G Wu1, Lei Yu, L Wang, H Wang, J W Xuan. 1. Department of Urology, Xijing Hospital, the Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China, 710032. wuguojun@fmmu.edu.cn
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A new knock-in mouse adenocarcinoma prostate model (KIMAP) was established, which showed a close to human kinetics of tumour development. This study used a new mouse histological grading system similar to the human Gleason grading system and flow cytometry DNA analysis to measure and compare the new KIMAP model with human CaP and transgenic mouse adenocarcinoma prostate (TGMAP) model. METHODS: According to heterogeneity of the clinical standard for prostate cancer diagnosis, a close to human mouse standard for histological grading and scoring system, Gleason analogous grading system, was established in this study. Sixty KIMAP and 48 TGMAP prostate cancer samples were measured and compared with human CaP. Flow cytometry DNA analysis was performed on malignant prostate tissues obtained from both TGMAP and KIMAP models. RESULTS: Mice with CaP from KIMAP (n = 60) and TGMAP (n = 48) models showed a different distribution of histological scores (p = 0.000). KIMAP mice showed higher percentage (53.3%) of compound histological score rate than TGMAP (25%), but closer to the human clinical average (50%), which showed significant correlation with age (p = 0.001), while TGMAP mice showed unbalanced and random score distribution in all age groups. Flow cytometry analyses showed that most tumour tissues in KIMAP were diploid, analogous to the human condition, while all the TGMAP mice showed aneuploid tumours. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study further show that KIMAP, a new generation of murine prostate cancer model, could be used as a supplementary model in addition to the currently widely used transgenic models.
OBJECTIVE: A new knock-in mouseadenocarcinoma prostate model (KIMAP) was established, which showed a close to human kinetics of tumour development. This study used a new mouse histological grading system similar to the human Gleason grading system and flow cytometry DNA analysis to measure and compare the new KIMAP model with human CaP and transgenic mouseadenocarcinoma prostate (TGMAP) model. METHODS: According to heterogeneity of the clinical standard for prostate cancer diagnosis, a close to humanmouse standard for histological grading and scoring system, Gleason analogous grading system, was established in this study. Sixty KIMAP and 48 TGMAPprostate cancer samples were measured and compared with human CaP. Flow cytometry DNA analysis was performed on malignant prostate tissues obtained from both TGMAP and KIMAP models. RESULTS:Mice with CaP from KIMAP (n = 60) and TGMAP (n = 48) models showed a different distribution of histological scores (p = 0.000). KIMAP mice showed higher percentage (53.3%) of compound histological score rate than TGMAP (25%), but closer to the human clinical average (50%), which showed significant correlation with age (p = 0.001), while TGMAPmice showed unbalanced and random score distribution in all age groups. Flow cytometry analyses showed that most tumour tissues in KIMAP were diploid, analogous to the human condition, while all the TGMAPmice showed aneuploid tumours. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study further show that KIMAP, a new generation of murineprostate cancer model, could be used as a supplementary model in addition to the currently widely used transgenic models.
Authors: M Y Gabril; T Onita; P G Ji; H Sakai; F L Chan; J Koropatnick; J L Chin; M Moussa; J W Xuan Journal: Gene Ther Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 5.250
Authors: Wenming Duan; Manal Y Gabril; Madeleine Moussa; Franky L Chan; Hideki Sakai; Guohua Fong; Jim W Xuan Journal: Oncogene Date: 2005-02-24 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: N Masumori; T Z Thomas; P Chaurand; T Case; M Paul; S Kasper; R M Caprioli; T Tsukamoto; S B Shappell; R J Matusik Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2001-03-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Scott B Shappell; George V Thomas; Richard L Roberts; Ron Herbert; Michael M Ittmann; Mark A Rubin; Peter A Humphrey; John P Sundberg; Nora Rozengurt; Roberto Barrios; Jerrold M Ward; Robert D Cardiff Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2004-03-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Katharine Ellwood-Yen; Thomas G Graeber; John Wongvipat; M Luisa Iruela-Arispe; JianFeng Zhang; Robert Matusik; George V Thomas; Charles L Sawyers Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 31.743