OBJECT: Brain tumor stem cells (TSCs) hypothetically drive the malignant phenotype of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), and evidence suggests that a better understanding of these TSCs will have profound implications for treating gliomas. When grown in vitro, putative TSCs grow as a solid sphere, making their subsequent characterization, particularly the cells within the center of the sphere, difficult. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to develop a new method to better understand the proteomic profile of the entire population of cells within a sphere. METHODS: Tumor specimens from patients with confirmed GBM and glioma models in mice were mechanically and enzymatically dissociated and grown in traditional stem cell medium to generate neurospheres. The neurospheres were then embedded in freezing medium, cryosectioned, and analyzed with immunofluorescence. RESULTS: By sectioning neurospheres as thinly as 5 mum, the authors overcame many of the problems associated with immunolabeling whole neurospheres, such as antibody penetration into the core of the sphere and intense background fluorescence that obscures the specificity of immunoreactivity. Moreover, the small quantity of material required and the speed with which this cryosectioning and immunolabeling technique can be performed make it an attractive tool for the rapid assessment of TSC character. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to show that cryosectioning of neurospheres derived from glioma models in mice and GBM in humans is a feasible method of better defining the stem cell profile of a glioma.
OBJECT: Brain tumor stem cells (TSCs) hypothetically drive the malignant phenotype of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), and evidence suggests that a better understanding of these TSCs will have profound implications for treating gliomas. When grown in vitro, putative TSCs grow as a solid sphere, making their subsequent characterization, particularly the cells within the center of the sphere, difficult. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to develop a new method to better understand the proteomic profile of the entire population of cells within a sphere. METHODS: Tumor specimens from patients with confirmed GBM and glioma models in mice were mechanically and enzymatically dissociated and grown in traditional stem cell medium to generate neurospheres. The neurospheres were then embedded in freezing medium, cryosectioned, and analyzed with immunofluorescence. RESULTS: By sectioning neurospheres as thinly as 5 mum, the authors overcame many of the problems associated with immunolabeling whole neurospheres, such as antibody penetration into the core of the sphere and intense background fluorescence that obscures the specificity of immunoreactivity. Moreover, the small quantity of material required and the speed with which this cryosectioning and immunolabeling technique can be performed make it an attractive tool for the rapid assessment of TSC character. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to show that cryosectioning of neurospheres derived from glioma models in mice and GBM in humans is a feasible method of better defining the stem cell profile of a glioma.
Authors: Demirkan B Gürsel; Matei A Banu; Nicholas Berry; Roberta Marongiu; Jan-Karl Burkhardt; Keith Kobylarz; Michael G Kaplitt; Shahin Rafii; John A Boockvar Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2014-10-26 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Prakash Rath; Douglas C Miller; N Scott Litofsky; Douglas C Anthony; Qi Feng; Craig Franklin; Lirong Pei; Alan Free; Jimei Liu; Mingqiang Ren; Mark D Kirk; Huidong Shi Journal: Exp Mol Pathol Date: 2010-12-17 Impact factor: 3.362
Authors: Amit S Adhikari; Neeraj Agarwal; Byron M Wood; Constance Porretta; Bernardo Ruiz; Radhika R Pochampally; Tomoo Iwakuma Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2010-05-11 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Massimo Squatrito; Cameron W Brennan; Karim Helmy; Jason T Huse; John H Petrini; Eric C Holland Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2010-12-14 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Demirkan B Gürsel; Robel T Beyene; Christoph Hofstetter; Jeffry P Greenfield; Mark M Souweidane; Michael Kaplitt; Margarita Arango-Lievano; Brian Howard; John A Boockvar Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2011-02-19 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Eun-Joon Lee; Prakash Rath; Jimei Liu; Dungsung Ryu; Lirong Pei; Satish K Noonepalle; Austin Y Shull; Qi Feng; N Scott Litofsky; Douglas C Miller; Douglas C Anthony; Mark D Kirk; John Laterra; Libin Deng; Hong-Bo Xin; Xinguo Wang; Jeong-Hyeon Choi; Huidong Shi Journal: J Genet Genomics Date: 2015-06-24 Impact factor: 4.275
Authors: Joseph D Dougherty; Elena I Fomchenko; Afua A Akuffo; Eric Schmidt; Karim Y Helmy; Elena Bazzoli; Cameron W Brennan; Eric C Holland; Ana Milosevic Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2012-08-03 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Demirkan B Gürsel; Benjamin J Shin; Jan-Karl Burkhardt; Kartik Kesavabhotla; Cody D Schlaff; John A Boockvar Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2011-06-10 Impact factor: 6.639