A subscription to JoVE is required to view this content. Sign in or start your free trial.
This protocol describes how to use the MEDUSA analytical method to quantify the death regulatory effect of each gene knockout. It includes instructions on determining experimental conditions that optimize sensitivity and a step-by-step tutorial on performing the analysis.
Systematic screening of gain- or loss-of-function genetic perturbations can be used to characterize the genetic dependencies and mechanisms of regulation for essentially any cellular process of interest. These experiments typically involve profiling from a pool of single gene perturbations and how each genetic perturbation affects the relative cell fitness. When applied in the context of drug efficacy studies, often called chemo-genetic profiling, these methods should be effective at identifying drug mechanisms of action. Unfortunately, fitness-based chemo-genetic profiling studies are ineffective at identifying all components of a drug response. For instance, these studies generally fail to identify which genes regulate drug-induced cell death. Several issues contribute to obscuring death regulation in fitness-based screens, including the confounding effects of proliferation rate variation, variation in the drug-induced coordination between growth and death, and, in some cases, the inability to separate DNA from live and dead cells. MEDUSA is an analytical method for identifying death-regulatory genes in conventional chemo-genetic profiling data. It works by using computational simulations to estimate the growth and death rates that created an observed fitness profile rather than scoring fitness itself. Effective use of the method depends on optimal tittering of experimental conditions, including the drug dose, starting population size, and length of the assay. This manuscript will describe how to set up a chemo-genetic profiling study for MEDUSA-based analysis, and we will demonstrate how to use the method to quantify death rates in chemo-genetic profiling data.
In chemo-genetic profiling, systematic genetic perturbations are used to understand the contribution of each gene to a given drug response1,2,3. These experiments are valuable and can reveal important insights about drug responses, including the drug's binding target and mechanisms of drug influx/efflux. However, because these experiments are typically performed in a pooled manner that evaluates all genes simultaneously, generating mechanistic insights from chemo-genetic profiling data can be challenging.
The control mechanisms and genetic dependencies for drug-induced cell death tend to be challenging to resolve in chemo-genetic profiling data. There are several reasons for this problem, but many of these stem from the impacts of variation in cell proliferation4. For instance, because cells proliferate exponentially, a genetic perturbation's effect on the proliferation rate has a larger impact on the population size than changing cell death rates. Furthermore, because this biased sensitivity is exacerbated over time and because these experiments are typically performed over several weeks, most studies are optimized to be highly sensitive to proliferation defects and essentially insensitive to changes in drug-induced cell death. Other proliferation-related issues include varied coordination between proliferation and death (e.g., how fast is each clone growing while also dying, and does this vary between genetic perturbations) and the variations in proliferation rates for each clone in the absence of drug, which changes the expected number of cells that should/could have been recovered if the drug was not effective. The bottom line is that chemo-genetic profiling experiments generally score the impact of genetic perturbations using measurements that are proportional to the relative population sizes, comparing treated and untreated populations. Because population size is a product of both the cell growth and cell death rates, from the perspective of cell death, proliferation represents a confounding influence.
To remedy these issues, we created a Method for Evaluating Death Using a Simulation-assisted Approach (MEDUSA)5. MEDUSA works by interpreting the observed relative population size data through the lens of computational simulations to infer the combination of drug-induced growth and death rates that generated the observed drug response for each genetic clone. Prior data suggest that the method can accurately infer how genetic perturbations affect the drug-induced death rate, but the accuracy of this method depends on a detailed understanding of how cell proliferation and cell death are coordinated by a drug and how these rates vary over time5,6. Additionally, MEDUSA-based inferences require a drug being tested at a dose that causes substantial cell death. Importantly, these drugging conditions create additional concerns about the starting population sizes and assay lengths, which should be carefully considered and optimized. In this protocol, we describe how to set up a chemo-genetic profiling study for MEDUSA-based analysis and provide a detailed use of this analytical method. The overall goal of MEDUSA is to determine how each gene deletion impacts drug-induced growth and death rates.
1. Optimization of the drug dose to induce cell death
NOTE: The protocol below is for optimizing one combination of cell line, drug, and dose using the FLICK assay7,8. The example data for this protocol describes the optimization and screening of 5 ΞΌM etoposide in U2OS cells, but the same optimization steps could be applied to any other desired combination of cell line and drug/dose. This protocol does not require the collection or analysis of dead cells. This protocol can be used for suspension cultures, provided that dead cells are removed. For suspension cultures, dead cells can be sorted/separated using a viability marker or a marker specific for cell death.
2. Selection of assay length
3. Determining the starting population size
4. Performing CRISPR screen
NOTE: Cells can be screened using established CRISPR screening methods following optimization of drug dose and assay length. Established protocols, such as the TKO screening protocol from the Moffat lab10,11, can be used to prepare the CRISPR screening library, produce viruses, perform the CRISPR screen, and prepare libraries for sequencing (Figure 1A-B). The protocol below describes steps specific to the MEDUSA analysis, which should be carried out on count-level data following sequencing.
Using this protocol, we explored the genetic dependencies of etoposide-induced death in U2OS cells. Etoposide is a commonly used DNA-damaging chemotherapy15. This chemo-genetic profiling experiment was performed using the GeCKOv2 library16 in Cas9 expressing U2OS cells5. In these types of experiments, gene function is typically inferred from the relative abundance of a given knockout clone when comparing drug-treated versus untreated populations (
In this protocol, we describe the use of the MEDUSA analytical method for quantifying chemo-genetic profiling data to score how genetic perturbations alter drug-induced growth and death rates. Because the primary output of a chemo-genetic profiling experiment is related to population size, not rates, the underlying rates are inferred using simulations. Thus, the critical steps in the method are the accurate experimental parameterization of drug response kinetics, which includes the untreated cell proliferation rate, the ...
The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
We thank all members of the Lee Lab, past and present, for their contributions to our lab's point of view on evaluating drug responses. This work was supported by funding MJL and MEH from the National Institutes of Health (U01CA265709, R21CA294000, and R35GM152194 to MJL, and F31CA268847 to MEH), the funding MJL from the Jayne Koskinas Ted Giovanis Foundation.
Name | Company | Catalog Number | Comments |
100mm Fisherbrand TC Dishes | Fisher Scientific | FB012924 | For growing cells and optimizing population size |
150mm Fisherbrand TC Dishes | Fisher Scientific | FB012925 | For growing cells and optimizing population size |
DESeq2 | R Package | v1.44.0 | For calculating fold-change |
DMEM | Corning | 10017CV | For seeding and drugging cells |
DMSO | Fisher Scientific | MT-25950CQC | For seeding and drugging cells |
Fisherbrand 96-Well, Cell Culture-Treated, U-Shaped-Bottom Microplate | Fisher Scientific | FB012932 | For seeding and drugging cells (pin plate) |
Greiner Bio-OneΒ CELLSTAR ΞΌClear 96-well, Cell Culture-Treated, Flat-Bottom Microplate | Greiner | 655090 | For seeding and drugging cells |
MATLAB | MathworksΒ | R2024a | For performing FLICK, GRADE, and MEDUSA |
Microplate fluorescence reader | Tecan | Spark | For dead cell measurements |
Sytox Green | Thermo Fisher Scientific | S7020 | For dead cell measurements |
TKOV3 CRISPR library | Addgene | 125517 | For performing CRISPR screen |
Triton-X 100 | Thermo Fisher Scientific | J66624-AP | For permeabilizing cells |
Trypan blueΒ | Corning | MT25900CI | For measure live/dead cells |
Request permission to reuse the text or figures of this JoVE article
Request PermissionThis article has been published
Video Coming Soon
Copyright Β© 2025 MyJoVE Corporation. All rights reserved