Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Invasion of white matter tracts by glioma stem cells is regulated by a NOTCH1–SOX2 positive-feedback loop

Nature Neuroscience volume 22, pages 91–105 (2019)Cite this article

Subjects

An Author Correction to this article was published on 22 March 2019

This article has been updated

Abstract

Early invasive growth along specific anatomical structures, especially the white matter tract, is regarded as one of the main causes of poor therapeutic outcome of people with gliomas. We show that some glioma stem cells (GSCs) are preferentially located along white matter tracts, which exhibit a demyelinated phenotype, at the invasive frontier of glioma tissues. These GSCs are CD133+Notch1+, whereas the nerve fibers express the Notch ligand Jagged1. The Notch-induced transcription factor Sox9 promotes the transcription of SOX2 and the methylation level of the NOTCH1 promoter is attenuated by the upregulation of SOX2 to reinforce NOTCH1 expression in GSCs. This positive-feedback loop in a cohort of glioma subjects is correlated with a poor prognosis. Inhibition of Notch signaling attenuates the white-matter-tract tropism of GSCs. These findings provide evidence indicating that the NOTCH1-SOX2 positive-feedback loop controls GSC invasion along white matter tracts.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: White-matter-tract tropism of glioma stem cells.
Fig. 2: CD133+Notch1+ GSCs distributed along with Jagged1+ nerve fibers (Tau1+).
Fig. 3: Notch signaling pathway activity in GSCs controls white-matter-tract tropism of GSCs.
Fig. 4: NOTCH1 promotes the transcription of SOX2 via SOX9.
Fig. 5: Sox9 initiates the transcription of SOX2 by directly binding to the promoter region of SOX2.
Fig. 6: Sox2 promotes NOTCH1 transcription.
Fig. 7: Sox2 decreases the methylation level of the NOTCH1 promoter.
Fig. 8: Coexpression of Sox2 and Notch1 in glioma is a prognostic predictor of subject outcome.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

All routine analysis methods are included in Methods. The data that support the findings of this study are presented in the paper and supplementary materials and all raw data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. The five published mRNA expression data sets (Glioblastoma-TCGA-540; Glioma-French-284, GSE16011; Glioblastoma-TCGA-395; Glioblastoma Stemcells-20, GSE15209 and GSE67089) used in this study were obtained from R2, an Affymetrix analysis and visualization platform developed at the Department of Human Genetics at the Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam.

Change history

  • 22 March 2019

    The original and corrected figures are shown in the accompanying Author Correction.

References

  1. Chen, J., McKay, R. M. & Parada, L. F. Malignant glioma: lessons from genomics, mouse models, and stem cells. Cell 149, 36–47 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Preusser, M., Haberler, C. & Hainfellner, J. A. Malignant glioma: neuropathology and neurobiology. Wien. Med. Wochenschr. 156, 332–337 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Huse, J. T. & Holland, E. C. Targeting brain cancer: advances in the molecular pathology of malignant glioma and medulloblastoma. Nat. Rev. Cancer 10, 319–331 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Cuddapah, V. A., Robel, S., Watkins, S. & Sontheimer, H. A neurocentric perspective on glioma invasion. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 15, 455–465 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Calabrese, C. et al. A perivascular niche for brain tumor stem cells. Cancer Cell 11, 69–82 (2007).

  6. Pietras, A. et al. Osteopontin-CD44 signaling in the glioma perivascular niche enhances cancer stem cell phenotypes and promotes aggressive tumor growth. Cell Stem Cell 14, 357–369 (2014).

  7. Bao, S. et al. Glioma stem cells promote radioresistance by preferential activation of the DNA damage response. Nature 444, 756–760 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Singh, S. K. et al. Identification of a cancer stem cell in human brain tumors. Cancer Res. 63, 5821–5828 (2003).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Stangeland, B. et al. Combined expressional analysis, bioinformatics and targeted proteomics identify new potential therapeutic targets in glioblastoma stem cells. Oncotarget 6, 26192–26215 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Brown, D. V. et al. Coexpression analysis of CD133 and CD44 identifies proneural and mesenchymal subtypes of glioblastoma multiforme. Oncotarget 6, 6267–6280 (2015).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Lu, J. et al. Endothelial cells promote the colorectal cancer stem cell phenotype through a soluble form of Jagged-1. Cancer Cell 23, 171–185 (2013).

  12. Stidworthy, M. F. et al. Notch1 and Jagged1 are expressed after CNS demyelination, but are not a major rate-determining factor during remyelination. Brain 127, 1928–1941 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wang, S. et al. Notch receptor activation inhibits oligodendrocyte differentiation. Neuron 21, 63–75 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Patel, A. P. et al. Single-cell RNA-seq highlights intratumoral heterogeneity in primary glioblastoma. Science 344, 1396–1401 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Gangemi, R. M. et al. SOX2 silencing in glioblastoma tumor-initiating cells causes stop of proliferation and loss of tumorigenicity. Stem Cells 27, 40–48 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Ehm, O. et al. RBPJkappa-dependent signaling is essential for long-term maintenance of neural stem cells in the adult hippocampus. J. Neurosci. 30, 13794–13807 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Candy, P. A. et al. Notch-induced transcription factors are predictive of survival and 5-fluorouracil response in colorectal cancer patients. Br. J. Cancer 109, 1023–1030 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Taranova, O. V. et al. SOX2 is a dose-dependent regulator of retinal neural progenitor competence. Genes Dev. 20, 1187–1202 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Terragni, J. et al. Notch signaling genes: myogenic DNA hypomethylation and 5-hydroxymethylcytosine. Epigenetics 9, 842–850 (2014).

  20. Bulstrode, H. et al. Elevated FOXG1 and SOX2 in glioblastoma enforces neural stem cell identity through transcriptional control of cell cycle and epigenetic regulators. Genes Dev. 31, 757–773 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Teodorczyk, M. & Schmidt, M. H. Notching on cancer’s door: Notch signaling in brain tumors. Front. Oncol. 4, 341 (2014).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Krop, I. et al. Phase I pharmacologic and pharmacodynamic study of the gamma secretase (Notch) inhibitor MK-0752 in adult patients with advanced solid tumors. J. Clin. Oncol. 30, 2307–2313 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Darsalia, V. et al. Cell number and timing of transplantation determine survival of human neural stem cell grafts in stroke-damaged rat brain. J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab. 31, 235–242 (2011).

  24. Aharonowiz, M. et al. Neuroprotective effect of transplanted human embryonic stem cell-derived neural precursors in an animal model of multiple sclerosis. PLoS One 3, e3145 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Giese, A., Bjerkvig, R., Berens, M. E. & Westphal, M. Cost of migration: invasion of malignant gliomas and implications for treatment. J. Clin. Oncol. 21, 1624–1636 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Gritsenko, P. G., Ilina, O. & Friedl, P. Interstitial guidance of cancer invasion. J. Pathol. 226, 185–199 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Iwadate, Y., Fukuda, K., Matsutani, T. & Saeki, N. Intrinsic protective mechanisms of the neuron-glia network against glioma invasion. J. Clin. Neurosci. 26, 19–25 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Belien, A. T., Paganetti, P. A. & Schwab, M. E. Membrane-type 1 matrix metalloprotease (MT1-MMP) enables invasive migration of glioma cells in central nervous system white matter. J. Cell Biol. 144, 373–384 (1999).

  29. Beadle, C. et al. The role of myosin II in glioma invasion of the brain. Mol. Biol. Cell 19, 3357–3368 (2008).

  30. Yeo, S. Y. & Chitnis, A. B. Jagged-mediated Notch signaling maintains proliferating neural progenitors and regulates cell diversity in the ventral spinal cord. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104, 5913–5918 (2007).

  31. Corn, B. W. et al. White matter changes are correlated significantly with radiation dose. Observations from a randomized dose-escalation trial for malignant glioma (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 83-02). Cancer 74, 2828–2835 (1994).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Milic, M. & Rees, J. H. Acute demyelination following radiotherapy for glioma: a cautionary tale. Pract. Neurol. 17, 35–38 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Esiri, M. M. The interplay between inflammation and neurodegeneration in CNS disease. J. Neuroimmunol. 184, 4–16 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Dos Santos, C. D., Picanco-Diniz, C. W. & Gomes-Leal, W. Differential patterns of inflammatory response, axonal damage and myelin impairment following excitotoxic or ischemic damage to the trigeminal spinal nucleus of adult rats. Brain Res. 1172, 130–144 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sinha, S., Bastin, M. E., Whittle, I. R. & Wardlaw, J. M. Diffusion tensor MR imaging of high-grade cerebral gliomas. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 23, 520–527 (2002).

  36. Yen, P. S. et al. White matter tract involvement in brain tumors: a diffusion tensor imaging analysis. Surg. Neurol. 72, 464–469 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Givogri, M. I. et al. Central nervous system myelination in mice with deficient expression of Notch1 receptor. J. Neurosci. Res. 67, 309–320 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Bonini, S. A. et al. Nuclear factor κB-dependent neurite remodeling is mediated by Notch pathway. J. Neurosci. 31, 11697–11705 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Morokoff, A., Ng, W., Gogos, A. & Kaye, A. H. Molecular subtypes, stem cells and heterogeneity: Implications for personalised therapy in glioma. J. Clin. Neurosci. 22, 1219–1226 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Verhaak, R. G. et al. Integrated genomic analysis identifies clinically relevant subtypes of glioblastoma characterized by abnormalities in PDGFRA, IDH1, EGFR, and NF1. Cancer Cell 17, 98–110 (2010).

  41. Venkatesh, H. S. et al. Neuronal activity promotes glioma growth through neuroligin-3 secretion. Cell 161, 803–816 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Venkatesh, H. S. et al. Targeting neuronal activity-regulated neuroligin-3 dependency in high-grade glioma. Nature 549, 533–537 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Lathia, J. D. et al. Integrin α6 regulates glioblastoma stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 6, 421–432 (2010).

  44. Haas, T. L. et al. Integrin α7 is a functional marker and potential therapeutic target in glioblastoma. Cell Stem Cell 21, 35–50.e9 (2017).

  45. Zhu, X., Tollkuhn, J., Taylor, H. & Rosenfeld, M. G. Notch-dependent pituitary SOX2(+) stem cells exhibit a timed functional extinction in regulation of the postnatal gland. Stem Cell Rep. 5, 1196–1209 (2015).

  46. Phi, J. H. et al. Upregulation of SOX2, NOTCH1, and ID1 in supratentorial primitive neuroectodermal tumors: a distinct differentiation pattern from that of medulloblastomas. J. Neurosurg. Pediatr. 5, 608–614 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Yin, J. et al. Pigment epithelium-derived factor (PEDF) expression induced by EGFRvIII promotes self-renewal and tumor progression of glioma stem cells. PLoS Biol. 13, e1002152 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Garros-Regulez, L. et al. mTOR inhibition decreases SOX2-SOX9 mediated glioma stem cell activity and temozolomide resistance. Expert Opin. Ther. Targets 20, 393–405 (2016).

  49. Yu, S. C. et al. Isolation and characterization of cancer stem cells from a human glioblastoma cell line U87. Cancer Lett. 265, 124–134 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Zhou, W. et al. Periostin secreted by glioblastoma stem cells recruits M2 tumour-associated macrophages and promotes malignant growth. Nat. Cell Biol. 17, 170–182 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank C.-J. Zhao, S.-M. Yang and X.-D. Liu for their constructive suggestions. This study was supported by grants from the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2016YFA0202104, 2016YFA0101200), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81570131, 81572880, 61327902), and the Key Clinical Research Program of Southwest Hospital, Army Medical University (Third Military Medical University) of China (SWH2016ZDCX1005, SWH2017ZDCX1003).

Author information

Author notes

  1. These authors contributed equally: Jun Wang, Sen-Lin Xu, Jiang-Jie Duan, Liang Yi.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Pathology and Southwest Cancer Center, Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education, Southwest Hospital, Army Medical University (Third Military Medical University), Chongqing, China

    Jun Wang, Sen-Lin Xu, Jiang-Jie Duan, Yu-Feng Guo, Yu Shi, Lin Li, Ze-Yu Yang, Xue-Mei Liao, Jiao Cai, Li Yin, Xia Zhang, Xiu-Wu Bian & Shi-Cang Yu

  2. Department of Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine, Southwest Hospital, Army Medical University (Third Military Medical University), Chongqing, China

    Jun Wang, Jiang-Jie Duan, Yu-Feng Guo, Lin Li, Ze-Yu Yang, Xue-Mei Liao, Jiao Cai, Li Yin & Shi-Cang Yu

  3. Department of Neurosurgery, Daping Hospital, Army Medical University (Third Military Medical University), Chongqing, China

    Liang Yi

  4. Department of Medical Statistics, Military Preventive Medicine Academy, Army Medical University (Third Military Medical University), Chongqing, China

    Yan-Qi Zhang

  5. Department of Pathology, Daping Hospital, Army Medical University (Third Military Medical University), Chongqing, China

    Hua-Liang Xiao

  6. Department of Radiology, Daping Hospital, Army Medical University (Third Military Medical University), Chongqing, China

    Hao Wu

  7. Department of Medical Imaging, College of Biomedical Engineering, Army Medical University (Third Military Medical University), Chongqing, China

    Jing-Na Zhang

  8. Department of Neurosurgery, Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University (Third Military Medical University), Chongqing, China

    Sheng-Qing Lv

  9. Institute of Cancer Stem Cell, Cancer Center, Second Affiliated Hospital, Dalian Medical University, Dalian, China

    Qing-Kai Yang

  10. Center for Neuroscience, Medical College, Shantou University, Shantou, China

    Xiao-Jun Yang

  11. Department of Neurosurgery, TianTan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China

    Tao Jiang

Authors
  1. Jun Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sen-Lin Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jiang-Jie Duan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Liang Yi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yu-Feng Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yu Shi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Lin Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Ze-Yu Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Xue-Mei Liao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Jiao Cai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Yan-Qi Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Hua-Liang Xiao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Li Yin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Hao Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Jing-Na Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Sheng-Qing Lv
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Qing-Kai Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Xiao-Jun Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Tao Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Xia Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Xiu-Wu Bian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  22. Shi-Cang Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

J.W. acquired, analyzed and interpreted data and drafted the manuscript. S.L.X., J.J.D. and L.Y. acquired, analyzed and interpreted data. Y.F.G., Y.S., L.L., Z.Y.Y., X.M.L., J.C., H.L.X. and L.Y. acquired data. Y.Q.Z. performed statistical analysis. H.W., J.N.Z., S.Q.L., Q.K.Y., X.J.Y., T.J. and X.Z. analyzed and interpreted data. X.W.B. analyzed and interpreted data, critically revised the manuscript for intellectual content, obtained funding and supervised the study. S.C.Y. initiated the study concept and design, acquired, analyzed and interpreted data, drafted of the manuscript, critically revised the manuscript for intellectual content, performed statistical analysis, obtained funding, and supervised the study. All authors read and approved the manuscript for publication.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Xiu-Wu Bian or Shi-Cang Yu.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Integrated supplementary information

Supplementary Figure. 1 Spatial relationship between GSCs and nerve fibers.

(a) Schematic diagram of the spatial distribution analysis. (b-c) Spatial relationship between GSCs (PBK+, CDC6+, and CD44+, red). and nerve fibers (NF200+, green) at the invasive frontier of glioma patients as detected by immunofluorescence staining. Three. samples, 3 male, aged from 46 to 57, 3 sections/sample, 10 high-power fields/section. Representative laser confocal microscopy. images of nuclei stained with DAPI (blue) are shown. Scale bar=20 μm (b). Quantitative analysis of the spatial orientation of every GSC. (CDC6, n=445 independent positive cells; PBK, n=426 independent positive cells; CD44, n=450 independent positive cells) to the. nearest nerve fibers (c)

Supplementary Figure 2 Migration, adherence, and invasion of GSCs in vitro and in vivo.

(a) Schematic diagram of the migration assay in vitro. (b) Quantitative analysis of GSC (CD133+, derived from U87, GBM1,and GBM2). migration under high-power field light microscopy showing representative results from 4 independent expriments, the data shown are. the mean±SD. A two-sided Student’s t test was used to generate P values (CS vs. CM. U87-GSC: n=10 independent high-power fields, df=18, t=0.44; GBM1-GSC: n=10 independent high-power fields, df=18, t=0.42; GBM1-GSC: n=10 independent high-power fields, df=18, t=0.79;). CS, culture supernatants; CM, culture media. (c) Adherence of GSCs (CD133+) and non-GSCs (CD133-) to the neurites of neurons cultured in vitro. Representative results from 4 independent expriments, the data shown are the mean±SD. A twosided Student’s t test was used to generate P values (CD133- vs. CD133+, n=25 independent high-power fields, df=48, t=-13). (d, e). The adherence of GSCs (CD133+) to the neurites of neurons cultured in vitro after treatment of Decoy (d) and Notch1-siRNA (e). Representative results from 4 independent exprements, the data shown are the mean±SD. A two-sided Student’s t test was used to. generate P values (PBS vs. Decoy, n=30 independent high-power fields, df=58, t=16; Mock vs. NOTCH1-siRNA, n=30 independent. high-power fields, df=58, t=11). (f) Immunofluorescent staining of CD44 (green) in xenografts of the control group to reveal the invasive. growth of glioma cells (red) along nerve fibers (blue). Two weeks after orthotopic implantation of 1×105 mCherry-labeled GL261 GSCs. into the right striatum adjacent to the corpus callosum of Thy1-EGFP transgenic mice. Five mice per group, 3 sections per mouse, 3-6. high-power fields per section, n=54 high-power fields. Representative laser confocal microscopy images of nuclei stained with DAPI. (gray) are shown. Scale bar=20 μm. (G) 3D diagram of the orthotopic xenograft. View of the horizontal plane and view angle with an. 80º horizontal plane. 3D diagram of mouse brain derived from Brain explore 2 (Allen Institute for Brain Science). The red circle denotes. the site of implantation

Supplementary Figure. 3 Relationship between SOX2 and Notch receptors (NOTCH1–4) and transcription factors (SOX9, HEY1, HEY2, and HES1) expression.

The data were derived from 3 Affymetrix DNA microarray datasets (Tumor Glioblastoma - TCGA - 540, n= 540 biologically independent. patients; Tumor Glioma - French - 284, n= 284 biologically independent patients; and Tumor Glioblastoma - TCGA – 395, n= 395. biologically independent patients). Pearson correlation analysis (2-tailed) was used to generate P values and correlation coefficients (r)

Supplementary Figure 4 The mechanism underlying NOTCH1 upregulation of the transcription of SOX2.

(a) Luciferase reporter assay of the 5’-promoter of SOX2. NOTCH1OE, GBM2 non-GSC cells stably overexpressing NOTCH1 via. pcDNA 3.1-NOTCH1; Vector, GBM2 non-GSC cells stably transfected with pcDNA3.1 empty vector; n=3 biologically independent. samples, the data are the mean±SD. (b) The similarity of the Sox2 promoter region between mouse and human. (c) The putative. binding sites of RBP-Jκ located at the promoter of the human SOX2 gene. (d) Chromatin. immunoprecipitation (ChIP) analysis in GSCs. derived from GBM2 cells. PCR primers were designed to surround predicted RBP-Jκ-binding sites 1 and 2 on the SOX2 promoter. Nonspecific IgG and anti-RNA polymerase II were used as controls. Three times these experiments were repeated independently with similar results. m, DNA ladder

Supplementary Figure 5 Immunofluorescent staining of Notch1, Sox9, and Sox2 in GSCs derived from GBM 1-3.

Representative lase confocal microscopy images of nuclei stained with hoechst33342 are shown. Scale bar=20 μm. (A) Double. immunofluorescent staining of Notch1 (red), Sox9 (red or green), and Sox2 (red or green) in GSCs derived from GBM 2 and GBM 3 cell. lines. Right panel: expanded view of the inset regions (white box) shown in the left panel. Inset1-3, scale bar=10 μm; Inset4-6, scale. bar=2 μm._Three times these experiments were repeated independently with similar results. (B) Triple immunofluorescent staining of. Notch1 (green), Sox9 (blue), and Sox2 (red) in GSCs derived from GBM 1 and GBM3. Scale bar=20 μm. Three times these. experiments were repeated independently with similar results

Supplementary Figure 6

Schematic diagram of orthotopic xenografts

Supplementary Figure 7 Luciferase reporter assays of the enhancers of NOTCH1.

(A) The putative enhancer binding sites of Sox2 located in the introns and exons of the NOTCH1 gene. (B) Luciferase activity of GBM2. non-GSC cells after different fragments containing the putative enhancers were cloned into a minimal promoter of the pGL-4 luciferase. vector and then co-transfected with pcDNA 3.1-SOX2, n=3 biologically independent samples. Center line represents the median, lower. and upper limits of the box represent the 25th and 75th percentiles, and whiskers show maximum and minimum

Supplementary Figure 8 Schematic diagram of the reciprocal activation between SOX2 and Notch signaling determining the WM tract tropism of GSCs.

CD133 and Notch1 double-positive GSCs were preferentially located along the Notch ligand Jagged1 expressed WM tracts, which. exhibited a demyelinated phenotype, at the invasive frontier of glioma tissues. The Notch-induced transcription factor Sox9 promoted. the transcription of SOX2 and the methylation level of the NOTCH1 promoter was attenuated by the upregulation of SOX2 to reinforce. NOTCH1 expression in GSCs

Supplementary Figure 9 Distribution of Sox9+ cells in different regions of human glioma samples.

Seven samples, 3 sections per sample, 1-20 high-power fields per section. Upper panel: Representative image of IHC staining. Dottedline. boxes (1-3) indicate the center, invasive frontier, and distant site of the tumor mass. Scale bar=200 μm. Lower panel: expanded. view of the inset regions (red box) shown in the upper panel. Scale bar=50 μm

Supplementary Figure 10 Full-length western blots.

Full-length western blots for cropped images in Figs. 4h,j, 4p, 6b,d, and 7f

Supplementary information

Supplementary Figures 1–10

Supplementary Figures 1–10, Supplementary Tables 1–6, and Supplementary Note

Reporting Summary

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, J., Xu, SL., Duan, JJ. et al. Invasion of white matter tracts by glioma stem cells is regulated by a NOTCH1–SOX2 positive-feedback loop. Nat Neurosci 22, 91–105 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-018-0285-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-018-0285-z

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing: Cancer

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Cancer newsletter — what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Cancer