Wendy A Woodward1, Erik P Sulman. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Box 1202, Houston, TX 77030, USA. wwoodward@mdanderson.org
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The lineages assumed by stem cells during hematopoiesis can be identified by the pattern of protein markers present on the surface of cells at different stages of differentiation. Specific antibodies directed at these markers have facilitated the isolation of hematopoietic stem cells by flow cytometry. DISCUSSION: Similarly, stem cells in solid organs also can be identified using cell surface markers. In addition, solid tumors have recently been found to contain small proportions of cells that are capable of proliferation, self-renewal, and differentiation into the various cell types seen in the bulk tumor. Of particular concern, these tumor-initiating cells (termed cancer stem cells when multipotency and self-renewal have been demonstrated) often display characteristics of treatment resistance, particularly to ionizing radiation. Thus, it is important to be able to identify these cells in order to better understand the mechanisms of resistance, and to be able to predict outcome and response to treatment. This depends, of course, on identifying markers that can be used to identify the cells, and for some solid tumors, a specific pattern of cell surface markers is emerging. In breast cancer, for example, the tumor-initiating cells have a characteristic Lin(-)CD44(+)CD24(-/lo) ESA(+) antigenic pattern. In cells derived from some high-grade gliomas, expression of CD133 on the cell surface appears to select for a population of tumor-initiating, treatment resistant cells. CONCLUSION: Because multiple markers, typically examined on single cells using flow cytometry, are used routinely to identify the subpopulation of tumor-initiating cells, and because the number of these cells is small, the challenge remains to detect them in clinical samples and to determine their ability to predict outcome and/or response to treatment, the hallmarks of established biomarkers.
INTRODUCTION: The lineages assumed by stem cells during hematopoiesis can be identified by the pattern of protein markers present on the surface of cells at different stages of differentiation. Specific antibodies directed at these markers have facilitated the isolation of hematopoietic stem cells by flow cytometry. DISCUSSION: Similarly, stem cells in solid organs also can be identified using cell surface markers. In addition, solid tumors have recently been found to contain small proportions of cells that are capable of proliferation, self-renewal, and differentiation into the various cell types seen in the bulk tumor. Of particular concern, these tumor-initiating cells (termed cancer stem cells when multipotency and self-renewal have been demonstrated) often display characteristics of treatment resistance, particularly to ionizing radiation. Thus, it is important to be able to identify these cells in order to better understand the mechanisms of resistance, and to be able to predict outcome and response to treatment. This depends, of course, on identifying markers that can be used to identify the cells, and for some solid tumors, a specific pattern of cell surface markers is emerging. In breast cancer, for example, the tumor-initiating cells have a characteristic Lin(-)CD44(+)CD24(-/lo) ESA(+) antigenic pattern. In cells derived from some high-grade gliomas, expression of CD133 on the cell surface appears to select for a population of tumor-initiating, treatment resistant cells. CONCLUSION: Because multiple markers, typically examined on single cells using flow cytometry, are used routinely to identify the subpopulation of tumor-initiating cells, and because the number of these cells is small, the challenge remains to detect them in clinical samples and to determine their ability to predict outcome and/or response to treatment, the hallmarks of established biomarkers.
Authors: Sheldon R Mink; Surabhi Vashistha; Wenxuan Zhang; Amanda Hodge; David B Agus; Anjali Jain Journal: Mol Cancer Res Date: 2010-06-08 Impact factor: 5.852
Authors: P J Simpson-Haidaris; S J Pollock; S Ramon; N Guo; C F Woeller; S E Feldon; R P Phipps Journal: PPAR Res Date: 2010-02-28 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: Kwame Sefah; Kyung-Mi Bae; Joseph A Phillips; Dietmar W Siemann; Zhen Su; Steve McClellan; Johannes Vieweg; Weihong Tan Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2013-02-08 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Adam R Wolfe; Bisrat G Debeb; Lara Lacerda; Richard Larson; Arvind Bambhroliya; Xuelin Huang; Francois Bertucci; Pascal Finetti; Daniel Birnbaum; Steven Van Laere; Parmeswaran Diagaradjan; Brian Ruffell; Nicholaus J Trenton; Khoi Chu; Walter Hittelman; Michael Diehl; Ilya Levental; Naoto T Ueno; Wendy A Woodward Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2015-11-21 Impact factor: 4.872