Interaction between RasV12 and scribbled clones induces tumour growth and invasion

  • Nature volume 463, pages 545548 (28 January 2010)
  • doi:10.1038/nature08702
  • Download Citation


Human tumours have a large degree of cellular and genetic heterogeneity1. Complex cell interactions in the tumour and its microenvironment are thought to have an important role in tumorigenesis and cancer progression2. Furthermore, cooperation between oncogenic genetic lesions is required for tumour development3; however, it is not known how cell interactions contribute to oncogenic cooperation. The genetic techniques available in the fruitfly Drosophila melanogaster allow analysis of the behaviour of cells with distinct mutations4, making this the ideal model organism with which to study cell interactions and oncogenic cooperation. In Drosophila eye-antennal discs, cooperation between the oncogenic protein RasV12 (ref. 5) and loss-of-function mutations in the conserved tumour suppressor scribbled (scrib)6,7 gives rise to metastatic tumours that display many characteristics observed in human cancers8,9,10,11. Here we show that clones of cells bearing different mutations can cooperate to promote tumour growth and invasion in Drosophila. We found that the RasV12 and scrib- mutations can also cause tumours when they affect different adjacent epithelial cells. We show that this interaction between RasV12 and scrib- clones involves JNK signalling propagation and JNK-induced upregulation of JAK/STAT-activating cytokines, a compensatory growth mechanism for tissue homeostasis. The development of RasV12 tumours can also be triggered by tissue damage, a stress condition that activates JNK signalling. Given the conservation of the pathways examined here, similar cooperative mechanisms could have a role in the development of human cancers.

  • Subscribe to Nature for full access:



Additional access options:

Already a subscriber?  Log in  now or  Register  for online access.


  1. 1.

    Tumour heterogeneity. Cancer Res. 44, 2259–2265 (1984)

  2. 2.

    & The hallmarks of cancer. Cell 100, 57–70 (2000)

  3. 3.

    & Lessons from hereditary colorectal cancer. Cell 87, 159–170 (1996)

  4. 4.

    & Analysis of genetic mosaics in developing and adult Drosophila tissues. Development 117, 1223–1237 (1993)

  5. 5.

    ras genes. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 56, 779–827 (1987)

  6. 6.

    & Localization of apical epithelial determinants by the basolateral PDZ protein Scribble. Nature 403, 676–680 (2000)

  7. 7.

    et al. Deregulation of scribble promotes mammary tumourigenesis and reveals a role for cell polarity in carcinoma. Cell 135, 865–878 (2008)

  8. 8.

    & A genetic screen in Drosophila for metastatic behavior. Science 302, 1227–1231 (2003)

  9. 9.

    , & Loss of cell polarity drives tumour growth and invasion through JNK activation in Drosophila. Curr. Biol. 16, 1139–1146 (2006)

  10. 10.

    & JNK- and Fos-regulated Mmp1 expression cooperates with Ras to induce invasive tumours in Drosophila.. EMBO J. 25, 5294–5304 (2006)

  11. 11.

    , , , & Basement membrane remodeling is essential for Drosophila disc eversion and tumour invasion. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 2721–2726 (2007)

  12. 12.

    & Ectopic expression of activated Ras1 induces hyperplastic growth and increased cell death in Drosophila imaginal tissues. Development 125, 1–9 (1998)

  13. 13.

    & scribble mutants cooperate with oncogenic Ras or Notch to cause neoplastic overgrowth in Drosophila. EMBO J. 22, 5769–5779 (2003)

  14. 14.

    , & The roles of the Drosophila JAK/STAT pathway. Oncogene 19, 2598–2606 (2000)

  15. 15.

    & Regulation of imaginal disc growth by tumour-suppressor genes in Drosophila. Annu. Rev. Genet. 40, 335–361 (2006)

  16. 16.

    , , , & Drosophila unpaired encodes a secreted protein that activates the JAK signaling pathway. Genes Dev. 12, 3252–3263 (1998)

  17. 17.

    , , , & Signaling role of hemocytes in Drosophila JAK/STAT-dependent response to septic injury. Dev. Cell 5, 441–450 (2003)

  18. 18.

    , , & Characterisation of Upd2, a Drosophila JAK/STAT pathway ligand. Dev. Biol. 288, 420–433 (2005)

  19. 19.

    et al. GFP reporters detect the activation of the Drosophila JAK/STAT pathway in vivo. Gene Expr. Patterns 7, 323–331 (2007)

  20. 20.

    , & Identification of the first invertebrate interleukin JAK/STAT receptor, the Drosophila gene domeless. Curr. Biol. 11, 1700–1705 (2001)

  21. 21.

    , & Apoptosis in Drosophila: compensatory proliferation and undead cells. Int. J. Dev. Biol. 53, 1341–1347 (2009)

  22. 22.

    , & An innate immune response of blood cells to tumours and tissue damage in Drosophila. Disease Models Mech. 1, 144–154 (2008)

  23. 23.

    , & Apoptotic cells can induce compensatory cell proliferation through the JNK and the Wingless signaling pathways. Dev. Cell 7, 491–501 (2004)

  24. 24.

    , & Non-cell-autonomous induction of tissue overgrowth by JNK/Ras cooperation in a Drosophila tumour model. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 13123–13128 (2005)

  25. 25.

    , , , & Intrinsic tumour suppression and epithelial maintenance by endocytic activation of Eiger/TNF signaling in Drosophila. Dev. Cell 16, 458–465 (2009)

  26. 26.

    , , & JNK signaling pathway required for wound healing in regenerating Drosophila wing imaginal discs. Dev. Biol. 280, 73–86 (2005)

  27. 27.

    et al. puckered encodes a phosphatase that mediates a feedback loop regulating JNK activity during dorsal closure in Drosophila. Genes Dev. 12, 557–570 (1998)

  28. 28.

    Tumors: wounds that do not heal. Similarities between tumor stroma generation and wound healing. N. Engl. J. Med. 315, 1650–1659 (1986)

  29. 29.

    & Inflammation and cancer: back to Virchow? Lancet 357, 539–545 (2001)

  30. 30.

    , & Paradoxical roles of the immune system during cancer development. Nature Rev. Cancer 6, 24–37 (2006)

Download references


We thank E. Bach, D. Harrison, J. Castelli-Gair Hombria, M. Zeidler, T. Adachi-Yamada, M. Mlodzik, E. Matunis, D. Montell, H. Agaisse, the Bloomington Stock Center and the National Institute of Genetics (Kyoto) for fly strains, and T. Ni, S. Landrette and M. Rojas for comments. R. Pagliarini and S. Landrette helped with microarray analysis and RT–PCR. We thank T. Igaki for discussing the manuscript and providing FRT82B,tub-Gal80,scrib1/TM6B flies. M.W. is a Yale predoctoral fellow. J.C.P.-P. was funded by a Spanish Ministry of Education postdoctoral fellowship. This work was supported by a grant from NIH/NCI to T.X. T.X. is a Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator.

Author Contributions M.W., J.C.P.-P. and T.X. designed research, M.W. and J.C.P.-P. performed experiments and analysed the data. M.W., J.C.P.-P. and T.X. wrote the manuscript.

Author information

Author notes

    • Ming Wu
    •  & José Carlos Pastor-Pareja

    These authors contributed equally to this work.


  1. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Department of Genetics, Yale University School of Medicine, 295 Congress Avenue, New Haven, Connecticut 06519, USA

    • Ming Wu
    • , José Carlos Pastor-Pareja
    •  & Tian Xu
  2. Fudan-Yale Biomedical Research Center, Institute of Developmental Biology and Molecular Medicine, School of Life Sciences, Fudan University, 220 Han Dan Road, Shanghai 20043, China

    • Tian Xu


  1. Search for Ming Wu in:

  2. Search for José Carlos Pastor-Pareja in:

  3. Search for Tian Xu in:

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tian Xu.

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Figures

    This file contains Supplementary Figures 1-10 with Legends and Supplementary References.

  2. 2.

    Supplementary Data

    This file contains the detailed genotype for Figures 1-4 in the main paper and for Supplementary Figures 1-10.


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.