Cellular network entropy as the energy potential in Waddington's differentiation landscape

Abstract

Differentiation is a key cellular process in normal tissue development that is significantly altered in cancer. Although molecular signatures characterising pluripotency and multipotency exist, there is, as yet, no single quantitative mark of a cellular sample's position in the global differentiation hierarchy. Here we adopt a systems view and consider the sample's network entropy, a measure of signaling pathway promiscuity, computable from a sample's genome-wide expression profile. We demonstrate that network entropy provides a quantitative, in-silico, readout of the average undifferentiated state of the profiled cells, recapitulating the known hierarchy of pluripotent, multipotent and differentiated cell types. Network entropy further exhibits dynamic changes in time course differentiation data, and in line with a sample's differentiation stage. In disease, network entropy predicts a higher level of cellular plasticity in cancer stem cell populations compared to ordinary cancer cells. Importantly, network entropy also allows identification of key differentiation pathways. Our results are consistent with the view that pluripotency is a statistical property defined at the cellular population level, correlating with intra-sample heterogeneity, and driven by the degree of signaling promiscuity in cells. In summary, network entropy provides a quantitative measure of a cell's undifferentiated state, defining its elevation in Waddington's landscape.

Full text

Its licence does not allow us to show the full text. Read it at PubMed Central:

References 50

1. 1.

   Keller G. Embryonic stem cell differentiation: emergence of a new era in biology and medicine. Genes Dev 19, 1129–1155 (2005 ).

   Not in our library10.1101/gad.1303605

2. 2.

   Zhou J. X., Brusch L. & Huang S. Predicting pancreas cell fate decisions and reprogramming with a hierarchical multi-attractor model. PLoS One 6, e14752 (2011 ).

   Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0014752

3. 3.

   Zhou J. X. & Huang S. Understanding gene circuits at cell-fate branch points for rational cell reprogramming. Trends Genet 27, 55–62 (2011 ).

   Not in our library10.1016/j.tig.2010.11.002

4. 4.

   Ladewig J., Koch P. & Bruestle O. Leveling waddington: the emergence of direct programming and the loss of cell fate hierarchies. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 14, 225–236 (2013 ).

   Not in our library10.1038/nrm3543

5. 5.

   Heinaniemi M. et al. Gene-pair expression signatures reveal lineage control. Nat Methods 10, 577–583 (2013 ).

   Not in our library10.1038/nmeth.2445

6. 6.

   Chang H. H., Hemberg M., Barahona M., Ingber D. E. & Huang S. Transcriptome-wide noise controls lineage choice in mammalian progenitor cells. Nature 453, 544–547 (2008 ).

   Not in our library10.1038/nature06965

7. 7.

   Pina C. et al. Inferring rules of lineage commitment in haematopoiesis. Nat Cell Biol 14, 287–294 (2012 ).

   Not in our library10.1038/ncb2442

8. 8.

   Kohn L. A. et al. Lymphoid priming in human bone marrow begins before expression of cd10 with upregulation of l-selectin. Nat Immunol 13, 963–971 (2012 ).

   Not in our library10.1038/ni.2405

9. 9.

   Rodrigues N. P., Tipping A. J., Wang Z. & Enver T. Gata-2 mediated regulation of normal hematopoietic stem/progenitor cell function, myelodysplasia and myeloid leukemia. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 44, 457–460 (2012 ).

   Not in our library10.1016/j.biocel.2011.12.004

10. 10.

    Chen X. et al. Integration of external signaling pathways with the core transcriptional network in embryonic stem cells. Cell 133, 1106–1117 (2008 ).

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2008.04.043

11. 11.

    Mueller F. J. et al. Regulatory networks define phenotypic classes of human stem cell lines. Nature 455, 401–405 (2008 ).

    Not in our library10.1038/nature07213

12. 12.

    Mikkelsen T. S. et al. Dissecting direct reprogramming through integrative genomic analysis. Nature 454, 49–55 (2008 ).

    Not in our library10.1038/nature07056

13. 13.

    Wong D. J. et al. Module map of stem cell genes guides creation of epithelial cancer stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 2, 333–344 (2008 ).

    Not in our library10.1016/j.stem.2008.02.009

14. 14.

    Mueller F. J. et al. A bioinformatic assay for pluripotency in human cells. Nat Methods 8, 315–317 (2011 ).

    Not in our library10.1038/nmeth.1580

15. 15.

    Palmer N. P., Schmid P. R., Berger B. & Kohane I. S. A gene expression profile of stem cell pluripotentiality and differentiation is conserved across diverse solid and hematopoietic cancers. Genome Biol 13, R71 (2012 ).

    Not in our library10.1186/gb-2012-13-8-r71

16. 16.

    Meissner A. et al. Genome-scale dna methylation maps of pluripotent and differentiated cells. Nature 454, 766–770 (2008 ).

    Not in our library10.1038/nature07107

17. 17.

    Ernst J. et al. Mapping and analysis of chromatin state dynamics in nine human cell types. Nature 473, 43–49 (2011 ).

    Not in our library10.1038/nature09906

18. 18.

    Zhu J. et al. Genome-wide chromatin state transitions associated with developmental and environmental cues. Cell 152, 642–654 (2013 ).

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2012.12.033

19. 19.

    Smith Z. D. & Meissner A. Dna methylation: roles in mammalian development. Nat Rev Genet 14, 204–220 (2013 ).

    Not in our library10.1038/nrg3354

20. 20.

    Bock C. et al. Dna methylation dynamics during in vivo differentiation of blood and skin stem cells. Mol Cell 47, 633–647 (2012 ).

    Not in our library10.1016/j.molcel.2012.06.019

21. 21.

    Waddington C. H. The Strategy of the Genes: A Discussion of Some Aspects of Theoretical Biology (Allen & Unwin, London, 1957 ).

    Not in our library

22. 22.

    Macarthur B. D. & Lemischka I. R. Statistical mechanics of pluripotency. Cell 154, 484–489 (2013 ).

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2013.07.024

23. 23.
    Chaotic expression dynamics implies pluripotency: when theory and experiment meet · 2009

    Not checked
24. 24.

    Furusawa C. & Kaneko K. A dynamical systems view of stem cell biology. Science 338 (2012 ).

    Not in our library10.1126/science.1224311

25. 25.

    Teschendorff A. E. & Severini S. Increased entropy of signal transduction in the cancer metastasis phenotype. BMC Syst Biol 4, 104 (2010 ).

    Not in our library10.1186/1752-0509-4-104

26. 26.

    West J., Bianconi G., Severini S. & Teschendorff A. E. Differential network entropy reveals cancer system hallmarks. Sci Rep 2, 802 (2012 ).

    Not in our library10.1038/srep00802

27. 27.

    Li Y., Yi M. & Zou X. Identification of the molecular mechanisms for cell-fate selection in budding yeast through mathematical modeling. Biophys J. 104, 2282–94 (2013 ).

    Not in our library10.1016/j.bpj.2013.03.057

28. 28.

    Cerami E. G. et al. Pathway commons, a web resource for biological pathway data. Nucleic Acids Res 39, D685–D690 (2011 ).

    Not in our library10.1093/nar/gkq1039

29. 29.

    Latora V. & Baranger M. Kolmogorov-sinai entropy rate versus physical entropy. Phys Rev Lett 82 (1999 ).

    Not in our library

30. 30.

    Gomez-Gardenes J. & Latora V. Entropy rate of diffusion processes on complex networks. Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys 78, 065102 (2008 ).

    Not in our library10.1103/physreve.78.065102

31. 31.

    Nazor K. L. et al. Recurrent variations in dna methylation in human pluripotent stem cells and their differentiated derivatives. Cell Stem Cell 10, 620–634 (2012 ).

    Not in our library10.1016/j.stem.2012.02.013

32. 32.

    Ben-Porath I. et al. An embryonic stem cell-like gene expression signature in poorly differentiated aggressive human tumors. Nat Genet 40, 499–507 (2008 ).

    Not in our library10.1038/ng.127

33. 33.

    Watkins N. A. et al. A haematlas: characterizing gene expression in differentiated human blood cells. Blood 113, e1–e9 (2009 ).

    Not in our library10.1182/blood-2008-06-162958

34. 34.

    Goldfarb A. N., Wong D. & Racke F. K. Induction of megakaryocytic differentiation in primary human erythroblasts: a physiological basis for leukemic lineage plasticity. Am J Pathol 158, 1191–1198 (2001 ).

    Not in our library10.1016/s0002-9440(10)64068-0

35. 35.

    Miranda-Saavedra D. & Gttgens B. Transcriptional regulatory networks in haematopoiesis. Curr Opin Genet Dev 18, 530–535 (2008 ).

    Not in our library10.1016/j.gde.2008.09.001

36. 36.

    Zipori D. The stem state: mesenchymal plasticity as a paradigm. Curr Stem Cell Res Ther 1, 95–102 (2006 ).

    Not in our library10.2174/157488806775269133

37. 37.

    Krinner A., Hoffmann M., Loeffler M., Drasdo D. & Galle J. Individual fates of mesenchymal stem cells in vitro. BMC Syst Biol 4, 73 (2010 ).

    Not in our library10.1186/1752-0509-4-73

38. 38.

    Huang S., Eichler G., Bar-Yam Y. & Ingber D. E. Cell fates as high-dimensional attractor states of a complex gene regulatory network. Phys Rev Lett 94, 128701 (2005 ).

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.94.128701

39. 39.

    Yu Y. H. et al. Network biology of tumor stem-like cells identified a regulatory role of cbx5 in lung cancer. Sci Rep 2, 584 (2012 ).

    Not in our library10.1038/srep00584

40. 40.

    Noggle S. A., Weiler D. & Condie B. G. Notch signaling is inactive but inducible in human embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells 24, 1646–1653 (2006 ).

    Not in our library10.1634/stemcells.2005-0314

Cited by papers we hold 2

• Single-cell analysis uncovers that metabolic reprogramming by ErbB2 signaling is essential for cardiomyocyte proliferation in the regenerating heart · 2019
  No notice
• Single-cell entropy for accurate estimation of differentiation potency from a cell’s transcriptome · 2017
  No notice

Reads

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.