Abstract
The initiating oncogenic event in almost half of human lung adenocarcinomas is still unknown, a fact that complicates the development of selective targeted therapies. Yet these tumours harbour a number of alterations without obvious oncogenic function including BRAF-inactivating mutations. Inactivating BRAF mutants in lung predominate over the activating V600E mutant that is frequently observed in other tumour types1. Here we demonstrate that the expression of an endogenous Braf(D631A) kinase-inactive isoform in mice (corresponding to the human BRAF(D594A) mutation) triggers lung adenocarcinoma in vivo, indicating that BRAF-inactivating mutations are initiating events in lung oncogenesis. Moreover, inactivating BRAF mutations have also been identified in a subset of KRAS-driven human lung tumours. Co-expression of Kras(G12V) and Braf(D631A) in mouse lung cells markedly enhances tumour initiation, a phenomenon mediated by Craf kinase activity2,3, and effectively accelerates tumour progression when activated in advanced lung adenocarcinomas. We also report a key role for the wild-type Braf kinase in sustaining Kras(G12V)/Braf(D631A)-driven tumours. Ablation of the wild-type Braf allele prevents the development of lung adenocarcinoma by inducing a further increase in MAPK signalling that results in oncogenic toxicity; this effect can be abolished by pharmacological inhibition of Mek to restore tumour growth. However, the loss of wild-type Braf also induces transdifferentiation of club cells, which leads to the rapid development of lethal intrabronchiolar lesions. These observations indicate that the signal intensity of the MAPK pathway is a critical determinant not only in tumour development, but also in dictating the nature of the cancer-initiating cell and ultimately the resulting tumour phenotype.
The RAS–MAPK signalling cascade serves as a central node in transducing signals from membrane receptors to the nucleus. This pathway is aberrantly activated in a substantial fraction of human cancers4. Moreover, germline mutations resulting in limited activation of this signalling cascade cause developmental disorders known as RASopathies5. There is also abundant evidence that elevated RAS–MAPK signalling results in cellular toxicity that may serve as a natural barrier to cancer progression early in tumorigenesis6. Finally, genetic abrogation of this pathway in adult mice results in their rapid death7. These findings suggest that defined thresholds of RAS–MAPK activity are required for homeostasis as well as for malignant transformation, but compelling genetic evidence is missing.
In order to augment MAPK signalling in controlled increments we have taken advantage of the expression of an endogenous Braf(D631A) kinase-dead isoform (corresponding to the human BRAF(D594A) mutant) that is known to induce Erk phosphorylation in a Craf-dependent manner2,8. This effect, known as the MAPK paradox, is due to enhanced heterodimerization and activation of the catalytically competent Craf protomer in Braf(D631A)–Craf complexes2,3. In agreement with these observations, lack of wild-type Braf expression in KrasG12V cell lines expressing Braf(D631A) increased the intensity and duration of MAPK signalling (Extended Data Fig. 1), probably as a result of the exclusive formation of Braf(D631A)–Craf heterodimers. Thus, to generate controlled thresholds of MAPK intensity in vivo, we combined wild-type Braf, conditional knockout Braf lox and conditional knock-in Braf LSLD631A with an inducible KrasLSLG12Vgeo allele9 (where LSL indicates a lox-STOP-lox motif). The resulting Kras+/LSLG12Vgeo (hereto designated as K), Kras+/LSLG12Vgeo;Braf +/LSLD631A (designated as KB) and Kras+/LSLG12Vgeo;Braf lox/LSLD631A (designated as KBL) strains were intratracheally infected with adenovirus expressing Cre recombinase (Ad-Cre). Cre-mediated recombination of these alleles results in the induction of distinct levels of Ras–MAPK signalling, with Braf +/+ driving lower activity, Braf +/D631A intermediate intensity and Braf −/D631A maximal activation. This strategy allowed us to investigate the effect of various MAPK activity thresholds on cell transformation, adenocarcinoma development and cellular toxicity in vivo.
Lung cells expressing these conditional alleles were identified by co-expression of the Kras(G12V) oncoprotein with β-geo, a chimaeric bacterial protein with β-galactosidase activity9 (Extended Data Fig. 2). As illustrated in Fig. 1a, small X-gal+ hyperplasias could be readily detected in the lungs of K mice 1 month after Ad-Cre infection. By constrast, Ad-Cre-infected KB mice displayed abundant hyperplastic areas together with adenomas, a lesion that is extremely infrequent in K mice at this early stage10. Remarkably, X-gal+ alveolar hyperplasias and adenomas were nearly absent in Ad-Cre-infected KBL animals. These mice, however, displayed hypertrophic bronchi as their most prominent feature (Fig. 1a). The lack of KrasG12V-driven alveolar lesions in KBL mice is unlikely to be a consequence of the absence of an active Braf, since this kinase is dispensable for the development of KrasG12V-driven lung adenocarcinoma7,11. Thus, we explored the possibility that the absence of alveolar lesions was due to some sort of cellular toxicity such as that caused by the induction of senescence or DNA damage, two phenomena known to act as barriers to tumour development6,12,13. Indeed, examination of lung lysates and sections from KBL mice detected p19Arf and p53 tumour suppressors, active caspase-3 and γ-H2AX, a marker for DNA damage, as early as 1 week following Ad-Cre infection (Fig. 1b, c). We did not observe differences in senescence-associated β-gal staining (data not shown). The concomitant increase in the phosphorylation of Erk1/2 and p90Rsk suggested that elevated MAPK signalling triggered a stress response that impaired tumour cell proliferation. Yet it has been recently described that mutant Kras-driven lung adenocarcinomas display a tonic activation of the DNA damage response to prevent the induction of genotoxic stress14. We hypothesize that the exclusive formation of Braf(D631A)–Craf complexes in KBL mice exceeded such a toxic signalling threshold and induced a stress response incompatible with tumour development. Thus, our results indicate that Ras-oncogenic toxicity is quantitatively dictated by MAPK function. In support of this hypothesis, whereas Mek inhibition prevented tumour growth in Ad-Cre-infected KB mice, it rescued the toxic phenotype in KBL animals in a dose-dependent manner and restored tumour progression at intermediate drug concentrations, most likely by curtailing MAPK activity to levels compatible with cell proliferation (Fig. 1d). This is in agreement with the observation that RAS-induced senescence in primary cells is bypassed by inhibition of MEK and ERK kinases15. These observations suggest that KrasG12V-driven lung tumour cells can only proliferate within a limited range of MAPK activity. Whereas excess MAPK activity induced DNA damage- mediated cellular toxicity, insufficient MAPK signalling cannot sustain tumour growth.
Next, cohorts of Ad-Cre infected K, KB and KBL mice were followed over time. In agreement with the earlier onset and the more rapid progression of the alveolar lesions, the KB animals displayed significantly shortened survival (Fig. 2a). Histopathological analysis of their lungs at 6 months post Ad-Cre infection revealed a 7.5-fold increase in tumour burden compared to K controls (Fig. 2b). Moreover, KB mice displayed advanced adenocarcinomas, a tumour stage that is extremely infrequent at this time in tumours driven by KrasG12V alone (Fig. 2c). Tumours present in KB mice displayed SPC+CC10− immunostaining, which suggests an alveolar type II (AT2) origin as previously described for adenocarcinomas driven by oncogenic Kras alone10,16 (Fig. 2d). Altogether, these observations suggest that MAPK hyperactivation by coexisting Kras(G12V) and Braf(D631A) mutations resulted in increased transformation of AT2 cells and accelerated tumour progression. The MAPK paradoxical activation model postulates that the observed tumour phenotype is mediated by Craf kinase activity2,8,17. To genetically validate this hypothesis in the lung tumours studied here, we added conditional knock-in Craf (also known as Raf1) kinase-dead alleles (Craf LSLD468A) to KB mice. The resulting strain, Kras+/LSLG12Vgeo;Braf +/LSLD631A;Craf LSLD468A/LSLD468A (designated as KBCKD) was used to determine whether genetic inhibition of the Craf kinase reverted the increased tumorigenic phenotype displayed by KB mice. Expression of the Craf(D468A) kinase-dead isoform led to a substantial decrease in the levels of phosphorylated (p-)Erk1/2 and overall tumour burden (Fig. 2e, f and Extended Data Fig. 3), significantly extending the survival of Ad-Cre-infected KBCKD mice compared to KB animals. Similarly, Craf ablation (KBCL mice) also resulted in prolonged survival (Fig. 2g). Altogether, these results demonstrate that the increased tumour burden and faster adenocarcinoma progression in KB animals is due to Craf-mediated hyper-activation of MAPK signalling.
As indicated above, the tumour burden of the KBL cohort was significantly decreased compared to KB mice, suggesting that excessive MAPK activity in the absence of wild-type Braf expression may be detrimental for lung adenocarcinoma development. Yet, in spite of the reduced tumour burden, KBL animals reached humane end point at the same time as KB mice (Fig. 2a, b). Detailed examination of the lungs of KBL mice revealed the presence of intrabronchiolar carcinomas (112 of 250 bronchi, 45%), a rare lesion in K (0 of 162) or KB (20 of 145, 14%) cohorts (Fig. 3a). Immunostaining with a collection of markers including Ttf1 and SPC, characteristic of lung adenocarcinoma and Sox2, p63 and CK5, diagnostic of squamous cell carcinoma, did not clarify the origin of these intrabronchiolar lesions since the resulting expression pattern was not in accordance with the expected profile of either of these tumour types18 (Fig. 3b). Analysis of the initial tumour stages of these lesions revealed protruding papillary structures accompanied by loss of CC10 expression, a marker characteristic of the bronchiolar epithelium. Most of these lesions (95%) acquired expression of the AT2 marker SPC, thus suggesting a transdifferentiation process (Fig. 3c and Extended Data Fig. 4).
To further clarify the origin of these intrabronchiolar lesions we performed in vivo tracing experiments by infecting K, KB and KBL mice with lineage-specific Ad-CC10-Cre or Ad-SPC-Cre viruses that restrict Cre-mediated recombination to club or AT2 cells respectively19. Analysis of lungs of K and KB mice after Ad-SPC-Cre infection revealed the presence of adenomas that, as expected, were larger and more abundant in KB animals. Likewise, KBL mice predominantly developed alveolar hyperplasias that failed to progress to advanced stages. Importantly, infection with Ad-CC10-Cre did not induce tumour growth in K or KB mice but caused abundant SPC+ intrabronchiolar carcinomas in KBL animals (Fig. 3d, e). These results indicate that the threshold of MAPK activity toxic for AT2 cells resulted in the efficient transformation of cells present in bronchial epithelium that are usually refractory to KrasG12V-driven oncogenesis10,20,21. Altogether, these results suggest a quantitative impact of MAPK activity controlling various aspects of Kras oncogene-driven lung carcinogenesis. As such, oncogenic transformation may critically depend on cell- or tissue-specific programs that are hijacked to adjust MAPK activity and avoid senescence or other tumour-suppressive stress responses. This quantitative model is not exclusive to MAPK signalling as a similar threshold response level has been proposed for Wnt/β-catenin-driven22 or PI3K/AKT-driven tumorigenesis23.
Mutational analysis of different human cancers has recently uncovered that among the BRAF hot spots in lung adenocarcinoma, those resulting in inactivating mutations predominate over the V600E activating substitution1. However, the contribution of BRAF-inactive mutants to lung cancer progression is unclear. Interestingly, a percentage of BRAF-inactivating mutations (11%) coexist with upstream RAS alterations (Table 1). Thus, we decided to investigate whether expression of the Braf(D631A) kinase-inactive mutant in pre-existing KrasG12V-driven tumours may enhance tumour progression. To this end, we added the Braf LSLD631A allele to a lung tumour model driven by the Flp recombinase. The resulting strain, Kras+/FSFG12V; Tg.hUb-cre-ERT2+/T;Braf +/LSLD631A (designated as KFB) allows the temporal separation of tumour initiation (Flp-mediated Kras(G12V) expression) from genetic events induced during tumour progression (Cre-mediated Braf(D631A) expression). Induction of the Braf(D631A) kinase-inactive isoform in pre-existing KrasG12V-driven tumours resulted in reduced survival owing to the accelerated progression of these lesions (Fig. 4a and Extended Data Fig. 5). Thus, these results provide an experimental explanation for the concurrence of oncogenic KRAS and BRAF-inactivating mutations in certain human lung tumours. These observations also reinforce the current clinical indication that class I RAF inhibitors (vemurafenib and derivatives targeting the activated form of the BRAF kinase) should not be used in patients with KRAS-mutant lung adenocarcinoma.
Table 1.
Human skin cutaneous melanoma | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||
Sample | BRAF | NF1 | KRAS | NRAS | HRAS |
TCGA-EE-A29N-06 | D594N | Y80* | K117N | – | – |
TCGA-EE-A2GJ-06 | G466E | – | – | G12D | – |
TCGA-EE-A2GC-06 | G466E | Q2239* | – | – | – |
TCGA-EE-A19F-06 | G466E | X69_splice, L274F | – | – | – |
TCGA-EE-A1ZZ-06 | N581S | Q684*, S1599F | – | P34L | – |
TCGA-EE-A181-06 | S467L | Q519*, R440*, L2604F | – | – | – |
TCGA-EE-A3JD-06 | S467L | P1851S, R1276Q | – | – | – |
Human lung adenocarcinoma | |||||
Sample | BRAF | NF1 | KRAS | NRAS | HRAS |
TCGA-05-5428-01 | D594N | – | – | – | – |
TCGA-50-5044-01 | D594H | – | – | – | – |
TCGA-05-4410-01 | G466V | – | – | – | – |
TCGA-78-7537-01 | G466V | – | – | – | – |
TCGA-78-7153-01 | G466A | – | – | – | – |
TCGA-44-6744-01 | N581S | – | – | – | |
TCGA-44-2662-01 | N581S | – | – | – | – |
TCGA-05-4249-01 | A762E | – | G12C | – | – |
TCGA-55-6979-01 | P367R | – | – | – | – |
The co-occurrence of BRAF hypoactive mutants with NF1 and RAS mutations in human cancer datasets. Data from skin cutaneous melanoma and lung adenocarcinoma patients obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas cutaneous melanoma and lung adenocarcinoma studies, respectively. Sample ID as well as the precise mutations identified in these patients are indicated. Asterisks indicate that the mutation creates a STOP codon, and therefore a truncated protein. X69_splice represents a mutation affecting the splice site adjacent to amino acid 69.
Yet, the majority of BRAF-inactivating mutations present in human lung cancer (89%) do not coexist with RAS mutations (Table 1). To assess whether Braf inactive mutants could induce lung adenocarcinoma formation in the absence of Kras mutations, we infected Braf +/LSLD631A mice intratracheally with Ad-Cre. Analysis of their lungs 12 months after infection revealed the presence of tumours in 9 of 22 mice (41% incidence) compared to 14 of 18 (78%) in Kras+/LSLG12Vgeo animals. All tumours studied displayed histology characteristic of lung adenocarcinoma with SPC+CC10− immunostaining (Fig. 4b and Extended Data Fig. 6a). Notably, p-Erk1/2 levels in Braf D631A-driven lung adenocarcinomas were higher than those observed in Braf V637E (equivalent to human BRAFV600E), KrasG12V or KrasG12V;Trp53−/− tumours (Fig. 4c). As control, we confirmed that the Braf LSLD631A allele was efficiently recombined in tumour tissue. Moreover, we determined that there were no Ras mutations in these tumours (data not shown).
These results suggest that Braf-inactivating mutations initiate lung adenocarcinoma (Extended Data Fig. 6b). Our results are in good agreement with data from the Rosen laboratory indicating that increased levels of wild-type Ras–GTP complexes can cooperate with Braf hypoactive mutants to trigger tumour development in epithelial cells24. Similarly, increasing the pool of Ras–GTP by a dominant active Sos is sufficient to induce MAPK hyperactivation and the formation of epithelial tumours in response to Raf inhibition25. Likewise, MAPK activation in primary keratinocytes carrying the Braf LSLD631A allele depended both on Craf and RTK signalling. Of note, elimination of the Braf wild-type allele induced a further increase in p-Erk1/2 (Extended Data Fig. 6c). In lung, the high levels of endogenous Ras–GTP present in adult AT2 cells26 may explain the oncogenicity of the Braf(D631A) inactive mutant in the absence of Kras(G12V). By contrast, hypoactive BRAF mutants require the presence of RAS or NF1 mutations to trigger melanoma development, both in experimental GEM models2 as well as in human tumours (Table 1).
In summary, we provide the first genetic evidence demonstrating that a kinase-inactivating Braf mutation induces lung adenocarcinoma development. Importantly, in lung adenocarcinoma patients kinase- inactivating BRAF mutations are more prevalent than the activating V600E allele1. Furthermore, a recent retrospective study identified BRAF(D594G) (affecting the same residue as the mouse mutation used in this study) as the most frequent BRAF alteration in these patients27. Our analysis of human lung adenocarcinomas with hypoactive BRAF revealed co-occurring alterations such as mutations in RTK signalling antagonists that might cooperate in sustaining MAPK activity (Extended Data Fig. 7). The accompanying manuscript by Yao et al.24 suggests that RTK profiling of tumours driven by kinase-impaired BRAF mutants can identify the dominant receptor for the design of specific treatment for individual patients. Alternatively, our results suggest that these patients could benefit from therapies based on selective CRAF inhibitors. The mouse model described here will be useful to evaluate effective drug combinations.
METHODS
Mice
KrasLSLG12Vgeo (ref. 9), Braf LSLD631A (ref. 2, described therein as Braf LSLD594A), Braf lox (ref. 28), Braf LSLV637E (ref. 29, described therein as Braf CA) and Trp53lox/lox (ref. 30) strains have been previously described. The targeting vector for the Craf LSLD468A allele was generated by Gene Bridges GmBH. The D468A miscoding mutation (GAC (Asp) to GCC (Ala)) was engineered within the Craf locus present in the BAC RP23-37K24 by multi-site Red/ET (‘triple recombination’). A loxP-cDNA-STOP-PGK-Neo-loxP cassette containing a partial Craf cDNA sequence encompassing exons 13 to 17 was inserted 150 bp upstream of the 5′ end of the mutated exon13 by Red/ET recombination. The resulting targeting vector was linearized with NotI and SalI restriction enzymes and electroporated into B6129SF1/J ES cells. Clones having undergone proper homologous recombination were identified by Southern blot analysis. Two independent recombinant ES cell clones were microinjected into FVB donor blastocysts and implanted into pseudo-pregnant females. Chimaeric mice were backcrossed to C57BL/6J mice and germline transmission of the Craf LSLD468A allele was confirmed by Southern blot analysis. The targeting vector used to obtain the KrasFSFG12V allele was generated by Taconic Artemis. In brief, the homology arms including the first exon containing the oncogenic G12V mutation were amplified by PCR using as a template a targeting vector previously developed to generate a KrasLSLG12Vgeo allele9. A PGK-Neo-STOP cassette was generated by PCR amplification of the 1,377 bp STOP cassette derived from the KrasLSLG12Vgeo targeting vector with primers that incorporated NdeI restriction sites. The STOP cassette was subsequently cloned into the NdeI restriction site of pBASIC10 (Taconic Artemis) flanked by FRT sequences. The resulting targeting vector was linearized with NotI and electroporated into B6129SF1/J ES cells. Two independent recombinant ES cell clones were microinjected into C57BL/6J blastocysts and transplanted into pseudo-pregnant females. Chimaeric mice were backcrossed to C57BL/6J mice and germ line transmission of the targeted allele was confirmed by Southern blot analysis. All animal experiments were approved by the Ethical Committee of CNIO and performed in accordance with the guidelines stated in the International Guiding Principles for Biomedical Research Involving Animals, developed by the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS). All strains were genotyped by Transnetyx.
Tumour induction and drug treatments
Tumours were induced in 8- to 12-week-old mice (both male and female animals were used) by single intratracheal infection with 106 adenoviral particles (unless stated otherwise) after anaesthesia (i.p. injection of ketamine 75 mg kg−1, xylazine 12 mg kg−1) as previously reported7. Ad-Cre, Ad-CC10-Cre, Ad-SPC-Cre and Ad-Flp were purchased from University of Iowa Vector Core Facility. The Mek inhibitor PD-0325901 (Tocris Bioscience) was dissolved in 0.5% hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose, 0.2% Tween-80 water solution and administered by daily gavage. Following the ethical committee guidelines all mice were euthanized when showing respiratory problems.
Histopathology and immunohistochemistry
For routine histological analysis, all lung lobes from each mouse were fixed in 10% buffered formalin (Sigma), embedded in paraffin and evaluated in serial sections by conventional haematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining according to previously published criteria31. All whole mount X-gal-stained sections were counterstained with Nuclear Fast Red. Antibodies used for immunostaining included those raised against: SPC (Millipore, AB3786); CC10 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, SC-9772); Ttf1 (Epitomics, 2044-1); Sox2 (Cell Signaling Technology, 3728); p63 (Thermo Scientific, MS-1081-P); Ck5 (Covance, PRB-160P) and p-Erk1/2 (Cell Signaling Technology; 9101).
Cell culture
Kras+/G12V;Araf−/−;Braf lox/lox;Craf lox/lox;Trp53−/−;Tg.hUb-cre-ERT2+/T lung adenocarcinoma cell lines were generated from primary tumours. Cells were infected with lentiviruses expressing Braf, Braf(D631A) and Craf (pLVXpuro) using routine procedures and exposed to 50 MOI (multiplicity of infection) of Ad-Cre. 4-hydroxytamoxifen (4-OHT) (Sigma) was used at 600 nM. Cell lines were confirmed mycoplasma free at every freeze/thaw cycle. Primary keratinocytes were obtained from adult tail skin. The antibodies used for western blotting included those raised against: Araf (Cell Signaling Technology, 4432); Braf (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, SC-5284); Craf (BD Biosciences, 610151); p-Erk1/2 (Cell Signaling Technology, 9101); Erk1 (BD Biosciences, 554100); Erk2 (BD Biosciences, 610103); γ-H2AX (Millipore, 05-636); p-p90Rsk (Cell Signaling Technology, 9341); p90Rsk (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, SC-231); p53 (Cell Signaling Technology, 2524); p19ARF (Abcam, ab80); cleaved caspase-3 (Cell Signaling Technology, 9661) and Gapdh (Sigma, G8795).
Computed tomography
Mice were anaesthetized with 1% to 3% flow of isoflurane/oxygen, and the chest area was visualized with the GE eXplore Locus micro PET-CT scanner (GE Healthcare). The resulting raw data were reconstructed to a final image volume of 875 ×875 × 465 slices at 93 μm3 voxel dimensions. Reconstructed slices were output in the manufacturer’s raw format and corrected equal to Hounsfield units and analysed with MicroView analysis software (GE Healthcare).
Digital image quantification
Digital images of immunostained slides were obtained using a whole slide scanner (Dotslide Olympus) with resolution 0.32 μm per pixel (20×/NA 0.75). For automated image quantification the tumour areas on scanned H&E sections were manually delimited within the normal lung tissue according to histological criteria and quantified by Dotslide viewer software.
Statistical and data analysis
The product limit method of Kaplan and Meier was used for generating the survival curves, which were compared by using the log-rank (Mantel–Cox) test. A P value that was less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant for all datasets. All statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism software. No statistical method was used to predetermine sample size in animal studies. Only mice carrying tumours >1 mm in diameter on CT were enrolled in longitudinal studies assessing tumour volume variation. For all animal experiments block randomization was used to ensure a balance in sample size across groups over time. The investigators were blinded during evaluation of tumour size variations following tamoxifen diet.
Data availability
All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article (and its Supplementary Information files).
Extended Data
Supplementary Material
Acknowledgments
We thank A. de Martino for histopathological evaluation of murine lung tumours. This work was supported by grants to M.B. from the European Research Council (ERC-AG/250297-RAS AHEAD), EU-Framework Programme (HEALTH-F2-2010-259770/LUNGTARGET and HEALTH-2010-260791/EUROCANPLATFORM) and Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (SAF2011-30173 and SAF2014-59864-R). M.B. is the recipient of an Endowed Chair from the AXA Research Fund. Funding was also provided by grants to N.R. from the National Institutes of Health (P01 CA129243; R35 CA210085); the Commonwealth Foundation for Cancer Research, the Center for Experimental Therapeutics at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and the Stand Up To Cancer – American Cancer Society Lung Cancer Dream Team Translational Research Grant (SU2C-AACR-DT17-15). Support was also received from the NIH MSKCC Cancer Center Support Grant P30 CA008748. Work in the laboratory of R.C. was supported by grants FP7 ERC-2009-StG (242965-Lunely) and Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro (AIRC) grant IG-12023. P.N. was the recipient of an FPU fellowship from the Spanish Ministry of Education. C.A. was the recipient of a postdoctoral fellowship from the Spanish Association Against Cancer (AECC).
Footnotes
Online Content Methods, along with any additional Extended Data display items and Source Data, are available in the online version of the paper; references unique to these sections appear only in the online paper.
Supplementary Information is available in the online version of the paper.
Author Contributions D.S. and M.B. designed experiments and research aims, analysed data and wrote the manuscript with help from co-authors. P.N. performed experiments and analysed the data with help from C.A., L.E. and M.T.B. R.C. carried out critical interpretation of the tumour phenotype. R.M. provided the Braf+/LSLD631A strain. Z.Y., N.R, R.M. and R.C. contributed critical information and helpful discussions. D.G.P. and G.G.-L. performed the bioinformatic analysis of human datasets.
The authors declare competing financial interests: details are available in the online version of the paper.
Readers are welcome to comment on the online version of the paper.
References
- 1.Chang MT, et al. Identifying recurrent mutations in cancer reveals widespread lineage diversity and mutational specificity. Nat Biotechnol. 2016;34:155–163. doi: 10.1038/nbt.3391. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Heidorn SJ, et al. Kinase-dead BRAF and oncogenic RAS cooperate to drive tumor progression through CRAF. Cell. 2010;140:209–221. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2009.12.040. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Poulikakos PI, Zhang C, Bollag G, Shokat KM, Rosen N. RAF inhibitors transactivate RAF dimers and ERK signalling in cells with wild-type BRAF. Nature. 2010;464:427–430. doi: 10.1038/nature08902. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Sebolt-Leopold JS, Herrera R. Targeting the mitogen-activated protein kinase cascade to treat cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2004;4:937–947. doi: 10.1038/nrc1503. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Rauen KA. The RASopathies. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 2013;14:355–369. doi: 10.1146/annurev-genom-091212-153523. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Hills SA, Diffley JFX. DNA replication and oncogene-induced replicative stress. Curr Biol. 2014;24:R435–R444. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2014.04.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Blasco RB, et al. c-Raf, but not Braf, is essential for development of K-Ras oncogene-driven non-small cell lung carcinoma. Cancer Cell. 2011;19:652–663. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2011.04.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Kamata T, et al. BRAF inactivation drives aneuploidy by deregulating CRAF. Cancer Res. 2010;70:8475–8486. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-0603. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Guerra C, et al. Tumor induction by an endogenous K-ras oncogene is highly dependent on cellular context. Cancer Cell. 2003;4:111–120. doi: 10.1016/s1535-6108(03)00191-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Mainardi S, et al. Identification of cancer initiating cells in K-Ras driven lung adenocarcinoma. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111:255–260. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1320383110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Karreth FA, Frese KK, DeNicola GM, Baccarini M, Tuveson DA. C-Raf is required for the initiation of lung cancer by K-Ras(G12D) Cancer Discov. 2011;1:128–136. doi: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-10-0044. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Bartkova J, et al. DNA damage response as a candidate anti-cancer barrier in early human tumorigenesis. Nature. 2005;434:864–870. doi: 10.1038/nature03482. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Gorgoulis VG, et al. Activation of the DNA damage checkpoint and genomic instability in human precancerous lesions. Nature. 2005;434:907–913. doi: 10.1038/nature03485. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Dietlein F, et al. A synergistic interaction between Chk1- and MK2 inhibitors in KRAS-mutant cancer. Cell. 2015;162:146–159. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2015.05.053. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Deschênes-Simard X, et al. Tumor suppressor activity of the ERK/MAPK pathway by promoting selective protein degradation. Genes Dev. 2013;27:900–915. doi: 10.1101/gad.203984.112. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Cheung WKC, Nguyen DX. Lineage factors and differentiation states in lung cancer progression. Oncogene. 2015;34:5771–5780. doi: 10.1038/onc.2015.85. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Andreadi C, et al. The intermediate-activity (L597V)BRAF mutant acts as an epistatic modifier of oncogenic RAS by enhancing signaling through the RAF/MEK/ERK pathway. Genes Dev. 2012;26:1945–1958. doi: 10.1101/gad.193458.112. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Langer CJ, Besse B, Gualberto A, Brambilla E, Soria JC. The evolving role of histology in the management of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:5311–5320. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.28.8126. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Sutherland KD, et al. Cell of origin of small cell lung cancer: inactivation of Trp53 and Rb1 in distinct cell types of adult mouse lung. Cancer Cell. 2011;19:754–764. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2011.04.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Xu X, et al. Evidence for type II cells as cells of origin of K-Ras-induced distal lung adenocarcinoma. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2012;109:4910–4915. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1112499109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Sutherland KD, et al. Multiple cells-of-origin of mutant K-Ras-induced mouse lung adenocarcinoma. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111:4952–4957. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1319963111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Buchert M, et al. Genetic dissection of differential signaling threshold requirements for the Wnt/beta-catenin pathway in vivo. PLoS Genet. 2010;6:e1000816. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000816. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Papa A, et al. Cancer-associated PTEN mutants act in a dominant- negative manner to suppress PTEN protein function. Cell. 2014;157:595–610. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.03.027. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Yao Z, et al. Tumours with class 3 BRAF mutants are sensitive to the inhibition of activated RAS. Nature. 2017 doi: 10.1038/nature23291. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature23291. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 25.Doma E, et al. Skin tumorigenesis stimulated by Raf inhibitors relies upon Raf functions that are dependent and independent of ERK. Cancer Res. 2013;73:6926–6937. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-13-0748. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Kammouni W, et al. Increased K-ras protein and activity in mouse and human lung epithelial cells at confluence. Cell Growth Differ. 2002;13:441–448. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Carter J, et al. Non-p.V600E BRAF mutations are common using a more sensitive and broad detection tool. Am J Clin Pathol. 2015;144:620–628. doi: 10.1309/AJCP85ATMJOZOUDJ. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Chen AP, et al. Forebrain-specific knockout of B-raf kinase leads to deficits in hippocampal long-term potentiation, learning, and memory. J Neurosci Res. 2006;83:28–38. doi: 10.1002/jnr.20703. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Dankort D, et al. A new mouse model to explore the initiation, progression, and therapy of BRAFV600E-induced lung tumors. Genes Dev. 2007;21:379–384. doi: 10.1101/gad.1516407. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Jonkers J, et al. Synergistic tumor suppressor activity of BRCA2 and p53 in a conditional mouse model for breast cancer. Nat Genet. 2001;29:418–425. doi: 10.1038/ng747. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Jackson EL, et al. The differential effects of mutant p53 alleles on advanced murine lung cancer. Cancer Res. 2005;65:10280–10288. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-2193. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Data Availability Statement
All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article (and its Supplementary Information files).