Subscriber access provided by UNIV OF LOUISIANA
Letter
Proteome profiling of 1 to 5 spiked circulating tumor cells isolated from whole blood using immunodensity enrichment, laser capture microdissection, nanodroplet sample processing and ultrasensitive nanoLC-MS Ying Zhu, Jennifer Podolak, Rui Zhao, Anil K. Shukla, Ronald J. Moore, George V Thomas, and Ryan T. Kelly Anal. Chem., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.8b03268 • Publication Date (Web): 30 Sep 2018 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on October 2, 2018
Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.
is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Analytical Chemistry
Proteome profiling of 1 to 5 spiked circulating tumor cells isolated from whole blood using immunodensity enrichment, laser capture microdissection, nanodroplet sample processing and ultrasensitive nanoLC-MS Ying Zhu,1, † Jennifer Podolak,2, † Rui Zhao,1 Anil K. Shukla,3 Ronald J. Moore,3 George V. Thomas,*, 2, 4 and Ryan T. Kelly*, 1, 5 1
Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA 99354 USA Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, 97239, USA 3 Biological Sciences Division, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA 99354 USA 4 Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, 97239, USA 2
5
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah 84602, USA
ABSTRACT: Proteome profiling of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) can provide crucial insight into disease progression and the role of CTCs in tumor metastasis. We describe an integrated workflow to measure global protein expression in 1–5 spiked CTCs enriched from whole blood by immunodensity gradient centrifugation. Enriched CTCs were purified and collected by laser capture microdissection, prepared using a recently developed nanodroplet-based processing platform (nanoPOTS), and finally analyzed by ultrasensitive nanoLC-MS/MS. The workflow was capable of identifying an average of 164 and 607 protein groups from samples comprising 1 and 5 LNCaP cells, respectively, that were isolated from human whole blood. A panel of prostate cancer-specific proteins were identified and quantified, which were used to differentiate between spiked CTCs and white blood cells.
Circulating tumor cells (CTCs), which originate in primary tumors or metastases and circulate in blood vessels, may extravasate at distant tissues to form metastatic tumors.1 High CTC counts are usually correlated with aggressive and metastatic cancer.2,3 Multiplexed molecular characterization of CTC protein profiles would add considerably to the understanding of cancer progression. Because no whole-proteome amplification method is available, multiplexed protein analysis of single CTCs is very challenging. Conventional immunofluorescence assays are limited to measuring a handful of proteins in single cells due to spectral overlap. Microfluidics-based immunofluorescence techniques have enabled simultaneous detection of up to 42 secreted proteins from single cells by combining spatial and spectral encoding approaches.4 A similar approach was applied to profile a panel of proteins from CTCs and its ability to distinguish CTCs from leukocytes and determine their tumor of origin were demonstrated.5 Microfluidic western blotting has provided another way for multiplexed protein measurement from single CTCs by integrating electrophoretic separations and multiple-cycle immunoassays.6 A panel of 12 protein markers from patient-derived CTCs was quantified, and two distinct CTC subpopulations from breast cancer were identified. However, these immunoassay-based approaches shared common limitations including small numbers of proteins, limited specificity and availability of antibodies, and the inability to work in an untargeted or discovery mode.
Although mass spectrometry (MS)-based proteomics has been developed to quantify thousands of proteins in a labelfree fashion,7 the application of MS proteomics to study rare CTCs has been precluded by limited analytical sensitivity. Recently, proteomic sensitivity was significantly improved through the use of nanoflow chemical separations,8–10 high performance ion optics and detectors,11 and low-loss sample preparation.12,13 Nemes and coworkers developed a capillary electrophoresis mass spectrometry (CE-MS) platform to measure protein expression in single blastomeres from frog embryo, and significant heterogeneity was observed.14 Li et al.10 developed an ultralow-flow liquid chromatography (LC)MS system to analyze low numbers of MCF-7 cells isolated from human blood. Approximate 2500 proteins were identified by injecting an aliquot of digested lysate corresponding to 122 cells. Recently, we developed a microfluidic platform termed Nanodroplet Processing in One pot for Trace Samples (nanoPOTS),13 which enhanced overall sensitivity by significantly minimizing protein and peptide losses during sample preparation. When combined with ultrasensitive nanoLC-MS,9 the platform was able to profile ~3000 proteins from as few as 10 HeLa cells,13 and nearly 700 proteins from single HeLa cells.15 Together, these works suggest that MSbased proteomics holds great potential to provide insight into protein expression signatures from previously inaccessible small samples. Here we report an integrated workflow to study protein expression in rare or single CTCs spiked into whole blood.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Analytical Chemistry 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
The workflow combined negative enrichment,16 laser capture microdissection (LCM)-based cell purification,17 nanoPOTS sample preparation and ultrasensitive nanoLC-MS analysis.13 We show that the coupling of negative enrichment with LCM could efficiently obtain highly purified CTCs from human whole blood, which could then be transferred to nanowells for sensitive and untargeted proteomic analysis. The overall workflow is shown in Figure 1. As a proof-ofconcept study, we spiked 5×105 LNCaP cells into 7 mL of human whole blood, resulting in a concentration of ~7000 cells/mL. The blood sample was processed with a RosetteSep CTC enrichment kit (no. 15137C, STEMCELL Technologies). White blood cells (WBCs) were crosslinked with red blood cells (RBCs) and separated from CTCs during density gradient centrifugation (Figure 1a). After RBC lysis and fixation, the remaining cells were deposited onto PEN membrane slides (Carl Zeiss Microscopy) with the use of a Cytospin 4 (Thermo Scientific) (Figure 1b). To differentiate LNCaP cells from remaining WBCs, the slides were stained with anti-EpCAM (green) and anti-CD45 (red) antibodies. LCM was used to identify cells based on fluorescence staining, excise the surrounding membranes, and transfer the CTC-containing membranes into nanowells (Figure 1c) by laser-pressure catapulting. Cell lysis, and protein extraction, denaturation, alkylation and tryptic digestion were performed using the nanoPOTS platform (Figure 1d).13 Finally, cell digest was purified by solid phase extraction (SPE) and analyzed by nanoLC-MS/MS (Figure 1e).
a
b
c
Nanodroplets
CTCs WBCs PEN membrane
Immunodensity enrichment
d
Cytospin onto membrane slide
Cell lysis Protein extraction Reduction Alkylation Digestion
nanoPOTS preparation
10 X
Laser capture microdissection
e nanoHPLC
ESI
MS
LC-MS/MS measurement
two failed transfers resulting from errant trajectories during laser-pressure catapulting into nanowells.
Figure 2. (a) Brightfield microscopic images showing a spiked CTC cell (LNCaP) surrounded by WBCs on a PEN membrane slide after negative enrichment. (b) PEN membrane slide after LCM removal of the single LNCaP cell. Scale bar is 50 µm. (c, d) Fluorescence images showing (c) one and (d) five LNCaP cells collected into nanodroplets. Scale bar is 150 µm. The cell number was determined by refocusing the microscope and identifying each cell individually.
We evaluated the sensitivity of the present workflow by analyzing triplicate samples comprising 10 WBCs, 5 LNCaP cells and 1 LNCaP cell, all of which were isolated from whole blood. One sample containing 10 LNCaP cells was also analyzed for use as a library to transfer identifications using MaxQuant’s Match Between Runs (MBR) algorithm.9,13,18 We identified an average of 589, 1480, and 293 unique peptides, corresponding to 265, 607 and 164 protein groups for triplicate analysis of 10 WBCs, 5 LNCaP cells and 1 LNCaP cell, respectively (Figure 3a and 3b). Venn diagrams showed 53%, 75% and 38% of the proteins were common in each cell group (Figure S1). Among the protein identifications, both WBCs and LNCaP cells highly expressed a panel of housekeeping proteins including histones (HIST1H2AJ, HIST1H2BL, HIST2H3A, HIST1H4A), actin (ACTG1), tubulin (TUBB) and glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH). However, LNCaP cells can be easily differentiated from WBCs by a panel of prostate and epithelium-specific proteins including prostate-specific antigen (KLK3) and cytokeratins (KRT8, KRT 18) (Figure 3c and 3d). We were able to identify 3 out of 9 protein markers (KRT8, KRT18, and HSPD1) associated with highly progressive prostate cancer.19 Despite this, additional sensitivity improvements are clearly required to increase proteome coverage and enable the detection of more prostate cancer-associated protein makers such as AMACR, PSMA, and EZH2.20
Figure 1. Workflow for isolation and proteomic analysis of spiked CTCs.
The negative CTC enrichment approach has been previously demonstrated to deplete WBCs by >3 orders of magnitude in an unbiased fashion, and multiple spike-in experiments have suggested that an average of 38% of CTCs can be recovered using this procedure.16 In this work, LCM further purified CTCs from remaining WBCs and collected defined numbers of cells for proteomic analysis (Figure 2). Over 90% collection efficiency was achieved in triplicate collection of 10 single LNCaP cells into nanowells (10/10, 9/10, and 9/10), with the
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 2 of 4
Page 3 of 4 a
b 800 Protein groups
Unique peptides
1600
1200
800
400
0
600
400
200
0 10 WBC
5 LNCaP
1 LNCaP
25 10 WBCs 20
HIST1H2AJ ACTG1 GAPDH
15
d Log2(iBAQ value)
Log2(iBAQ value)
c
10
5
10 WBC
5 LNCaP
1 LNCaP
25 HIST1H2AJ
5 LNCaP
ACTG1
20 KRT18 HSPD1
15
KRT8 GAPDH
10
KLK3
5
-50
0
50
100 150 200 250 300 350
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Protein rank
Protein rank
Figure 3. Evaluation of the sensitivity of the proteomic workflow for CTCs. (a) Number of unique peptides and (b) protein groups identified from 10 WBCs, 5 LNCaP cells and 1 LNCaP cell. Error bars represent standard deviations. Identified proteins ranked according by abundance based on MS1 intensity (log2 iBAQ values) for 10 WBCs (c) and 5 LNCaP cells (d).
We next evaluated whether LNCaP cells could be quantitatively differentiated from WBCs cells based on labelfree protein quantification. Protein abundance was estimated with iBAQ (Intensity-Based Absolute Quantification).21 We plotted a panel of proteins including two housekeeping proteins (ACTG1 and HIST1H4A) and four prostate-cancerspecific proteins (KRT18, KRT8, HSPD1, and KLK3) (Figure 4). Reproducible protein abundance measurements with RSDs in the range of 1.3% to 8.0% were obtained. For housekeeping proteins, 10 WBC samples and 5 LNCaP cell samples had similar iBAQ values without significant differences (p > 0.05). Three prostate cancer-specific proteins were detected with valid iBAQ values in both the 5 LNCaP and 1 LNCaP cell samples, while KLK3 (prostate-specific antigen) was only detected in 5 LNCaP cells. Interestingly, although only a small number of cells was analyzed, the protein abundances were still proportional to cell numbers. The average difference in log2-transformed iBAQ values between 5 LNCaP cells and 1 LNCaP cell were 3.43, 3.24, 3.60, 3.53, and 3.43 for ACTG1, HIST1H4A, KRT18, KRT8, and HSPD1, respectively. Together, these results demonstrate the present system is able to quantify protein expression using few or even single CTCs. 28 10 WBCs
5 LNCaP
1 LNCaP
24
In summary, we have demonstrated the feasibility of proteome profiling of spiked CTCs from whole blood by integrating negative immunodepletion, LCM and nanoPOTSbased sample preparation. We also demonstrated that labelfree protein quantification can be used to differentiate CTCs from WBCs. Further refinement of the platform will include improving CTC recovery from much smaller starting concentrations using microfluidic techniques22, commercial platforms that isolate single CTCs, or automated whole-slide scanning and isolation by LCM. In addition, proteome coverage will be increased through further optimization of nanoPOTS sample preparation and additional improvements to nanoLC23 and MS. With these advances, we anticipate MSbased proteomics can become a valuable tool for investigating tumor response to therapy and deciphering the molecular mechanism of tumor metastasis.
Supporting Information Supporting Information is available free of charge on the ACS Publication website. Detailed description of experimental procedures including cell culture, cell spike-in, enrichment and collection, proteomic sample preparation, LC-MS/MS setup and data analysis. Figure S1 showing the overlap of protein group identifications from similar cell groups. Table listing proteins identified from WBCs and LNCaP cells with the corresponding log2-transformed iBAQ values.
AUTHOR INFORMATION Corresponding Author * Ryan T. Kelly,
[email protected] * George V. Thomas,
[email protected] Author Contributions †
These authors contributed equally. Y. Z., J. P., G.V.T and R.T.K designed experiments. J. P. performed LNCaP cell culture, spikein, immune-density enrichment, immunofluorescence staining and slide preparation. Y. Z. performed LCM and proteomic sample preparation. R. Z. prepared SPE and LC columns. A. K. S. and R. J. M. optimized MS. Y. Z. performed LC-MS experiments and analyzed raw data. The manuscript was written through contributions of all authors. All authors have given approval to the final version of the manuscript.
20
Log2(iBAQ)
16
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
12 8 4
K3 KL
HS PD 1
8 KR T
T1 8 KR
4A T1 H HIS
G1
0
AC T
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Analytical Chemistry
Figure 4. Measurement of protein abundances among 10 white blood cells (WBCs), 5 LNCaP cells, and 1 LNCaP cell. Undetected proteins are indicated with a 0 value.
This work was supported by NIH grants R33 CA225248 (R.T.K.), R21 EB020976 (R.T.K.), the Pacific Northwest Prostate Cancer SPORE/NCI P50 CA097186 (G.V.T), the OHSU-Knight Cancer Institute (G.V.T), Earth & Biological Sciences Directorate Mission Seed under the Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program at PNNL. (Y.Z.) and the Precision Medicine Innovation Co-Laboratory (PMedIC), a joint research collaboration of OHSU and PNNL. A portion of this research was performed using EMSL, a national scientific user facility sponsored by the Department of Energy’s Office of Biological and Environmental Research and located at PNNL.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Analytical Chemistry 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
REFERENCES (1) (2)
(3)
(4)
(5) (6)
(7) (8) (9)
(10)
(11) (12)
(13)
Plaks, V.; Koopman, C. D.; Zena, W. Science 2013, 341 (6151), 1186–1189. Cristofanilli, M.; Budd, G. T.; Ellis, M. J.; Stopeck, A.; Matera, J.; Miller, M. C.; Reuben, J. M.; Doyle, G. V.; Allard, W. J.; Terstappen, L. W. M. M.; Hayes, D. F. N. Engl. J. Med. 2004, 351 (8), 781–791. Pantel, K.; Denève, E.; Nocca, D.; Coffy, A.; Vendrell, J.-P.; Maudelonde, T.; Riethdorf, S.; Alix-Panabières, C. Clin. Chem. 2012, 58 (5), 936–940. Lu, Y.; Xue, Q.; Eisele, M. R.; Sulistijo, E. S.; Brower, K.; Han, L.; Amir, E. D.; Pe’er, D.; Miller-Jensen, K.; Fan, R. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2015, 112 (7), E607–E615. Yang, L.; Wang, Z.; Deng, Y.; Li, Y.; Wei, W.; Shi, Q. Anal. Chem. 2016, 88 (22), 11077–11083. Sinkala, E.; Sollier-Christen, E.; Renier, C.; Rosàs-Canyelles, E.; Che, J.; Heirich, K.; Duncombe, T. A.; Vlassakis, J.; Yamauchi, K. A.; Huang, H.; Jeffrey, S. S.; Herr, A. E. Nat. Commun. 2017, 8, 14622. Mann, M.; Kulak, N. A.; Nagaraj, N.; Cox, J. Mol. Cell 2013, 49 (4), 583–590. Sun, L.; Zhu, G.; Zhao, Y.; Yan, X.; Mou, S.; Dovichi, N. J. Angew. Chemie - Int. Ed. 2013, 52 (51), 13661–13664. Zhu, Y.; Zhao, R.; Piehowski, P. D.; Moore, R. J.; Lim, S.; Orphan, V. J.; Paša-Tolić, L.; Qian, W. J.; Smith, R. D.; Kelly, R. T. Int. J. Mass Spectrom. 2018, 427, 4–10. Li, S.; Plouffe, B. D.; Belov, A. M.; Ray, S.; Wang, X.; Murthy, S. K.; Karger, B. L.; Ivanov, A. R. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 2015, 14 (6), 1672–1683. Kelly, R. T.; Tolmachev, A. V.; Page, J. S.; Tang, K.; Smith, R. D. Mass Spectrom. Rev. 2010, 29 (2), 294–312. Hughes, C. S.; Foehr, S.; Garfield, D. A.; Furlong, E. E.; Steinmetz, L. M.; Krijgsveld, J. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2014, 10 (10), 757–757. Zhu, Y.; Piehowski, P. D.; Zhao, R.; Chen, J.; Shen, Y.; Moore, R. J.; Shukla, A. K.; Petyuk, V. A.; Campbell-Thompson, M.;
(14) (15)
(16)
(17)
(18) (19)
(20)
(21)
(22)
(23)
Page 4 of 4 Mathews, C. E.; Smith, R. D.; Qian, W. J.; Kelly, R. T. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9 (1), 882. Lombard-Banek, C.; Moody, S. A.; Nemes, P. Angew. Chemie Int. Ed. 2016, 55 (7), 2454–2458. Zhu, Y.; Clair, G.; Chrisler, W. B.; Shen, Y.; Zhao, R.; Shukla, A. K.; Moore, R. J.; Misra, R. S.; Pryhuber, G. S.; Smith, R. D.; Ansong, C.; Kelly, R. T. Angew. Chemie Int. Ed. 2018, DOI: 10.1002/anie.201802843. Podolak, J.; Eilers, K.; Newby, T.; Slottke, R.; Tucker, E.; Olson, S. B.; Lue, H.-W.; Youngren, J.; Aggarwal, R.; Small, E. J.; Graff, J. N.; Alumkal, J. J.; Beer, T. M.; Thomas, G. V. Oncotarget 2017, 8 (42), 71447–71455. Zhu, Y.; Dou, M.; Piehowski, P. D.; Liang, Y.; Wang, F.; Chu, R. K.; Chrisler, W. B.; Smith, J. N.; Schwarz, K. C.; Shen, Y.; Shukla, A. K.; Moore, R. J.; Smith, R. D.; Qian, W.-J.; Kelly, R. T. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 2018, 17 (9), 1864–1874. Tyanova, S.; Temu, T.; Cox, J. Nat. Protoc. 2016, 11 (12), 2301–2319. Lexander, H.; Palmberg, C.; Hellman, U.; Auer, G.; Hellström, M.; Franzén, B.; Jörnval, H.; Egevad, L. Proteomics 2006, 6 (15), 4370–4380. Tanase, C. P.; Codrici, E.; Popescu, I. D.; Mihai, S.; Enciu, A.M.; Necula, L. G.; Preda, A.; Ismail, G.; Albulescu, R. Oncotarget 2017, 8 (11), 18497–18512. Schwanhäusser, B.; Busse, D.; Li, N.; Dittmar, G.; Schuchhardt, J.; Wolf, J.; Chen, W.; Selbach, M. Nature 2011, 473 (7347), 337–342. Ozkumur, E.; Shah, A. M.; Ciciliano, J. C.; Emmink, B. L.; David, T.; Brachtel, E.; Yu, M.; Chen, P.; Morgan, B.; Trautwein, J.; Kimura, A.; Sengupta, S.; Stott, S. L.; Karabacak, N. M.; Barber, T. A.; Walsh, J. R.; Smith, K.; Spuhler, P. S.; Sullivan, J. P.; Lee, R. J.; Ting, D. T.; Luo, X.; Shaw, A. T.; Bardia, A.; Lecia, V.; Louis, D. N.; Maheswaran, S.; Kapur, R.; Haber, D. A. Sci Transl Med. 2013, 5 (179), 1–20. Shen, Y.; Tolić, N.; Masselon, C.; Paša-Tolić, L.; Camp, D. G.; Hixson, K. K.; Zhao, R.; Anderson, G. A.; Smith, R. D. Anal. Chem. 2004, 76 (1), 144–154.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
