Both IGF-1R/PI3K/AKT/mTOR and Hippo pathways are crucial for breast cancer stem cells (BCSCs). However, their interplay remains unclear. Four triple negative breast cancer cell lines derived from CSC of two patient-derived xenografts (PDXs), AS-B145, AS-B145-1R, AS-B244, and AS-B244-1R, were used to elucidate the role of YAP in BCSCs. YAP silenced BCSCs were analyzed by cell proliferation, aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH) activity, mammosphere formation, and tumorigenesis. The effects of modulating IGF-1R and IGF-1 on YAP expression and localization were evaluated. The clinical correlation of YAP and IGF-1R signaling with the overall survival (OS) of 7830 breast cancer patients was analyzed by KM plotter. Knockdown of YAP abates the viability and stemness of BCSCs in vitro and tumorigenicity in vivo. Depletion of IGF-1R by shRNA or specific inhibitor decreases YAP expression. In contrast, IGF-1 addition upregulates YAP and enhances its nuclear localization. YAP overexpression increased the mRNA level of IGF-1, but not IGF-1R. Data mining of clinical breast cancer specimens revealed that basal-like breast cancer patients with higher level of IGF-1 and YAP exhibit significantly shorter OS. YAP contributes to stemness features of breast cancer in vitro and in vivo. The expression and localization of YAP was regulated by IGF-1R and YAP expression in turns upregulates IGF-1, but not IGF-1R. Clinically, higher level of YAP and IGF-1 significantly correlated with shorter OS in basal-like breast cancer. Taken together, these findings suggest the clinical relevance of interplay between YAP and IGF-1/IGF-1R pathway in sustaining the properties of BCSCs. Video Abstract.

It has been shown that imprecise cleavage of a primary or precursor RNA by Drosha or Dicer, respectively, may yield a group of microRNA (miRNA) variants designated as "isomiR". Variations in the relative abundance of isoforms for a given miRNA among different species and different cell types beg the question whether these isomiRs might regulate target genes differentially. We compared the capacity of three miR-31 isoforms (miR-31-H, miR-31-P, and miR-31-M), which differ only slightly in their 5'- and/or 3'-end sequences, to regulate several known targets and a predicted target, Dicer. Notably, we found isomiR-31s displayed concordant and discordant regulation of 6 known target genes. Furthermore, we validated a predicted target gene, Dicer, to be a novel target of miR-31 but only miR-31-P could directly repress Dicer expression in both MCF-7 breast cancer cells and A549 lung cancer cells, resulting in their enhanced sensitivity to cisplatin, a known attribute of Dicer knockdown. This was further supported by reporter assay using full length 3'-untranslated region (UTR) of Dicer. Our findings not only revealed Dicer to be a direct target of miR-31, but also demonstrated that isomiRs displayed similar and disparate regulation of target genes in cell-based systems. Coupled with the variations in the distribution of isomiRs among different cells or conditions, our findings support the possibility of fine-tuning gene expression by miRNAs.

G protein-coupled estrogen receptor-1 (GPER), a member of the G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) superfamily, mediates estrogen-induced proliferation of normal and malignant breast epithelial cells. However, its role in breast cancer stem cells (BCSCs) remains unclear. Here we showed greater expression of GPER in BCSCs than non-BCSCs of three patient-derived xenografts of ER^- /PR⁺ breast cancers. GPER silencing reduced stemness features of BCSCs as reflected by reduced mammosphere forming capacity in vitro, and tumor growth in vivo with decreased BCSC populations. Comparative phosphoproteomics revealed greater GPER-mediated PKA/BAD signaling in BCSCs. Activation of GPER by its ligands, including tamoxifen (TMX), induced phosphorylation of PKA and BAD-Ser118 to sustain BCSC characteristics. Transfection with a dominant-negative mutant BAD (Ser118Ala) led to reduced cell survival. Taken together, GPER and its downstream signaling play a key role in maintaining the stemness of BCSCs, suggesting that GPER is a potential therapeutic target for eradicating BCSCs.

Cancer stem cells (CSC) play a pivotal role in cancer metastasis and resistance to therapy. Previously, we compared the phosphoproteomes of breast cancer stem cells (BCSCs) enriched subpopulation and non-BCSCs sorted from breast cancer patient-derived xenograft (PDX), and identified a function unknown protein, transmembrane and coiled-coil domain family 3 (TMCC3) to be a potential enrichment marker for BCSCs. We demonstrated greater expression of TMCC3 in BCSCs than non-BCSCs and higher expression of TMCC3 in metastatic lymph nodes and lungs than in primary tumor of breast cancer PDXs. TMCC3 silencing suppressed mammosphere formation, ALDH activity and cell migration in vitro, along with reduced tumorigenicity and metastasis in vivo. Mechanistically, we found that AKT activation was reduced by TMCC3 silencing, but enhanced by TMCC3 overexpression. We further demonstrated that TMCC3 interacted directly with AKT through its 1-153 a.a. domain by cell-free biochemical assay in vitro and co-immunoprecipitation and interaction domain mapping assays in vivo. Based on domain truncation studies, we showed that the AKT-interacting domain of TMCC3 was essential for TMCC3-induced AKT activation, self-renewal, and metastasis. Clinically, TMCC3 mRNA expression in 202 breast cancer specimens as determined by qRT-PCR assay showed that higher TMCC3 expression correlated with poorer clinical outcome of breast cancer, including early-stage breast cancer. Multivariable analysis identified TMCC3 expression as an independent risk factor for survival. These findings suggest that TMCC3 is crucial for maintenance of BCSCs features through AKT regulation, and TMCC3 expression has independent prognostic significance in breast cancer. Thus, TMCC3 may serve as a new target for therapy directed against CSCs.