- A preview of this full-text is provided by Springer Nature.
- Learn more
Preview content only
Content available from Nature Medicine
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Articles
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-018-0086-7
1Centre for Evolution and Cancer, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK. 2Division of Molecular Pathology, The Institute of Cancer Research,
London, UK. 3Division of Cancer Therapeutics, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK. 4Department of Cellular Pathology, University Hospital of
Wales, Cardiff, UK. 5Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA. 6CRUK Gene Function Laboratory and Breast Cancer Now Toby Robins
Research Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK. 7UCL Cancer Institute, University College London, London, UK. 8Paediatric Oncology
Drug Development Team, Children and Young People’s Unit, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, UK. 9UQ Child Health Research Centre, The University
of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 10Oncology Services Group, Children’s Health Queensland Hospital and Health Service, Brisbane,
Queensland, Australia. 11The University of Queensland Diamantina Institute, Translational Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 12Department
of Anatomical and Cellular Pathology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. 13Department of Cytogenetics and Reproductive Biology,
Farhat HACHED Hospital, Sousse, Tunisia. 14Faculty of Medicine, Sousse, Tunisia. 15Centre Hospitalier Régional et Universitaire Hautepierre, Strasbourg,
France. 16Department of Radiotherapy, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, UK. 17Department of Cellular Pathology, St George’s Hospital NHS Trust, London,
UK. 18Department of Neurosurgery, St George’s Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK. 19Department of Neuropathology, Kings College Hospital, London, UK.
20Department of Neurosurgery, Kings College Hospital, London, UK. 21Hospital Sant Joan de Deu, Barcelona, Spain. 22Department of Neurology, Stanford
University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA. 23Present address: Bambino Gesù Children’s Hospital–IRCCS, Rome, Italy. 24Present address: Department
of Pediatric Hematology Oncology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. *e-mail: chris.jones@icr.ac.uk
pGBM and DIPG are a highly heterogeneous group of high-
grade glial tumors with no effective treatments1. Integrated
molecular profiling2–7 has revealed unique, specific and highly
recurrent mutations in genes encoding histone H3 variants that
mark robust subgroups of pGBM and DIPG with distinct age of
onset, anatomical distribution, clinical outcome, and histopatho-
logical and radiological features8,9. A paradigm shift away from
extrapolating from inappropriate adult GBM data and toward
a more pediatric-biology-specific approach to developing new
therapies has been a positive consequence of the discovery of these
mechanisms of tumorigenesis10–12.
Despite these advances in our understanding of the unique bio-
logical drivers of these diseases13, a major challenge to improving
outcomes for children with these tumors is likely to overlap with
morphologically similar tumors in adults: their extensive intratu-
moral heterogeneity14. This has been demonstrated spatially by the
application of genomic analyses of topographically distinct areas
of the tumor at resection15, through longitudinal studies of tumor
Functional diversity and cooperativity between
subclonal populations of pediatric glioblastoma
and diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma cells
Mara Vinci1,2,3,23, Anna Burford1,2,3, Valeria Molinari1,2,3, Ketty Kessler1,2,3, Sergey Popov1,2,3,4,
Matthew Clarke1,2,3, Kathryn R. Taylor1,2,3,5, Helen N. Pemberton6, Christopher J. Lord6,
Alice Gutteridge7, Tim Forshew7, Diana Carvalho 1,2,3, Lynley V. Marshall8, Elizabeth Y. Qin5,
Wendy J. Ingram 9,10, Andrew S. Moore 9,10,11, Ho-Keung Ng12, Saoussen Trabelsi13,
Dorra H’mida-Ben Brahim13,14, Natacha Entz-Werle15, Stergios Zacharoulis8,24, Sucheta Vaidya8,
Henry C. Mandeville16, Leslie R. Bridges17, Andrew J. Martin18, Safa Al-Sarraj19,
Christopher Chandler20, Mariona Sunol21, Jaume Mora21, Carmen de Torres21, Ofelia Cruz 21,
Angel M. Carcaboso 21, Michelle Monje 22, Alan Mackay1,2,3 and Chris Jones1,2,3*
The failure to develop effective therapies for pediatric glioblastoma (pGBM) and diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG) is
in part due to their intrinsic heterogeneity. We aimed to quantitatively assess the extent to which this was present in these
tumors through subclonal genomic analyses and to determine whether distinct tumor subpopulations may interact to promote
tumorigenesis by generating subclonal patient-derived models in vitro and in vivo. Analysis of 142 sequenced tumors revealed
multiple tumor subclones, spatially and temporally coexisting in a stable manner as observed by multiple sampling strategies.
We isolated genotypically and phenotypically distinct subpopulations that we propose cooperate to enhance tumorigenic-
ity and resistance to therapy. Inactivating mutations in the H4K20 histone methyltransferase KMT5B (SUV420H1), present
in < 1% of cells, abrogate DNA repair and confer increased invasion and migration on neighboring cells, in vitro and in vivo,
through chemokine signaling and modulation of integrins. These data indicate that even rare tumor subpopulations may exert
profound effects on tumorigenesis as a whole and may represent a new avenue for therapeutic development. Unraveling the
mechanisms of subclonal diversity and communication in pGBM and DIPG will be an important step toward overcoming barri-
ers to effective treatments.
NATURE MEDICINE | VOL 24 | AUGUST 2018 | 1204–1215 | www.nature.com/naturemedicine
1204
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved