 2004-2005 was not such an obvious thing to do.”

He ended up going to Harvard Medical School to work with Lewis Cantley, who studies signaling pathways in cells and was receptive to the idea of exploring cancer metabolism. There, Vander Heiden began studying an enzyme called pyruvate kinase M2 (PKM2), which is involved in regulation of glycolysis, a biochemical process that cells use to break down sugar for energy.

In 2008, Vander Heiden, Cantley, and others at Harvard Medical School reported that when cells shift between normal and Warburg (cancer-associated) metabolism, they start using PKM2 instead of PKM1, the enzyme that adult cells normally use for glycolysis. Cantley and Craig Thompson have since founded a company, Agios Pharmaceuticals, that is developing potential drugs that target PKM2, as well as other molecules involved in cancer metabolism.

While at Harvard, Vander Heiden also worked on a paper that contributed to the eventual development of drugs that target cancer cells with a mutation in the IDH gene. These drugs, the first modern FDA-approved cancer drugs that target metabolism, shut off an alternative pathway used by cancer cells with the IDH mutation.

New drug targets

In 2010, Vander Heiden became one of the first new faculty members hired after the creation of MIT’s Koch Institute, where he set up a lab focused on metabolism, particularly cancer metabolism.

His research has yielded many insights into the abnormal metabolism of cancer cells. In one study, together with other MIT researchers, he found that tumor cells turn on an alternative pathway that allows them to build lipids from the amino acid glutamine instead of the glucose that healthy cells normally use. He also found that altering the behavior of PKM2 to make it act more like PKM1 could stop tumor cell growth.

Studies such as these can offer insights that may help researchers to develop drugs that starve tumor cells of the nutrients they need, offering a new way to fight cancer, Vander Heiden says.

“If one wants to develop drugs that target metabolism, one really needs to focus on the context in which it’s happening, which is the environment of the cell plus the genetics of the cell,” he says. “That is what defines the sensitivity to drugs.”

Tissue architecture affects chromosome segregation

Biologists discover that the environment surrounding a cell plays an integral role in its ability to accurately segregate its chromosomes.

Ashley Junger | Koch Institute
August 24, 2018

All growth and reproduction relies on a cell’s ability to replicate its chromosomes and produce accurate copies of itself. Every step of this process takes place within that cell.

Based on this observation, scientists have studied the replication and segregation of chromosomes as a phenomenon exclusively internal to the cell. They traditionally rely on warm nutritional cultures that promote growth but bear little resemblance to the cell’s external surroundings while in its natural environment.

New research by a group of MIT biologists reveals that this long-held assumption is incorrect. In a paper published this week, they describe how some types of cells rely on signals from surrounding tissue in order to maintain chromosome stability and segregate accurately.

Kristin Knouse, a fellow at the Whitehead Institute, is the lead author of the paper, which was published online in the journal Cell on Aug. 23. Angelika Amon, the Kathleen and Curtis Marble Professor in Cancer Research in the Department of Biology and a member of the Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, is the senior author.

“The main takeaway from this paper is that we must study cells in their native tissues to really understand their biology,” Amon says. “Results obtained from cell lines that have evolved to divide on plastic dishes do not paint the whole picture.”

When cells replicate, the newly duplicated chromosomes line up within the cell and cellular structures pull one copy to each side. The cell then divides down the middle, separating one copy of each chromosome into each new daughter cell.

At least, that’s how it’s supposed to work. In reality, there are sometimes errors in the process of separating chromosomes into daughter cells, known as chromosome mis-segregation. Some errors simply result in damage to the DNA. Other errors can result in the chromosomes being unevenly divided between daughter cells, a condition called aneuploidy.

These errors are almost always harmful to cell development and can be fatal. In developing embryos, aneuploidy can cause miscarriages or developmental disorders such as Down syndrome. In adults, chromosome instability is seen in a large number of cancers.

To study these errors, scientists have historically removed cells from their surrounding tissue and placed them into easily controlled plastic cultures.

“Chromosome segregation has been studied in a dish for decades,” Knouse says. “I think the assumption was … a cell would segregate chromosomes the same way in a dish as it would in a tissue because everything was happening inside the cell.”

However, in previous work, Knouse had found that reported rates for aneuploidy in cells grown in cultures was much higher than the rates she found in cells that had grown within their native tissue. This prompted her and her colleagues to investigate whether the surroundings of a cell influence the accuracy with which that cell divided.

To answer this question, they compared mis-segregation rates between five different cell types in native and non-native environments.

But not all cells’ native environments are the same. Some cells, like those that form skin, grow in a very structured context, where they always have neighbors and defined directions for growth. Other cells, however, like cells in the blood, have greater independence, with little interaction with the surrounding tissue.

In the new study, the researchers observed that cells that grew in structured environments in their native tissues divided accurately within those tissues. But once they were placed into a dish, the frequency of chromosome mis-segregation drastically increased. The cells that were less tied to structures in their tissue were not affected by the lack of architecture in culture dishes.

The researchers found that maintaining the architectural conditions of the cell’s native environment is essential for chromosome stability. Cells removed from the context of their tissue don’t always faithfully represent natural processes.

The researchers determined that architecture didn’t have an obvious effect on the expression of known genes involved in segregation. The disruption in tissue architecture likely causes mechanical changes that disrupt segregation, in a manner that is independent of mutations or gene expression changes.

“It was surprising to us that for something so intrinsic to the cell — something that’s happening entirely within the cell and so fundamental to the cell’s existence — where that cell is sitting actually matters quite a bit,” Knouse says.

Through the Cancer Genome Project, scientists learned that despite high rates of chromosome mis-segregation, many cancers lack any mutations to the cellular machinery that controls chromosome partitioning. This left scientists searching for the cause of the increase of these division errors. This study suggests that tissue architecture could be the culprit.

Cancer development often involves disruption of tissue architecture, whether during tumor growth or metastasis. This disruption of the extracellular environment could trigger chromosome segregation errors in the cells within the tumor.

“I think [this paper] really could be the explanation for why certain kinds of cancers become chromosomally unstable,” says Iain Cheeseman, a professor of biology at MIT and a member of the Whitehead Institute, who was not involved in the study.

The results point not only to a new understanding of the cellular mechanical triggers and effects of cancers, but also to a new understanding of how cell biology must be studied.

“Clearly a two-dimensional culture system does not faithfully recapitulate even the most fundamental processes, like chromosome segregation,” Knouse says. “As cell biologists we really must start recognizing that context matters.”

This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health, the Kathy and Curt Marble Cancer Research Fund, and the Koch Institute Support (core) Grant from the National Cancer Institute.

Ankur Jain

Education

  • PhD, 2013, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
  • BTech, 2007,  Biotechnology and Biochemical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur

Research Summary

We study how biomolecules in a cell self-organize. In particular, we are interested in understanding how membrane-free cellular compartments such as RNA granules form and function. Our lab develops new biochemical and biophysical techniques to investigate these compartments and to understand their dysfunction in human disease.

Awards

  • Young Alumni Achiever’s Award, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, 2019
  • NIH K99/R00 Pathway to Independence Award, 2017
  • Pew Scholar in the Biomedical Sciences, 2022
The Y chromosome: Holding steadfast in a sea of change
Nicole Davis
August 2, 2018

The human Y chromosome is, in many ways, a study in contrasts. For decades, scientists have struggled to dissect its evolution in part because it does not have a genetic partner (or homolog), as all of the other human chromosomes do. That solitary existence means the Y chromosome is subject to some unusual evolutionary pressures. For example, it does not swap genetic material with a homologous chromosome — a practice known as recombination that other chromosomes follow — along the lion’s share of its length. However, its lack of recombination presents a unique opportunity: Because so much of its own genetic material stays put, scientists can trace the history of individual human Y chromosomes much further back in time than other chromosomes — in fact, they can go as far back as the data will allow.

That is precisely the approach taken by a team of Whitehead Institute researchers, led by Whitehead Institute Director David Page, who is also a professor of biology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator. Their work is published in the August 2nd online issue of the American Journal of Human Genetics. Page and his colleagues, including graduate student and first author Levi Teitz, set out to examine a series of regions on the Y chromosome called amplicons — vast stretches of DNA, from tens of thousands to millions of nucleotides in length, which are present in two or more copies per chromosome. While the DNA contained in amplicons is often highly repetitive, it also houses biologically important genes. Although the precise functions of many of these genes remains to be determined, some have been found to play important roles in the development of sperm cells and testicular cancer. However, the amplicons vary drastically among species, so scientists cannot look to other organisms such as mice or chimpanzees to help reconstruct their past.

Page’s team zeroed in on these amplicons. Specifically, they looked at how the number of amplicon copies varies from one person’s Y chromosome to another. The researchers developed sophisticated computational tools to analyze DNA sequencing data collected from more than 1,200 males as part of the 1000 Genomes Project. What they discovered was quite surprising. Although the amplicons are quite variable, they found that overall, the configuration of amplicon copies on the Y chromosome has been painstakingly maintained over the last 300,000 years of human evolution. That means that despite the high level of mutation the chromosome experiences, evolutionary forces work to counteract this change and preserve its ancestral structure.

More work is needed to determine which aspects of the amplicons’ structure are important for chromosome biology, and in turn proper male development and fertility. However, the efforts of Teitz, Page, and their colleagues shed new light on the unusual tricks the solo chromosome uses to maintain its genomic integrity.

This research is supported by the National Institutes of Health and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

 

Written by Nicole Davis

****

David Page’s primary affiliation is with Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, where his laboratory is located and all his research is conducted. He is also a Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator and a Professor of Biology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

 ****

Full citation:

“Selection Has Countered High Mutability to Preserve the Ancestral Copy Number of Y Chromosome Amplicons in Diverse Human Lineages”

American Journal of Human Genetics, online August 2, 2018.

Levi S. Teitz (1,2), Tatyana Pyntikova (1), Helen Skaletsky (1,3), and David C. Page (1,2,3).

1. Whitehead Institute, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA

2. Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA

3. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Whitehead Institute, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA

A tale of two projects

Graduate student Julie Monda has spent five years investigating two divergent aspects of cell division, revealing some unexpected results and new research questions.

Raleigh McElvery
July 23, 2018

To sixth year graduate student Julie Monda, dividing cells are among the most beautiful things she’s ever seen. Watching the tiny, delicate spheres split into identical versions of themselves also provides her with a visual readout for her experiments — will the process continue if she removes a certain piece of a certain protein? Will the genetic material still distribute equally between the two cells? Which molecules are crucial for cell division, and how are they regulated?

Our cells are constantly dividing in order to grow and repair themselves, although some (like skin cells) do so more often than others, say, in the brain. This process, known as mitosis, is the primary focus of Iain Cheeseman’s lab, situated in the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research. Most of the research in the Cheeseman lab involves the kinetochore, a group of proteins located on the chromosome where the arms join. During mitosis, long, fibrous structures, known as microtubules, attach to the kinetochore to pull apart the duplicated chromosomes as the parent cell splits in half, ensuring each daughter cell receives an exact copy of the parent’s genetic blueprint.

Before she arrived at MIT Biology in the fall of 2012, Monda worked as a research technician at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee in the lab of Brenda Schulman PhD ’96 . As she recalls, she always “preferred performing hands-on research techniques at the lab bench over being in a classroom.” So she surprised even herself when she chose MIT’s graduate program in biology precisely because it requires all first-year students to take a full course load their fall semester before beginning lab rotations.

“That structure seemed useful given that I studied biochemistry as an undergraduate at the University of Tulsa, and the degree requirements were weighted more towards chemistry than biology,” she says. “Plus, when you’re only taking classes, you spend more time interacting with your classmates. It creates a close-knit community that extends throughout your entire graduate career and beyond.”

Monda ultimately selected the Cheeseman lab because it married her interests in biochemistry and cell biology.

“The research in this lab focuses on various elements of kinetochore function and cell division, but everyone is generally working on their own distinct questions,” she explains. “I knew I would have an area that was mine to explore. It’s both exciting and challenging because no one else is thinking about your projects to the extent that you are.”

Monda’s story is a tale of two projects: one focused on the interface between the kinetochore and the array of microtubules known as the mitotic “spindle,” and another project that ended up taking both her and the lab in a slightly new direction.

The first, concerning kinetochore-microtubule interactions, represented a collaboration with former lab technician Ian Whitney. For this endeavor, Monda investigated a protein complex called Ska1, found at the outer kinetochore.

The Ska1 complex is located where the kinetochore and microtubule meet. Ska1’s role, Monda explains, is to allow the kinetochores to remain attached to the spindle during chromosome segregation, even as the microtubules that compose the spindle begin to disassemble (as they must do).

“We wanted to know how the kinetochore hangs onto this polymer that is essentially falling apart,” Monda explains. “Long story short, we ended up defining specific surfaces within the Ska1 complex that are important for holding on to the microtubule as it shrinks, and — as we were surprised to note — also as it grows”

Although Ska1 only requires a single point of contact to bind a microtubule, Monda and Whitney pinpointed multiple surfaces on Ska1 that are required to allow it to remain associated with the microtubules as they disassemble and reassemble themselves.

While her Ska1 project was very much in line with the types of questions that the Cheeseman lab traditionally pursues, Monda also worked on another endeavor that “began as a side project and slowly evolved into a more full-time effort.” This project involves a motor protein called dynein, which helps to align the chromosomes and position the spindle during mitosis.

Dynein piqued Monda’s interest because of its role in mitosis, as well as its importance throughout the entire cell cycle. Motor proteins are molecules powered by the release of chemical energy that move along surfaces, sometimes transporting cargo, sometimes performing other essential tasks. Dynein is a motor protein that walks in one direction along microtubules, even when the microtubules latch onto the kinetochore to yank apart the chromosomes during mitosis.

But dynein doesn’t act alone. There are a number of additional proteins that also play a key role in coordinating its activity and localization. Monda is studying two of these accessory regulatory proteins, Nde1 and NdeL1, which bind to dynein and help promote some of its functions. She wanted to understand how Nde1 and NdeL1 interact with dynein to activate it. Although Nde1 and NdeL1 are nearly identical in function, Monda discovered that Nde1 (but not NdeL1) binds to another complex: the 26S proteasome.

The proteasome degrades proteins within the cell, influencing virtually all aspects of cellular function, including DNA synthesis and repair, transcription, translation, and cell signaling. Given its ubiquity, it has remained a point of interest among the scientific community for years. And yet, before Monda’s research, the interaction between Nde1 and the proteasome had apparently gone unnoticed. Researchers have long studied Nde1 in relation to dynein, but it’s possible that the interaction between Nde1 and the proteasome represents a new function for Nde1 unrelated to dynein regulation. In fact, Monda’s finding may have implications for understanding the development of the human brain.

“It’s clear that patients with mutations in Nde1 have much more severe neurodevelopmental defects than scientists would have predicted,” Monda says, “so it’s possible that this new interaction between Nde1 and the proteasome could help to explain why Nde1 is so important in the brain.”

Her most recent results have been published in Molecular Biology of the Cell.

“I’ve found some exciting results over the past few years,” Monda says, “and even though a lot of my research has gone in a direction that’s not strictly mitosis-related, Iain has been great about allowing me to follow the science wherever it leads. We want to know what these proteins are actually doing, both in terms of this new interaction and also more broadly within the cell.”

Monda intends to submit and defend her thesis this summer, and assume a postdoctoral position at the University California, San Diego in the fall. Although she’s been watching cells divide for years now, the process still retains its grandeur.

“Often times biologists investigate questions at scales where we can’t really see what we’re studying as we study it,” she says. “But having this visual readout makes it more tangible; I feel like I can better appreciate what exactly it is that I’m trying to understand, as well as the beauty and complexity of the processes that sustain life.”

Sharpening the edges of cancer chemotherapy
Nicole Davis | Whitehead Institute
July 11, 2018

Cambridge, MA — Tackling unsolved problems is a cornerstone of scientific research, propelled by the power and promise of new technologies. Indeed, one of the shiniest tools in the biomedical toolkit these days is the genome editing system known as CRISPR/Cas9. Whitehead Institute Member David Sabatini and his colleagues pioneered the use of this tool as a foundation for large-scale genetic screens in human cells, turning up a treasure trove of new insights into cellular metabolism, in both normal cells and cancer cells.

When Naama Kanarek, a postdoc in Sabatini’s laboratory, pondered how to apply these state-of-the-art CRISPR/Cas9 screens to her own research, her thoughts turned to a classic cancer chemotherapy drug, methotrexate, which has been in clinical use for nearly seven decades. Often used to treat a form of pediatric leukemia, known as acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), the drug, when deployed as part of a multifaceted treatment plan, can be highly effective. But its power comes at a cost. Because methotrexate can damage not only cancer cells but also healthy tissues, it must be administered with great care. For children who receive high doses of the drug, a mainstay of ALL treatment, that can mean several days spent in the hospital with rigorous clinical monitoring.

In other forms of cancer, methotrexate’s efficacy is more uncertain. For example, in pediatric osteosarcoma, only 65 percent of patients respond. Unfortunately, there is currently no way for doctors to pinpoint who will and who will not.

“From a scientific standpoint, methotrexate is quite special because it was the first metabolic drug to be developed, but much of its biology remains to be discovered — particularly what drives these different responses in patients,” Kanarek says. “So, this is really one of these old, classic questions that has been lingering in the field for some time. We thought we could learn something new.”

And they did. In the July 11 online issue of the journal Nature, Kanarek, Sabatini, and their colleagues report the findings of a CRISPR/Cas9 screen for factors involved in methotrexate sensitivity. The team’s work yielded a surprising set of discoveries that point to the breakdown of histidine — one of several amino acids used by the body to construct proteins — as a critical gatekeeper of cancer cells’ vulnerability to methotrexate. The researchers’ findings not only help illuminate the biology of a well-known cancer chemotherapy, but also suggest a simple dietary supplement that could help broaden its therapeutic window and reduce its toxicity.

 “This study is an example of the power of modern genomic tools to shine a bright light on longstanding questions in human biology,” says senior author David Sabatini, a Member of Whitehead Institute, a professor of biology at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and investigator with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI). “While cancer chemotherapies can be quite effective, their biological effects are often poorly understood. By laying bare their biology, we may be able to devise ways to utilize them more wisely.”

ATTACK THE CANCER, NOT THE PATIENT

The history of methotrexate stretches back to the 1940s, a time when strikingly little was known about the origins of cancer much less how best to treat it. The birth of methotrexate as a chemotherapeutic agent was sparked by the astute observations of Sidney Farber, a pediatric pathologist at Boston Children’s Hospital who cared for children with a variety of maladies, including ALL. In the course of caring for patients with ALL, Farber recognized that cancer cells depended on the nutrient folic acid for their own proliferation. That gave him the idea of using folate antagonists to treat ALL. Methotrexate was developed in 1949 precisely for this purpose and was subsequently shown to induce remission in children with ALL. Fast forward to today, and the drug has evolved into a significant tool in oncologists’ toolkit.

“Methotrexate is a major part of the backbone of chemotherapy treatment across many human cancers,” says Loren Walensky, a pediatric hematologist/oncologist at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute who is not a study co-author but served as an early adviser on the project and will also play a deeper role in planning future follow-up studies. “It is also used outside of the cancer field for the treatment of several autoimmune diseases.”

He added, “But as with all chemotherapy, the critical issue is how to best use it to inflict maximal damage on the cancer without irreparably harming the patient.”

Kanarek explains how new genetic tools are allowing insights into the sensitivity of cancer cells to methotrexate.

The basic mechanics of methotrexate are fairly well known. The drug inhibits dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR), an enzyme that generates the functional form of folate, known as tetrahydrofolate (THF). THF is essential for preparing the raw materials needed to make nucleic acids, such as DNA, which carries cells’ genetic information, and RNA, a close chemical relative involved in making proteins. “Proliferating cells must duplicate their DNA, so they need a lot of THF,” Kanarek explains. “But even cells that are not dividing need to make RNA, and that requires THF, too.”

The results of Kanarek’s CRISPR/Cas9 screen now bring greater clarity to this molecular picture. She and her colleagues uncovered another enzyme, called FTCD, which is involved in the breakdown of histidine. Interestingly, FTCD also requires THF for its function — though not nearly as much as the main target of methotrexate, DHFR. Despite the differential demands of the two enzymes, they both draw from the same, shared pool of THF.

“Under normal conditions, this pool is sufficiently full, so there is no competition for resources, even in rapidly dividing cells,” Kanarek says.

But when the amount of THF becomes limiting — as it does in cells that are treated with methotrexate — the story is quite different, the Whitehead Institute team discovered. In that case, the activity of FTCD poses serious problems, because there isn’t enough THF in the pool to support both cell proliferation and histidine breakdown. When that happens, the cells die.

That got Kanarek thinking more about histidine: Could the nutrient provide a way to tinker with FTCD activity and, by virtue of the cancer cells’ own metabolism, make them more vulnerable to methotrexate?

To explore this question, the researchers used mouse models of leukemia, engineered by transplanting human leukemia cells under the skin of immunocompromised mice. A subset of the mice received injections of methotrexate together with histidine. This one-two punch, Kanarek hypothesized, should ramp up the function of FTCD and more rapidly drain the THF pool, thereby making the cells more sensitive to the cancer-killing effects of methotrexate.

That is precisely what the team observed. Notably, these experiments involved lower than normal doses of methotrexate, suggesting the cells had indeed been made more sensitive to the cancer drug. Moreover, the studies included a human leukemia cell line, called SEM, which harbors a specific genetic mutation that is associated with a particularly poor prognosis in patients — further underscoring the power of the histidine degradation pathway to weaken cells’ defenses.

Now, Kanarek and her colleagues are working to extend these initial findings with additional preclinical studies and, together with Walensky, determine how to best evaluate the potential benefits of histidine supplementation in cancer patients. Their ultimate goal: to pursue clinical trials that will assess histidine’s ability to improve the effectiveness of methotrexate in humans.

In addition to making cancer cells more vulnerable to methotrexate, the Whitehead Institute team’s research also holds promise for another therapeutic challenge: identifying which patients will or will not respond to the drug.

Two other enzymes cooperate with FTCD in breaking down histidine. The levels of one of the enzymes, known as HAL, appears to correlate with cells’ sensitivity to methotrexate: That is, cancer cells with high levels of HAL tend to be more sensitive to the drug. More work is needed to determine whether this correlation extends to a broader swath of patient samples and if it has predictive value in the clinic. Nevertheless, Kanarek and her colleagues are already beginning work on this front. Together with Abner Louissaint, Jr., a hematopathologist at Massachusetts General Hospital who also served as an early adviser on the Nature study, the Whitehead Institute team will launch a second clinical study to examine whether HAL levels can predict methotrexate response in patients with lymphoma.

“Being able to understand who is going to respond to methotrexate and who is not, and how to achieve a therapeutic benefit while mitigating the drug’s potential side effects, could have a profound impact on patient care,” Walensky says. “The insights from this study bring an entirely new dimension to our understanding of a decades-old and critically important cancer medicine. And as a physician and a scientist, that’s truly exciting.”

Written by Nicole Davis

* * *

David Sabatini’s primary affiliation is with Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, where his laboratory is located and all his research is conducted. He is also a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator and a professor of biology at Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

* * *

Full citation:

“Histidine catabolism is a major determinant of methotrexate sensitivity”

Nature, online on July 11, 2018.

Naama Kanarek (1,2,3,4), Heather R. Keys (1), Jason R. Cantor (1,2,3,4), Caroline A. Lewis (1), Sze Ham Chan (1), Tenzin Kunchok (1), Monther Abu-Remaileh (1,2,3,4), Elizaveta Freinkman (1), Lawrence D. Schweitzer (4), and David M. Sabatini (1,2,3,4).

  1. Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Biology, 455 main Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142, USA
  2. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA
  3. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Biology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA
  4. Broad Institute of Harvard and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 415 main Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142, USA
Restricting a key cellular nutrient could slow tumor growth

Researchers identify the amino acid aspartate as a metabolic limitation in certain cancers.

Raleigh McElvery | Department of Biology
June 29, 2018

Remove tumor cells from a living organism and place them in a dish, and they will multiply even faster than before. The mystery of why this is has long stumped cancer researchers, though many have simply focused on the mutations and chains of molecular reactions that could prompt such a disparity. Now, a group of MIT researchers suggests that the growth limitations in live organisms may stem from a different source: the cell’s environment. More specifically, they found that the amino acid aspartate serves as a key nutrient needed for the “proliferation” or rapid duplication of cancer cells when oxygen is not freely available.

The biologists took cancer cells from various tissue types and engineered them to convert another, more abundant substrate into aspartate using the gene encoding an enzyme from guinea pigs. This had no effect on the cells sitting in a dish, but the same cells implanted into mice engendered tumors that grew faster than ever before. The researchers had increased the cells’ aspartate supply, and in doing so successfully sped up proliferation in a living entity.

“There hasn’t been a lot of thought into what slows tumor growth in terms of the cellular environment, including the sort of food cancer cells need,” says Matthew Vander Heiden, associate professor of biology, associate director of the Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, and senior author of the study. “For instance, if you’re trying to get to a given destination and I want to slow you down, my best bet is to set up a roadblock at a place on your route where you’d experience a slow-down anyways, like a long traffic light. That’s essentially what we’re interested in here — understanding what nutrients the cell is already lacking that put the brakes on proliferation, and then further limiting those nutrients to inhibit growth even more.”

Lucas Sullivan, a postdoc in Vander Heiden’s lab, is the lead author of the study, which appeared in Nature Cell Biology on June 25.

Building the case for aspartate

Isolating a single factor that could impact tumor growth within an organism is tricky business. One potential candidate came to Sullivan via a paper he co-authored with graduate student Dan Gui in 2015, which asked a somewhat controversial question: Why is it that cells need to consume oxygen through cellular respiration in order to proliferate?

It’s a rather counter-intuitive question, because some scientific literature suggests just the opposite: Cancer cells in an organism (“in vivo”) do not enjoy the same access to oxygen as they would in a dish, and therefore don’t depend on oxygen to produce enough energy to divide. Instead, they switch to a different process, fermentation, that doesn’t require oxygen. But Sullivan and Gui noted that cancer cells do rely on oxygen for another reason: to produce aspartate as a byproduct.

Aspartate, they soon confirmed, does, in fact, play a crucial role in controlling the rate of cancer cell proliferation. In another study one year later, Sullivan and Gui noted that the antidiabetic drug metformin, known to inhibit mitochondria, slowed tumor growth and decreased aspartate levels in cells in vivo. Since mitochondria are key to cellular respiration, Sullivan reasoned that blocking their function in an already oxygen-constrained environment (the tumor) might make cancer cells vulnerable to further suppression of respiration — and aspartate — explaining why metformin seems to have such a strong effect on tumor growth.

Despite being potentially required for certain amino acids and the synthesis of all four DNA nucleotides, aspartate is already hard to come by, even in oxygen-rich environments. It’s among the lowest concentration amino acids in our blood, and has no way to enter our cells unless a rare protein transporter is present. Precisely why aspartate import is so inefficient remains an evolutionary mystery; one possibility is that its scarcity serves as a “failsafe,” preventing cells from multiplying until they have all the resources to properly do so.

Regardless, the easiest way for cells to get aspartate is not to import it from outside, but rather to make it directly inside, breaking down another amino acid called asparagine to generate it. However, there are very few known mammals that have an enzyme capable of producing aspartate from asparagine — among them, the guinea pig.

Channeling the guinea pig

In the 1950s, a researcher named John Kidd made an accidental discovery. He injected cancer-ridden rats with sera from various animals — rabbits, horses, guinea pigs, and the like — and discovered that guinea pig serum alone shrunk the rats’ tumors. It wasn’t until years later that scientists learned it was an enzyme in the guinea pig blood called guinea pig asparaginase 1 (gpASNase1) that was responsible for this antitumorigenic effect. Today, we know about a host of simpler organisms with similar enzymes, including bacteria and zebrafish. In fact, bacterial asparaginase is approved as a medicine to treat acute lymphocytic leukemia.

Because guinea pigs are mammals and thus have similar metabolisms to our own, the MIT researchers decided to use gpASNase1 to increase aspartate levels in tumors in four different tumor types and ask whether the tumors would grow faster. This was the case for three of the four types: The colon cancer cells, osteosarcoma cells, and mouse pancreatic cancer cells divided more rapidly than before, but the human pancreatic cancer cells continued to proliferate at their normal pace.

“This is a relatively small sample, but you could take this to mean that not every cell in the body is as sensitive to loss of aspartate production as others,” Sullivan says. “Acquiring aspartate may be a metabolic limitation for only a subset of cancers, since aspartate can be produced via a number of different pathways, not just through asparagine conversion.”

When the researchers tried to slow tumor growth using the antidiabetic metformin, the cells expressing gpASNase1 remained unaffected — confirming Sullivan’s prior suspicion that metformin slows tumor growth specifically by impeding cellular respiration and suppressing aspartate production.

“Our initial finding connecting metformin and proliferation was very serendipitous,” he says, “but these most recent results are a clear proof of concept. They show that decreasing aspartate levels also decreases tumor growth, at least in some tumors. The next step is to determine if there are other ways to more intentionally target aspartate synthesis in certain tissues and improve our current therapeutic approaches.”

Although the efficacy of using metformin to treat cancer remains controversial, these findings indicate that one means to target tumors would be to prevent them from accessing or producing nutrients like aspartate to make new cells.

“Although there are many limitations to cancer cell proliferation, which metabolites become limiting for tumor growth has been poorly understood,” says Kivanc Birsoy, the Chapman-Perelman Assistant Professor at Rockefeller University. “This study identifies aspartate as one such limiting metabolite, and suggests that its availability could be targeted for anti-cancer therapies.”

Birsoy is a former postdoc in professor of biology David Sabatini’s lab, who authored a paper published in the same issue of Nature Cell Biology, identifying aspartate as a major growth limitation in oxygen-deprived tumors.

“These companion papers demonstrate that some tumors in vivo are really limited by the chemical processes that require oxygen to get the aspartate they need to grow, which can affect their sensitivity to drugs like metformin,” Vander Heiden says. “We’re beginning to realize that understanding which cancer patients will respond to which treatments may be determined by factors besides genetic mutations. To really get the full picture, we need to take into account where the tumor is located, its nutrient availability, and the environment in which it lives.”

The research was funded by an NIH Pathway to Independence Award, the American Cancer Society, Ludwig Center for Molecular Oncology Fund, the National Science Foundation, a National Institutes of Health Ruth Kirschstein Fellowship, Alex’s Lemonade Stand Undergraduate Research Fellowship, Damon Runyon Cancer Research Foundation, Howard Hughes Medical Institute Faculty Scholar Award, Stand Up to Cancer, Lustgarten Foundation, Ludwig Center at MIT, the National Institutes of Health, and the Koch Institute’s Center for Precision Cancer Medicine.

Stem cell-derived zika model suggests mechanisms underlying microcephaly
Nicole Giese Rura | Whitehead Institute
June 21, 2018

Cambridge, MA  – Scientists turn to model organisms, like mice and yeast, to investigate the biology underlying emerging diseases. But for the Zika virus, the lack of a good model hampered this type of research. Now, a team of researchers in the laboratory of Whitehead Institute Founding Member Rudolf Jaenisch has devised a way to model Zika and other neural diseases in a dish. Their work is described this week in the journal PNAS.

The Zika virus was identified in 1947 in Uganda, but a 2013 epidemic in French Guinea first brought it to the public’s attention. As the disease spread throughout the Americas and the Caribbean in 2014, abnormalities, such as microcephaly in newborns, were increasingly reported when mothers were infected during their first trimester. Scientists’ efforts to better understand the virus and its mechanisms quickly hit a snag: mice, which are often used to model disease pathology, are not vulnerable to the Zika virus unless their innate immune defenses are knocked out. Additionally, neural diseases, such as those that cause microcephaly, affect cells that reside deep in the brain, and they cannot be easily accessed for observation and manipulation.

In order to circumvent these challenges and to model Zika in the lab, the researchers turned to induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs)–adult cells that have been pushed back to a embryonic stem cell-like state. iPSCs can in turn be nudged to mature into almost any cell type in the body. In previous work, Julien Muffat and Yun Li, former postdoctoral researchers in the Jaenisch lab, were the first to use iPSCs to create microglia, the specialized immune cells that maintain the brain and spinal cord and care for them after injury.

In the current work, Muffat and Li teamed up with Attya Omer, also a graduate student in the Jaenisch lab, and Lee Gehrke’s lab at MIT to study the effect of the Zika virus on iPSC-derived versions of three neural cell types critical during human fetal brain development: microglia, neural progenitors, and astrocytes. Whether the Zika virus can infect these cells and how well the cells can clear the virus could provide insight into why the virus can cause birth defects like microcephaly. Using their model, the team determined that after being infected with a strain derived from the initial Ugandan Zika virus, microglia can survive and can continue to harbor the virus. This is important because in a developing embryo, microglia move from the yolk sac to the developing brain very early in gestation. The study shows that, like their in vivo counterparts, iPSC-derived microglia could invade the immature neural tissue of a brain organoid, and pre-infected microglia could transfer the virus to the organoids. According to Muffat, this suggests that if microglial precursors are infected before their journey, they could shuttle the Zika virus to the developing brain and infect the neural progenitors residing there.

Neural progenitor cells, which during gestation produce the neurons and glia that constitute the majority of the human brain, are particularly vulnerable to the Zika virus and die when infected. To better understand why these cells are so susceptible, the team compared how the Zika virus and the closely related dengue virus affect the neural progenitor cells. Dengue, which does not cause birth defects like microcephaly, triggers a strong cellular immune response, called interferon, in the neural progenitors, which enables the progenitor cells to efficiently fight and clear the dengue virus. In sharp contrast, when exposed to the Zika virus, neural progenitors mount little if any interferon immune defense. Pretreating the neural progenitor cells with interferon before exposure to the Zika virus impedes the virus’s progression and proliferation, and reduces cell death. These results suggest that therapeutically altering interferon levels could prevent some of the more dire effects of Zika infection on the neural progenitor cells.

According to the team, using iPSC-derived cells has great potential for modeling Zika virus as well as many other diseases that affect the central nervous system.

This work was supported by the European Leukodystrophy Association, the Brain & Behavior Research Foundation, the Simons Foundation (SFARI 204106), the International Rett Syndrome Foundation, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the National Institutes of Health (NIH grants HD 045022, R37-CA084198, AI100190), the ELA Foundation, the Emerald Foundation, and Biogen. Jaenisch is a cofounder of Fate Therapeutics, Fulcrum Therapeutics, and Omega Therapeutics.

Written by Nicole Giese Rura
***
Rudolf Jaenisch’s primary affiliation is with Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, where his laboratory is located and all his research is conducted. He is also a professor of biology at Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
 ***
Full citation:
“Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell-derived Glial Cells and Neural Progenitors Display Divergent Responses to Zika and Dengue Infections”
PNAS, online June 18, 2018.
Julien Muffat (1,8), Yun Li (1,8), Attya Omer (1,8), Ann Durbin (3,4,5), Irene Bosch (3,4,5), Grisilda Bakiasi (6), Edward Richards (7), Aaron Meyer (7), Lee Gehrke (3,4,5), Rudolf Jaenisch (1,2).
1. Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, 9 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA
2. Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 31 Ames Street, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA
3. IMES, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge MA 02139, USA
4. Department of Microbiology and Immunobiology, Harvard Medical School, Boston 02115, USA
5. Harvard-MIT Program in Health Sciences and Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA
6. Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, PA
7. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research at MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA
8. These authors contributed equally
Biologists discover how pancreatic tumors lead to weight loss

Shortfall of digestive enzymes can lead to tissue breakdown in early stages of pancreatic cancer.

Anne Trafton | MIT News Office
June 20, 2018

Patients with pancreatic cancer usually experience significant weight loss, which can begin very early in the disease. A new study from MIT and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute offers insight into how this happens, and suggests that the weight loss may not necessarily affect patients’ survival.

In a study of mice, the researchers found that weight loss occurs due to a reduction in key pancreatic enzymes that normally help digest food. When the researchers treated these mice with replacement enzymes, they were surprised to find that while the mice did regain weight, they did not survive any longer than untreated mice.

Pancreatic cancer patients are sometimes given replacement enzymes to help them gain weight, but the new findings suggest that more study is needed to determine whether that actually benefits patients, says Matt Vander Heiden, an associate professor of biology at MIT and a member of the Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research.

“We have to be very careful not to draw medical advice from a mouse study and apply it to humans,” Vander Heiden says. “The study does raise the question of whether enzyme replacement is good or bad for patients, which needs to be studied in a clinical trial.”

Vander Heiden and Brian Wolpin, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, are the senior authors of the study, which appears in the June 20 issue of Nature. The paper’s lead authors are Laura Danai, a former MIT postdoc, and Ana Babic, an instructor in medicine at Dana-Farber.

Starvation mode

In a 2014 study, Vander Heiden and his colleagues found that muscle starts breaking down very early in pancreatic cancer patients, usually long before any other signs of the disease appear.

Still unknown was how this tissue wasting process occurs. One hypothesis was that pancreatic tumors overproduce some kind of signaling factor, such as a hormone, that circulates in the bloodstream and promotes breakdown of muscle and fat.

However, in their new study, the MIT and Dana-Farber researchers found that this was not the case. Instead, they discovered that even very tiny, early-stage pancreatic tumors can impair the production of key digestive enzymes. Mice with these early-stage tumors lost weight even though they ate the same amount of food as normal mice. These mice were unable to digest all of their food, so they went into a starvation mode where the body begins to break down other tissues, especially fat.

The researchers found that when they implanted pancreatic tumor cells elsewhere in the body, this weight loss did not occur. That suggests the tumor cells are not secreting a weight-loss factor that circulates in the bloodstream; instead, they only stimulate tissue wasting when they are in the pancreas.

The researchers then explored whether reversing this weight loss would improve survival. Treating the mice with pancreatic enzymes did reverse the weight loss. However, these mice actually survived for a shorter period of time than mice that had pancreatic tumors but did not receive the enzymes. That finding, while surprising, is consistent with studies in mice that have shown that calorie restriction can have a protective effect against cancer and other diseases.

“It turns out that this mechanism of tissue wasting is actually protective, at least for the mice, in the same way that limiting calories can be protective for mice,” Vander Heiden says.

Human connection

The intriguing findings from the mouse study prompted the research team to see if they could find any connection between weight loss and survival in human patients. In an analysis of medical records and blood samples from 782 patients, they found no link between degree of tissue wasting at the time of diagnosis and length of survival. That finding is important because it could reassure patients that weight loss does not necessarily mean that the patient will do worse, Vander Heiden says.

“Sometimes you can’t do anything about this weight loss, and this finding may mean that just because the patient is eating less and is losing weight, that doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re shortening their life,” he says.

The researchers say that more study is needed to determine if the same mechanism they discovered in mice is also occurring in human cancer patients. Because the mechanism they found is very specific to pancreatic tumors, it may differ from the underlying causes behind tissue wasting seen in other types of cancer and diseases such as HIV.

“From a mechanistic standpoint, this study reveals a very different way to think about what could be causing at least some weight loss in pancreatic cancer, suggesting that not all weight loss is the same across different cancers,” Vander Heiden says. “And it raises questions that we really need to study more, because some mechanisms may be protective and some mechanisms may be bad for you.”

Clary Clish, director of the Metabolomics Platform at the Broad Institute, and members of his research group also contributed to this work. The research was funded, in part, by the Lustgarten Foundation, a National Institutes of Health Ruth Kirschstein Fellowship, Stand Up 2 Cancer, the Ludwig Center for Molecular Oncology at MIT, the Koch Institute Frontier Research Program through the Kathy and Curt Marble Cancer Research Fund, the MIT Center for Precision Cancer Medicine, and the National Institutes of Health.