Literature DB >> 21547690

Clinical significance of side population in ovarian cancer cells.

Shinji Hosonuma1, Yoichi Kobayashi, Satoshi Kojo, Haruka Wada, Ken-ichiro Seino, Kazushige Kiguchi, Bunpei Ishizuka.   

Abstract

Recently, accumulating evidence has suggested that tumors, including ovarian cancer, are composed of a heterogeneous cell population with a small subset of cancer stem cells (CSCs) that sustain tumor formation and growth. The emergence of drug resistance is one of the most difficult problems in the treatment of ovarian cancer, which has been explained recently by the potential of CSCs to have superior resistance against anti-cancer drugs than conventional cancer cells. In this study, we expanded this line of study to examine whether this phenomenon is also observed in clinical specimens of ovarian cancer cells. In total we could analyze 28 samples out of 60 obtained from ovarian cancer patients. The clinical samples were subjected to testing of the expression of side population (SP) as a CSC marker, and according to the presence of SP (SP+) or absence of SP (SP-), clinicopathological significances were analyzed. Although there was no statistical significance, there were more SP+s in recurrent cases as well as in ascitic and peritoneal dissemination than in primary tumor of the ovary. There was no correlation between SP status and FIGO staging. In 19 cases of those who could be followed more than 6 months from initial therapy, there were 8 cases of recurrence or death from disease, and all of these were SP+. On the other hand, in 11 cases of disease-free survivors, 6 were SP+. There was a significant difference in prognosis between SP+ and SP- (p = 0.017). Although this study was limited, it revealed that SP could be contained more in recurrent or metastatic tumors than in primary tumors, and also that the presence of SP could be a risk factor of recurrence in ovarian cancer. Therefore, a novel therapeutic strategy targeting SP could improve the prognosis of ovarian cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21547690      PMCID: PMC3051070          DOI: 10.1007/s13577-010-0002-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Cell        ISSN: 0914-7470            Impact factor:   4.174


Introduction

Ovarian cancer is the most lethal gynecological malignancy. The number of ovarian cancer patients is gradually increasing in Japan, as well as in the United States and European countries. In 2008, 4,599 patients died of ovarian cancer, making it the tenth most fatal malignancy in Japan. Usually ovarian cancer patients lack symptoms because the ovaries reside within the pelvic cavity, and effective screening methods have not yet been developed. As a result, more than half of the ovarian cancer patients are stage III or IV at the time of diagnosis. Although taxanes improve 5-year survival in advanced ovarian cancer [1], many patients experience recurrence because of resistance to anti-cancer drugs. Therefore, novel therapeutic strategies are needed. Recently, accumulating evidence has suggested that tumors, including ovarian cancer, are composed of a heterogeneous cell population with a small subset of cancer stem cells (CSCs) that sustain tumor formation and growth. The emergence of drug resistance is one of the most difficult problems in the treatment of ovarian cancer, but has recently been explained by the discovery that CSCs have resistance against anti-cancer drugs that is superior to that of conventional cancer cells. Therefore, clarifying the mechanism of CSC drug resistance could result in the development of novel therapeutic strategies. Several reports have shown that CSCs are enriched in a side population (SP) that is recognized by fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS) [2-4]. To date, SP has been detected in various solid tumor cells, such as breast [5], colon [6, 7] and pancreatic cancer [8], as well as ovarian cancer [9-11]. We also found that SP is significantly increased in chemoresistant ovarian cancer cell lines (in submission). However, the significance of SP in clinical samples, such as cancer tissue or cancer cells in ascitic fluid, still remains unclear [12, 13]. Therefore, we conducted a clinical study to clarify the significance of SP in clinical samples.

Materials and methods

Clinical samples

Clinical samples, such as cancer tissue or cancer cells in ascitic fluid, were obtained from patients with ovarian, peritoneal or tubal cancer from January 2009 to July 2010 at St. Marianna University Hospital. Informed consent was obtained from all patients, and this study was approved by the internal review board of our institution. Tissues or ascites harvested during laparotomy or by ultrasound-guided puncture were centrifuged to isolate the cellular component and then resuspended in HAM-12 containing antibiotics.

Analysis of the side population in human ovarian cancer tissues and ascites by flow cytometry

Human ovarian cancer tissues were washed with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) and then cut into 1-mm-diameter pieces. These pieces were then transferred into PBS containing 2.4 U/ml of DISPASE® (GIBCO) and incubated for 60 min at 37°C. After passing through a Cell Strainer™ with 70-μm pore size (BD Falcon), red blood cells were lysed using PharmLyse™ (BD Bioscience), and the resulting single-cell suspension was diluted to 1.0 × 106 cells/ml. For the staining of the SP, cells were pre-incubated for 10 min at 37°C and then incubated for an additional 80 min at 37°C with 5 mg/ml Hoechst 33342 (Sigma-Aldrich, Japan). SP cells were determined by the exclusion of Hoechst 33342, which was inhibited by verapamil (Sigma-Aldrich, Japan). Verapamil was added after pre-incubation at the start of the Hoechst 33342 staining at a final concentration of 50 μM. Live cells were gated based on forward and side scatter as well as lack of propidium iodide uptake. Flow cytometry was performed using a J-SAN® (Bay Bioscience, Japan) instrument and analyzed by FlowJo® software (TOMY Digital Biology Co. Ltd., Japan). Tissues/cells that satisfied the following conditions were defined as tissues/cells containing SP: (1) the percentage of cells in the SP fraction was >0.15%, and (2) after verapamil administration, more than half of the cells were diminished from the SP fraction. Mann-Whitney U test or Fisher’s exact probability test were used to determine statistical significance, and p < 0.05 was considered significant.

Results

Clinical samples were obtained from a total of 60 patients. Six cases were not primary ovarian cancer and were excluded from this study. Among the remaining 54 samples, 26 could not be analyzed because they contained too much debris, were contaminated with normal tissues or were too small to be analyzed. In the 28 samples that were evaluable for the study, the patient age ranged from 20 to 73 years old. Patient characteristics are shown in Table 1.
Table 1

Patient characteristics that could be analyzed by FACS

AgeBackgroundPathologyFIGOSamplePrognosis
SP+ group
 370EndometrioidIcT a
 380EndometrioidIIIaTDFS
 380LPM, serousIcT a
 410EndometrioidIIIcA a
 420SerousIIIcTDOD
 430ClearIIIcTDOD
 431ClearIIIcADOD
 480SerousIIIcT a
 480EndometrioidIcTDFS
 560MucinousIIIcTAWD
 560ClearIIIcTDFS
 600MucinousIIIcADOD
 611SerousIIIcPAWD
 620Adenocarcinomab IaADFS
 640SerousIIIcPDOD
 671SSPCIIIcADOD
 690Adenocarcinomac IIIcA a
 730EndometrioidIcTDFS
SP− group
 200DysgerminomaIaT a
 200LPM, mucinousIcA a
 401EndometrioidIVTDFS
 410EndometrioidIIIcT a
 460EndometrioidIcTDFS
 600ClearIcTDFS
 610SerousIIIcTDFS
 670SerousIcTDFS
 680SerousIIIcA a
 690ClearIIcTDFS

Background: 0: obtained from primary surgery; 1: recurrent case

Sample: T ovarian tumor, A ascites, P peritoneal dissemination

DFS disease-free survival, AWD alive with disease, DOD died of disease

aFollow-up period <6 months

bHistological diagnosis could not be made due to chemotherapeutic effect

cLaparotomy was not done, and histological diagnosis was made only by cytology of ascitic fluid

Patient characteristics that could be analyzed by FACS Background: 0: obtained from primary surgery; 1: recurrent case Sample: T ovarian tumor, A ascites, P peritoneal dissemination DFS disease-free survival, AWD alive with disease, DOD died of disease aFollow-up period <6 months bHistological diagnosis could not be made due to chemotherapeutic effect cLaparotomy was not done, and histological diagnosis was made only by cytology of ascitic fluid Of 28 samples, 18 contained an SP (SP+) and 10 did not (SP−). Figure 1 shows the FACS analysis for a SP+ sample. The mean ages of SP+ and SP− patients were 52.6 and 49.2 years old, respectively; however, they were not significantly different. Of 24 patients with samples obtained at primary surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), 15 were SP+ (62.5%). Of four recurrent cases, three were SP+ (75%). Although the difference between primary and recurrent cases was not significant (p = 0.55), more recurrent cases were SP+.
Fig. 1

An example of a patient determined as SP+ by flow cytometric analysis. After administration of verapamil, cells of the SP fraction were diminished. Vertical axis intensity of Hoechst blue, horizontal axis intensity of Hoechst red

An example of a patient determined as SP+ by flow cytometric analysis. After administration of verapamil, cells of the SP fraction were diminished. Vertical axis intensity of Hoechst blue, horizontal axis intensity of Hoechst red Of 18 samples obtained directly from ovarian tumors, 10 were SP+ (55.6%). However, of eight ascitic fluid and two peritoneal dissemination samples, six (75%) and two (100%) were SP+, respectively. Although the difference was not significant, there were more SP+ samples in ascitic fluid and peritoneal dissemination than in primary ovarian tumors. Focusing on the histology, there were eight cases of endometrioid carcinoma (SP+: 5 vs. SP−: 3), seven cases of serous carcinoma (4 vs. 3) and five cases of clear cell carcinoma (3 vs. 2), with no correlation between SP+ and histology. According to FIGO staging, there were 11 cases of stage I/II and 17 cases of stage III/IV. Of the stage I/II cases, 5 were SP+ (45.4%), while 13 of the stage III/IV cases were SP+ (76.5%). There was no correlation between SP+ and FIGO staging (p = 0.22). In the 19 patients that could be followed more than 6 months from the initial therapy, there were 8 cases of recurrent or fatal disease, and all 8 were SP+. However, in 11 cases of disease-free survivors, 6 were SP+, and 5 were SP−. SP+ was significantly correlated with a worse prognosis than SP− (p = 0.017, Fig. 2). Of the SP+ cases that were histologically designated as serous and mucinous carcinoma, all were recurrent or the patient died of disease. Of the SP+ clear cell carcinomas, two out of three cases recurred or the patient died of disease. However, there was no recurrent case in three SP+ endometrioid carcinoma cases.
Fig. 2

Prognosis of the patients according to the presence or absence of SP. *There was statistical significance in the prognosis between SP+ and SP− (p = 0.017). Vertical axis number of cases. DFS disease-free survival, AWD alive with disease, DOD died of disease

Prognosis of the patients according to the presence or absence of SP. *There was statistical significance in the prognosis between SP+ and SP− (p = 0.017). Vertical axis number of cases. DFS disease-free survival, AWD alive with disease, DOD died of disease

Discussion

Several groups have reported about SP in ovarian cancer. Szotek et al. detected SP in human ovarian cancer cell lines as well as in primary ascites cancer cells. Moreover, SP cells in ovarian cancer were reported to have CSCs characteristics, suggesting that CSCs are also enriched in SP in ovarian cancer [9, 14]. In our clinical study, the presence of SP was assessed in clinical tissues/cells in ovarian, peritoneal and tubal carcinoma patients. A total of 54 cases were analyzed, but the percentage of evaluable cases was only 51.9% (28/54). The evaluable rate was relatively low because cancer tissues in vivo could contain some amount of normal cells, mucous and cell debris. Moreover, cancer tissues could contain various polyclonal cancer cells. These factors might have interfered with analysis by FACS in our study. For this reason, novel procedures that could extract only cancer cells from clinical samples should be developed. Once ovarian cancer develops, the tumor surface ruptures, and tumor cells are disseminated into the peritoneal cavity. Most ovarian cancers will spread by this process. CSCs were reported to be related to metastasis [15-17], which, if true, suggests that peritoneal dissemination could be promoted by CSCs. In the present study, although it was not statistically significant, SP+ cases were detected more frequently in ascitic fluid or peritoneal dissemination than in primary tumors (75, 100 vs. 55.6%). This result suggests that peritoneal dissemination in ovarian cancer is correlated with SP, which is supported by the fact that SP+ cases were detected more frequently in FIGO stage III/IV patients than in stage I/II (45.5 vs. 76.5%). Stage III/IV patients already have peritoneal dissemination and/or distant metastasis, so it might be reasonable that SP could be detected in tissues from stage III/IV patients. Although the histological difference was not correlated to the presence or absence of SP, in serous, mucinous and clear cell carcinoma patients that were SP+, most experienced recurrence or died of disease. However, SP+ endometrioid carcinoma patients did not experience recurrence. Although the follow-up term was too short and the number of patients too small to reach a conclusion, in endometrioid carcinoma, the prognosis might not be affected by the presence of SP. In the present study, all eight SP+ patients experienced recurrence or died of disease within 2 years from initial therapy, suggesting that SP might be correlated with the risk of recurrence or death from disease. Some of these patients were resistant to the initial chemotherapy, which may indicate that SP containing rich CSCs is correlated to chemoresistance. Therefore, although the number of the studied cases was small, it indicates that detecting SP could predict the chemoresistance or prognosis of ovarian cancer. In conclusion, our study suggests that SP might be correlated to peritoneal dissemination, and might also predict chemoresistance or prognosis in ovarian cancer. Because our study consisted of a small number of patients, a larger study should be conducted in order to define the clinical significance of SP in ovarian cancer. The technical difficulties of treating clinical samples for detecting SP/CSCs should also be overcome.
  17 in total

Review 1.  SP analysis may be used to identify cancer stem cell populations.

Authors:  Annamaria Hadnagy; Louis Gaboury; Raymond Beaulieu; Danuta Balicki
Journal:  Exp Cell Res       Date:  2006-09-09       Impact factor: 3.905

2.  A leukemic stem cell with intrinsic drug efflux capacity in acute myeloid leukemia.

Authors:  G G Wulf; R Y Wang; I Kuehnle; D Weidner; F Marini; M K Brenner; M Andreeff; M A Goodell
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2001-08-15       Impact factor: 22.113

Review 3.  A side order of stem cells: the SP phenotype.

Authors:  Grant A Challen; Melissa H Little
Journal:  Stem Cells       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 6.277

4.  Identification and expansion of human colon-cancer-initiating cells.

Authors:  Lucia Ricci-Vitiani; Dario G Lombardi; Emanuela Pilozzi; Mauro Biffoni; Matilde Todaro; Cesare Peschle; Ruggero De Maria
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2006-11-19       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  Ovarian cancer stem-like side-population cells are tumourigenic and chemoresistant.

Authors:  L Hu; C McArthur; R B Jaffe
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2010-03-30       Impact factor: 7.640

6.  Prospectively isolated cancer-associated CD10(+) fibroblasts have stronger interactions with CD133(+) colon cancer cells than with CD133(-) cancer cells.

Authors:  Lin Cui; Kenoki Ohuchida; Kazuhiro Mizumoto; Taiki Moriyama; Manabu Onimaru; Kohei Nakata; Toshinaga Nabae; Takashi Ueki; Norihiro Sato; Yohei Tominaga; Masao Tanaka
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-08-12       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Identification of pancreatic cancer stem cells.

Authors:  Chenwei Li; David G Heidt; Piero Dalerba; Charles F Burant; Lanjing Zhang; Volkan Adsay; Max Wicha; Michael F Clarke; Diane M Simeone
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2007-02-01       Impact factor: 12.701

Review 8.  The role of cancer stem cells and the side population in epithelial ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Miranda Y Fong; Sham S Kakar
Journal:  Histol Histopathol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.303

Review 9.  Side population cells in human cancers.

Authors:  Colleen Wu; Benjamin A Alman
Journal:  Cancer Lett       Date:  2008-05-19       Impact factor: 8.679

10.  Stem-like ovarian cancer cells can serve as tumor vascular progenitors.

Authors:  Ayesha B Alvero; Han-Hsuan Fu; Jennie Holmberg; Irene Visintin; Liora Mor; Carlos Cano Marquina; Jessica Oidtman; Dan-Arin Silasi; Gil Mor
Journal:  Stem Cells       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 6.277

View more
  19 in total

Review 1.  Overcoming challenges of ovarian cancer stem cells: novel therapeutic approaches.

Authors:  Cristóbal Aguilar-Gallardo; Emily Cecilia Rutledge; Ana M Martínez-Arroyo; Juan José Hidalgo; Santiago Domingo; Carlos Simón
Journal:  Stem Cell Rev Rep       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 5.739

2.  Transformation of epithelial ovarian cancer stemlike cells into mesenchymal lineage via EMT results in cellular heterogeneity and supports tumor engraftment.

Authors:  Hua Jiang; Xiaolong Lin; Yingtao Liu; Wenjia Gong; Xiaoling Ma; Yinhua Yu; Yi Xie; Xiaoxi Sun; Youji Feng; Viktor Janzen; Tong Chen
Journal:  Mol Med       Date:  2012-10-24       Impact factor: 6.354

3.  Gene expression profiling of single circulating tumor cells in ovarian cancer - Establishment of a multi-marker gene panel.

Authors:  Christina Blassl; Jan Dominik Kuhlmann; Alessandra Webers; Pauline Wimberger; Tanja Fehm; Hans Neubauer
Journal:  Mol Oncol       Date:  2016-04-20       Impact factor: 6.603

4.  Expression of Multidrug Resistance Transporter ABCB5 in a Murine Model of Human Conjunctival Melanoma.

Authors:  Nadine E de Waard; Paraskevi E Kolovou; Sean P McGuire; Jinfeng Cao; Natasha Y Frank; Markus H Frank; Martine J Jager; Bruce R Ksander
Journal:  Ocul Oncol Pathol       Date:  2015-04

Review 5.  Cancer stem cells, epithelial-mesenchymal transition, and drug resistance in high-grade ovarian serous carcinoma.

Authors:  Xiaoxiang Chen; Jing Zhang; Zhihong Zhang; Hongxia Li; Wenjun Cheng; Jinsong Liu
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2013-07-11       Impact factor: 3.466

6.  Targeting Notch, a key pathway for ovarian cancer stem cells, sensitizes tumors to platinum therapy.

Authors:  Shannon M McAuliffe; Stefanie L Morgan; Gregory A Wyant; Lieu T Tran; Katherine W Muto; Yu Sarah Chen; Kenneth T Chin; Justin C Partridge; Barish B Poole; Kuang-Hung Cheng; John Daggett; Kristen Cullen; Emily Kantoff; Kathleen Hasselbatt; Julia Berkowitz; Michael G Muto; Ross S Berkowitz; Jon C Aster; Ursula A Matulonis; Daniela M Dinulescu
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-09-27       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 7.  Ovarian cancer stem cells: elusive targets for chemotherapy.

Authors:  Achuta Kumar Guddati
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2012-05-26       Impact factor: 3.064

8.  Reversing paclitaxel resistance in ovarian cancer cells via inhibition of the ABCB1 expressing side population.

Authors:  Rachel Eyre; Ian Harvey; Katherine Stemke-Hale; Thomas W J Lennard; Alison Tyson-Capper; Annette P Meeson
Journal:  Tumour Biol       Date:  2014-07-04

Review 9.  Ovarian Cancers: Genetic Abnormalities, Tumor Heterogeneity and Progression, Clonal Evolution and Cancer Stem Cells.

Authors:  Ugo Testa; Eleonora Petrucci; Luca Pasquini; Germana Castelli; Elvira Pelosi
Journal:  Medicines (Basel)       Date:  2018-02-01

10.  Short-term single treatment of chemotherapy results in the enrichment of ovarian cancer stem cell-like cells leading to an increased tumor burden.

Authors:  Khalid Abubaker; Ardian Latifi; Rod Luwor; Simon Nazaretian; Hongjian Zhu; Michael A Quinn; Erik W Thompson; Jock K Findlay; Nuzhat Ahmed
Journal:  Mol Cancer       Date:  2013-03-27       Impact factor: 27.401

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.