Arun Satelli1, Zachary Brownlee1, Abhisek Mitra1, Qing H Meng2, Shulin Li3. 1. Department of Pediatrics and. 2. Laboratory Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; 3. Department of Pediatrics and The University of Texas Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Houston, TX. sli4@mdanderson.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Detection, isolation, and enumeration of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) from cancer patients has become an important modality in clinical management of patients with breast cancer. Although CellSearch, an epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM)-based method that is used to isolate epithelial CTCs, has gained prominence, its inability to detect mesenchymal CTCs from breast cancer patients raises concerns regarding its utility in clinical management. METHODS: To address this gap in technology, we recently discovered the utility of cell-surface vimentin (CSV) as a marker for detecting mesenchymal CTCs from sarcoma tumors. In the present study, we tested the sensitivity and specificity of detecting CTCs from blood collected at a random time during therapy from each of 58 patients with metastatic breast cancer by use of 84-1 (a monoclonal antibody against CSV to detect epithelial/mesenchymal-transition CTCs) and CellSearch methods. Additionally, we tested the possibility of improving the sensitivity and specificity of detection by use of additional parameters including nuclear EpCAM localization and epithelial mesenchymal ratios. RESULTS: CTC counts with CSV were significant (P = 0.0053) in differentiating populations responsive and nonresponsive to treatment compared with CTC counts with CellSearch (P = 0.0564). The specificity of CTC detection was found to be highest when the sum of CTC counts from the 2 methods was above a threshold of 8 CTCs/7.5 mL. CONCLUSIONS: The sum of CTC counts from the CellSearch and CSV methods appears to provide new insights for assessment of therapeutic response and thus provides a new approach to personalized medicine in breast cancer patients.
BACKGROUND: Detection, isolation, and enumeration of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) from cancerpatients has become an important modality in clinical management of patients with breast cancer. Although CellSearch, an epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM)-based method that is used to isolate epithelial CTCs, has gained prominence, its inability to detect mesenchymal CTCs from breast cancerpatients raises concerns regarding its utility in clinical management. METHODS: To address this gap in technology, we recently discovered the utility of cell-surface vimentin (CSV) as a marker for detecting mesenchymal CTCs from sarcoma tumors. In the present study, we tested the sensitivity and specificity of detecting CTCs from blood collected at a random time during therapy from each of 58 patients with metastatic breast cancer by use of 84-1 (a monoclonal antibody against CSV to detect epithelial/mesenchymal-transition CTCs) and CellSearch methods. Additionally, we tested the possibility of improving the sensitivity and specificity of detection by use of additional parameters including nuclear EpCAM localization and epithelial mesenchymal ratios. RESULTS: CTC counts with CSV were significant (P = 0.0053) in differentiating populations responsive and nonresponsive to treatment compared with CTC counts with CellSearch (P = 0.0564). The specificity of CTC detection was found to be highest when the sum of CTC counts from the 2 methods was above a threshold of 8 CTCs/7.5 mL. CONCLUSIONS: The sum of CTC counts from the CellSearch and CSV methods appears to provide new insights for assessment of therapeutic response and thus provides a new approach to personalized medicine in breast cancerpatients.
Authors: Arun Satelli; Abhisek Mitra; Jeffry J Cutrera; Marcos Devarie; Xueqing Xia; Davis R Ingram; Denada Dibra; Neeta Somaiah; Keila E Torres; Vinod Ravi; Joseph A Ludwig; Eugenie S Kleinerman; Shulin Li Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2014-01-21 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: W Jeffrey Allard; Jeri Matera; M Craig Miller; Madeline Repollet; Mark C Connelly; Chandra Rao; Arjan G J Tibbe; Jonathan W Uhr; Leon W M M Terstappen Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2004-10-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Massimo Cristofanilli; G Thomas Budd; Matthew J Ellis; Alison Stopeck; Jeri Matera; M Craig Miller; James M Reuben; Gerald V Doyle; W Jeffrey Allard; Leon W M M Terstappen; Daniel F Hayes Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-08-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: F Farace; C Massard; N Vimond; F Drusch; N Jacques; F Billiot; A Laplanche; A Chauchereau; L Lacroix; D Planchard; S Le Moulec; F André; K Fizazi; J C Soria; P Vielh Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2011-08-09 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Anieta M Sieuwerts; Jaco Kraan; Joan Bolt; Petra van der Spoel; Fons Elstrodt; Mieke Schutte; John W M Martens; Jan-Willem Gratama; Stefan Sleijfer; John A Foekens Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2008-12-30 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Dimple Y Chudasama; Daria V Freydina; Maxim B Freidin; Maria Leung; Angeles Montero Fernandez; Alexandra Rice; Andrew G Nicholson; Emmanouil Karteris; Vladimir Anikin; Eric Lim Journal: Ann Transl Med Date: 2016-12
Authors: David Frescas; Christelle M Roux; Semra Aygun-Sunar; Anatoli S Gleiberman; Peter Krasnov; Oleg V Kurnasov; Evguenia Strom; Lauren P Virtuoso; Michelle Wrobel; Andrei L Osterman; Marina P Antoch; Vadim Mett; Olga B Chernova; Andrei V Gudkov Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2017-02-13 Impact factor: 11.205