Cited by 302Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomicsCancer Genomics and Diagnostics

Cellular heterogeneity during mouse pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma progression at single-cell resolution

Open access
Hosein, Abdel Nasser, Huang, Huocong, Wang, Zhaoning, Parmar, Kamalpreet, Du, Wenting, Huang, Jonathan, Maitra, Anirban, Olson, Eric +2 more·2019·JCI Insight

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) is a major cause of cancer-related death, with limited therapeutic options available. This highlights the need for improved understanding of the biology of PDA progression, a highly complex and dynamic process, featuring changes in cancer cells and stromal cells. A comprehensive characterization of PDA cancer cell and stromal cell heterogeneity during disease progression is lacking. In this study, we aimed to profile cell populations and understand their phenotypic changes during PDA progression. To that end, we used single-cell RNA–sequencing technology to agnostically profile cell heterogeneity during different stages of PDA progression in genetically engineered mouse models. Our data indicate that an epithelial-mesenchymal transition of cancer cells accompanies tumor progression in addition to distinct populations of macrophages with increasing inflammatory features. We also noted the existence of 3 distinct molecular subtypes of fibroblasts in the normal mouse pancreas, which ultimately gave rise to 2 distinct populations of fibroblasts in advanced PDA, supporting recent reports on intratumor fibroblast heterogeneity. Our data also suggest that cancer cells and fibroblasts may be dynamically regulated by epigenetic mechanisms. This study systematically describes the landscape of cellular heterogeneity during the progression of PDA and has the potential to act as a resource in the development of therapeutic strategies against specific cell populations of the disease.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1172/jci.insight.129212

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The CyTOF data suggest neoadjuvant-treated patients would potentially respond better to adjuvant immunotherapy.

    “The data gained through this approach suggests neoadjuvant treated patients would potentially respond better to adjuvant immunotherapy.”

    From Pancreatic cancer: Advances and challenges (2023) · cites this paper as [268]

  • In PDAC patients, a 36-marker CyTOF analysis of peripheral blood showed that neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX raises effector T cells while lowering suppressive immune populations.

    “Illustrating this, a 36 marker CyTOF characterization of peripheral blood from PDAC patients revealed neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX promotes an increase in effector T cells and concurrent decrease in suppressive immune populations268.”

    From Pancreatic cancer: Advances and challenges (2023) · cites this paper as [268]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 58 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hosein, A. N., Huang, H., Wang, Z., Parmar, K., Du, W., Huang, J., Maitra, A., Olson, E., Verma, U., & Brekken, R. A.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US)
  • The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Brekken, Rolf A.
Venue
JCI Insight
Published
2019-08-22
Volume
4
Issue
16
ISSN
2379-3708 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2964097765
Cited by
302
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 41 · 2023: 64 · 2022: 61 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 4
FWCI
15.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JCI Insight (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (See comments)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Single-cell and spatial transcriptomics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Keywords
pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, tumor progression, cellular heterogeneity, epithelial-mesenchymal transition, tumor-associated macrophages, tumor-infiltrating fibroblasts, fibroblast heterogeneity, tumor microenvironment, epigenetic regulation, genetically engineered mouse models, tumor heterogeneity, stromal heterogeneity
MeSH terms
Animals, Disease Models, Animal, Fibroblasts, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Mutation, Pancreatic Neoplasms, Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic, Sequence Analysis, Genetic Heterogeneity, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal, Mice, Epigenomics, Single-Cell Analysis, Transcriptome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review