1. Introduction
Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common and malignant primary brain tumor, characterized by rapid progression, invasion, high genomic instability, intense angiogenesis and resistance to therapies [
1]. Despite aggressive standard treatments, the prognosis remains extremely poor with a mean survival of 20.9 months [
2]. The failure of current therapies is mainly due to the striking inter- and intratumoral heterogeneity of the disease [
3,
4,
5], supported by the presence, within the tumor mass, of cells with stem-like properties, called glioma stem cells (GSCs) [
6,
7]. To complicate this picture, there is also the presence, even if there is still a role to be defined, of an area named the peritumoral brain zone (PBZ), at the margin of the tumor central core [
8].
Although the original identification of GSCs dates back more than a decade, the purification and characterization of GSCs remain challenging. Since they play important roles in mediating therapeutic resistance through supporting radio-resistance, chemo-resistance, angiogenesis, invasion and recurrence, we need a deeper understanding of how to selectively target and ablate these tumor-initiating and -propagating populations [
9,
10,
11,
12,
13]. The most compelling reason to study glioma biology with GSCs is the fact that they have been shown to be very tumorigenic in vivo and form diffuse and invasive tumors that are highly resistant to conventional treatments, indicative of actual patient disease in clinic [
14,
15].
The GBM-PBZ is a region that radiologically and macroscopically resembles normal brain tissue, but with a particular cellular content, which consists of infiltrating tumor cells, reactive astrocytes, inflammatory cells and other stromal cells [
8]. Furthermore, since in 90% of cases tumor recurrence occurs at the margin of the surgical cavity, even after a complete tumor resection and chemo-radiotherapies, the glioma microenvironment seems to be a critical regulator of tumor progression [
16]. Therefore, a better understanding of this area is crucial to unravel the mechanisms underlying the GBM relapse and to develop new therapeutic approaches [
8,
17].
At the DNA level, GBMs are usually characterized by high levels of genomic instability with high rates of copy number alterations (CNAs), easily identifiable by array comparative genomic hybridization (array-CGH) [
9,
18,
19,
20]. Thanks to these studies, frequently amplified genes, such as EGFR, MET, PDGFRA, MDM2, PIK3CA, CDK4 and CDK6, and deleted genes such as CDKN2A/B, PTEN and RB1, have been highlighted [
21,
22]. However, the constant improvement in genetic characterization of GBMs is still failing to be translated to clinical practice, suggesting that other discovery paradigms should be examined.
Considering the importance of CNA data, in this work we performed an in depth study using array-CGH in order to outline the genomic profiles of 20 tumors and 7 peritumoral biopsies; in addition, we compared the genomic profiles of 14 tumor biopsies with their derived tumorspheres to identify new specific biomarkers useful for new therapies.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Population
The patient population of this study consists of 20 adults of both sexes diagnosed with high-grade gliomas. The study was approved by the ethic committee “Comitato Etico Monza e Brianza” (study number: 0031436—GLIODRUG-V, approved on 3 January 2020). Patients undergoing a craniotomy for a high-grade glioma were enrolled between January 2020 and September 2021 by the Neurosurgery Unit of the San Gerardo Hospital (Monza Brianza, Italy) after informed consent was signed. The criteria for histological analyses were based on the recommendations of the 2021 WHO classification of CNS tumors [
23] and samples from patients without a confirmed high-grade glioma were excluded from the study. Demographic and clinical data are reported in
Table 1.
2.2. Biopsy Collection
After surgical removal of the tumor with perilesional dissection [
24], the surgical cavity was checked with an intraoperative ultrasound (BK Medical, Herlev, Denmark) for tumor remnants. All patients received a resection of at least 95% of contrast enhancing tumor. The majority of the tumor was sent for formal histological diagnosis. When the surgical bed was considered tumor free, a sample of the surgical cavity was taken. The non-neoplastic tumor margin (PBZ) was collected from what was considered far from functionally eloquent areas under neuronavigation (BrainLab, Munich, Germany) and ultrasound guidance (BK Medical, Denmark). Finally, in only 10 out of 20 patients, it was possible to safely collect PBZ samples. When PBZ was collected, a part of the specimen was sent for formal histology in order to check for the absence of tumor remnants. Biopsy samples were placed in cooled PBS (Euroclone S.p.A., Milan, Italy) containing 10% antibiotics (streptomycin/penicillin, Euroclone S.p.A., Milan, Italy) for the isolation of GSCs [
25]; small pieces were also stored for DNA extraction.
2.3. Immuno-Molecular Analysis
Immuno-molecular analysis was performed according to routine diagnostic procedures. Immunohistochemical staining was performed on FFPE (4% formalin) sections of 1-μm thickness, according to the manufacturer’s protocols, using the automated instrument Dako Omnis (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA). All antibodies were purchased from Dako. For p53, only nuclear staining was considered positive. MGMT promoter methylation and IDH mutation analysis were performed as previously reported [
26].
2.4. GSCs Isolation from Tumor Tissues
GSCs were isolated directly from the TC samples after surgery. Briefly, samples obtained from tumor cores were washed with PBS and placed in a Petri dish. Then, they were disaggregated mechanically and enzymatically with a 1X trypsin-EDTA solution (Euroclone S.p.A., Milan, Italy). The digested tissue was passed through a cell strainer (70 μm) and finally subjected to lysis of red blood cells. Lastly, single cell suspension was seeded in a complete neural stem cell (NSC) culture medium (see below) at a density of 40,000 cells/cm2.
2.5. Primary GSC Cultures Conditions
GSCs were cultured in a selective medium for NSC, composed of DMEM F-12 and Neurobasal 1:1, B-27 supplement without vitamin A (Life Technologies Italia, Milan, Italy), 2 mM L-glutamine (Euroclone S.p.A., Milan, Italy), 10 ng/mL recombinant human bFGF and 20 ng/mL recombinant human EGF (Miltenyi Biotec, Bergish Gladbach, Germany), 20 UI/mL penicillin and 20 µg/mL streptomycin (Euroclone S.p.A., Milan, Italy). After isolation, the medium was replaced every 3 days to remove stroma and red blood cells residues, catabolic products and to supply fresh nutrients. Debris and adherent death cells generally were eliminated after a couple of passages. The isolated cells propagate in culture as free-floating spheres defined as tumorspheres [
6], which appeared in 15–20 days of culture after isolation. When tumorspheres reached an average size of 100 μm in diameter, the culture was ready to be passed and expanded. At each passage (P), tumorspheres were mechanically dissociated using a sterilized p200 pipette set at 180–200 µL and pipetting up and down 100–150 times to achieve a single-cell suspension.
2.6. Established Glioma Stem Cell Lines
Two established glioma stem cell lines were used as a positive control of stemness. G166 and G179 cell lines were kindly provided by Professor A. Smith of the Wellcome Trust Medical Research Council Stem Cell Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge (UK). These cell lines were extensively characterized by Pollard and Baronchelli [
9,
14]. The established stem cell lines were cultured as the GSC primary cultures; a G166 line grows as floating spheres, otherwise G179 grows in semi-adhesion.
2.7. Clonal Assay
Mechanically dissociated tumorspheres were seeded into 96-well plates at a density of 10 cells per mL in culture medium. Colony formation was scored 7–10 days after initial seeding. The self-renewal efficiency or the percentage of cells that formed spheres was determined by the following formula:
; where
Y is the number of wells in which one tumorsphere is developed from a single cell and
X is the number of wells in which a single cell was present [
27]. Wells containing either none or more than one cell were excluded from the analysis.
2.8. Differentiation Assay
Mechanically dissociated tumorspheres were seeded at a density of 1 × 105 cells/well into 6-well plates, with a coverslip on the bottom of each well, and into culture medium permissive for differentiation without EGF and with 5% FBS (Euroclone S.p.A., Milan, Italy). After 4 days of culture, the medium was replaced with fresh medium with 5% FBS, without growth factors. Under these conditions, the detection of the three neural lineages was evidenced at 7 days after plating by immunofluorescence.
2.9. Immunofluorescence
To evaluate the expression of stemness and differentiation markers, the following antibodies were used: anti-CD133 (1:50, Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Dallas, TX, USA); anti-nestin (1:50, Millipore, Burlington, MA, USA,); anti-GFAP (1:200, DakoCytomation, Glostrup, Denmark); anti-βIII Tubulin (1:100, Cell Signaling, Danvers, MA, USA); anti-MBP (1:50, Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Dallas, TX, USA). Each marker was analyzed in a separate set of experiments and with at least two replicates.
2.10. DNA Extraction and Purification
DNA was extracted from GSC primary culture pellets (between P4 and P6), from tumor and peritumor biopsies and from patients’ blood (used as reference) using the automatic extractor iPrep TM (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) and using kits supplied with the instrument: iPrep tissue, for DNA extraction from cell pellet, TC and PBZ; and iPrep whole blood, for DNA extraction from peripheral patients’ blood. Then, DNA was purified using Genomic DNA clean & concentration kit (Zymo Research, Irvine, CA, USA) based on several washings and elution on column in order to obtain DNA ultra-pure. The concentration and the purity of the extracted DNA were determined by measuring the absorbance (A260/280) of the sample with NanoDrop ND-1000 Spectrophotometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). In some cases, the extracted DNA from primary culture was not sufficient to perform the analysis and it was amplified using the GenomePlex Whole Genome Amplification (WGA) Kit (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MI, USA), according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Amplified DNA was tested for purity and concentration as above.
2.11. Array-CGH
Array-CGH analysis was performed using 60-mer oligonucleotide probe technology (SurePrint G3 Human CGH 8 × 60 K, Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA), according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Agilent Feature Extraction was exploited to generate raw data, which were further analyzed using Cytogenomics 5.1 with the ADAM-2 algorithm (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA). A minimum of three consecutive probes/regions was considered as a filter. The threshold for genomic deletion is x = −1; the threshold for genomic gain is x = +0.58. The estimated percentage of mosaicism was calculated using the formula reported in [
9]. Notably, in a mosaic scenario, the threshold is between −1 and 0 for deletions and between 0 and +0.58 for duplications. Amplifications and homozygous deletions are considered with threshold >+2 and <−1, respectively.
2.12. Bioinformatics Analysis
The Database for Annotation, Visualization and Integrated Discovery (DAVID), v 6.8
https://david.ncifcrf.gov/summary.jsp/ (accessed on 7 June 2021) [
28,
29], was used to analyze the lists of genes included in CNAs shared in at least 3 samples. The chart function was used to identify pathways in which genes in gain and in loss are involved. The clustering function was used to cluster the pathways found in groups with their own enrichment score.
2.13. Statistical Analysis
A chi-square test was used to compare data relating to patient-derived primary GSC cultures and those obtained from control GSC cell lines. Pearson correlation was used to compare genetic alteration profiles in matched pairs of TCs and patient derived GSCs and TCs and related PBZ samples. The statistical significance for each pair of correlations was calculated by consulting the Table of Critical Values for Pearson’s R. The level of significance for a two-tailed test was set to α = 0.05. The EASE Score, a modified Fisher’s Exact Test, is used by the DAVID bioinformatics program. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
4. Discussion
GBM is the most common and fatal primary brain tumor with a median survival rate of only 15 months after the first diagnosis. The current standard of care for GBM, as proposed by Stupp in 2017 [
2], consists of maximal safe surgical resection, radiotherapy with concomitant temozolomide, followed by adjuvant temozolomide and tumor-treating fields. Unfortunately, despite the treatment, about 70% of these tumors recur with de novo or acquired resistance, which leads to a low five-year survival rate [
32,
33,
34]. The reasons for this high failure rate are different and closely interconnected. First of all, similarly to what happens in benign tumors such as meningiomas, surgery cannot be considered curative, as the presence of cortical and subcortical functional areas, combined with the widespread infiltrative pattern of tumor growth, makes it difficult to perform a complete surgical resection enclosing a wide area of peritumoral brain [
35]. As a consequence, a variable number of invading tumor cells are invariably left behind in the peritumoral brain zone (PBZ), which is most often the site of recurrence [
16,
36]. Secondly, the huge variability of this type of tumor plays a paramount role: interpatient, intratumoral, functional and molecular heterogeneity, widely described in literature, and which is most likely supported and nourished by GSC subpopulations, makes this tumor very resistant to adjuvant treatments that should destroy the neoplastic cells left behind by the surgeon. In light of this, it is urgent to find more effective therapies that target specifically GCS subpopulations, and simultaneously, to develop in vitro models able to reliably recapitulate the original tumor and that can be used for preliminary rapid and cost-effective testing [
37,
38]. Establishing primary GSC primary cultures would provide a valuable and accurate model of the human tumor, would give insight into the origins of tumor heterogeneity, and finally, would direct towards the most effective therapies for the patient [
39]. In our study, we have shown that a simple and not expensive protocol is valid to establish primary cultures enriched with GSCs in at least 70% of cases. Indeed, the characteristics of stemness of our primary cultures, such as the formation of perpetuating tumorspheres in different passages and the ability to differentiate in neural lineages, have been confirmed. One of the ways to understand if the isolated cells faithfully represent the GSC subpopulations is to evaluate the similarity of the genomic profiles with their tumor cores (TCs). Moreover, we have already shown that the tumorspheres had specific genomic profiles, which can be used as a specific tracer of these subpopulations [
9].
In the last years, several studies focusing on genomic, transcriptomic and methylomic analyses of GBM were completed [
9,
20,
40,
41,
42,
43]. In addition, Lemée J. et al. also characterized the peritumoral brain zone of GBM, examining its genomic, transcriptomic and proteomic profiles, but it does not include the GSC component [
8]. In this work, for the first time to our knowledge, we obtained a complete view of the genomic profiles of GBM, studying, wherever possible, the tumor core, the relative GSCs and also including the PBZ, all derived from the same patient.
First of all, we obtained the genomic profile of 20 TCs, highlighting that our cohort almost completely recapitulates the information reported in literature. In fact, the most frequent copy number alterations were 7p11.2 amplifications (EGFR locus), 9p21.3 deletions (CDKN2A locus) and 10q23.31 deletions (PTEN locus), that are typical features of primary GBM, essential for gliomagenesis [
44]. However, tumor-specific profiles in terms of CNAs distribution were also observed, in accordance with the well-known heterogeneity of GBM.
At the same time, we were able to isolate and expand GSC primary cultures from 15 TCs and we compared their genomic profiles with the matched TC. We showed that 14 out of 15 GSC primary cultures very faithfully reflected the genomic profile of their original TC, as evidenced by the Pearson correlation and by the high number of shared CNAs. We observed that losses are better maintained than gains, and that all the alterations identified in TCs become more homogeneous and represented in GSC cultures, thanks to in vitro clonal selection. These shared CNAs are enriched by genes mainly involved in the pathways of cancer, as evidenced by GO and KEGG enrichment analysis, reinforcing the hypothesis that they are important for the progression and maintenance of cancer cells. We evidenced that a very large number of genes involved in gains and shared between TCs and GSCs belong to the GO term cellular component, particularly extracellular space, extracellular region and membrane, indicating a strong involvement in intercellular signaling. Interestingly, several gained genes shared between at least two datasets were reported in the literature as overexpressed in high-grade gliomas, associated with poor prognosis, or in any case, involved in canonical pathways of GBM (
EIF2AK1,
FTL,
SRC,
GNG8,
GNG11,
GNG7,
FZD9,
GNB2,
TGM2) [
45,
46,
47,
48,
49]. Conversely, only one lost gene,
AKR1C2, shared between at least two datasets, was reported as downregulated and associated with high-risk-score glioma in the REMBRANDT data set [
50]. These genes could represent interesting markers for prognosis and for new therapies in the future (
Table 8).
In this study, we were able to draw a complete picture of genomic profiles of GBM in 10 patients, adding information from the PBZ. There are still very few data on this area in the literature, and they are generally based on gene expression or imaging analysis [
55,
56]. The larger sharing of genomic profiles would testify to a greater infiltration of tumor cells in healthy areas of the brain, which, after surgical removal of the tumor core, would remain in the site, with a high risk of recurrence formation. Our data confirmed a previous study, which reported that tumor cell infiltration was found in one third of PBZs, despite radiological and macroscopic analysis revealing normal brain tissues [
8]. However, histopathological examination did not find tumor cell infiltration in our series of PBZ, even if the overlap between PBZ-TC genomic profiles would prove otherwise for more than 50% of cases. Interestingly, we evidenced two exclusive PBZ-CNAs that could identify a specific signature in this specific area, because it was not present in other samples, nor in other patients. The first includes the
SCMH1 gene, associated with the Polycomb group (PcG) multiprotein complexes, required to maintain the transcriptionally repressive state of some genes [
57]. The second region includes the
GLI2 gene, which promotes cell proliferation and migration in glioma [
58,
59]. Other potentially interesting regions are two gains, in 11p11.2 and 16p13.3, shared by two PBZs and evidenced also in other TCs and/or GSCs from other patients. Several genes included in these regions could hide an important role in the progression of glioma, as reported by the literature. For example, the expression level of the
EXT2 gene is increased in glioblastoma [
60];
C1QTNF8 promotes temozolomide resistance [
61];
CACNA1H promotes GBM cell proliferation and migration [
62]. Finally, we noticed that the CNAs in gains are more represented in PBZ samples, compared to the losses. We have already highlighted this phenomenon in other types of tumor [
63], associating it with a possible mechanism of endoreduplication-polyploidization [
64]. In support of this, the karyotype of GSCs of GP22 is tetraploid (data not shown), reinforcing the importance of this mechanism in glioma tumorigenesis.