| Literature DB >> 26094024 |
Huan Li1,2, Ji Zhang3,4, Shu-Wei Chen5,6, Lu-Lu Liu7,8, Lei Li9,10, Fan Gao11,12, Shi-Min Zhuang13, Li-Ping Wang14, Yan Li15,16, Ming Song17,18.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma (OTSCC) is still associated with a poor prognosis due to local recurrence and metastasis. Cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) play an important role in the complex processes of cancer stroma interaction and tumorigenesis. This study aims to determine the role of CAFs in the development and progression of OTSCC.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26094024 PMCID: PMC4475624 DOI: 10.1186/s12967-015-0551-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Transl Med ISSN: 1479-5876 Impact factor: 5.531
Figure 1Representative double immunohistochemical images of cN0 oral tongue cancer tissue specimens, which indicate high frequency and distribution of CAFs (a) and low frequency and distribution of CAFs (b). Tumor cell nuclei are stained a brown with the Ki-67 antibody, whereas CAFs are stained a fuchsin color in the cytoplasm by the α-SMA antibody . Magnification is ×200 (a, b). The frequency and distribution of CAFs affect overall survival and disease-free survival. Kaplan–Meier curves with univariate analysis (log-rank) for patients with cN0 oral tongue cancer with a high frequency and distribution of CAFs (n = 95) versus a low frequency and distribution of CAFs (n = 83) with respect to overall survival (c) and disease-free survival (d).
Figure 2Representative cell morphology of CAFs, NFs, and tumor cells (OTSCC). Immunofluorescence was used to distinguish CAFs, NFs and OTSCC cells with antibodies that target α-SMA, fibronectin, and E-cadherin (a). Neither CAFs nor NFs grow or aggregate in matigel. Tca8113and CAL-27co-cultured with CAFs grow and aggregate better than that with NFs (b).
Figure 3CAFs grow faster than NFs. XTT assay was used to compare cell growth rates between CAFs and NFs (a, b). Two examples of DNA content comparison between CAFs, NFs by flow cytometry. Flow cytometry histogram shows that the percentages of cells in S and G2-M phases were significantly higher in CAFs compared with NFs (c, d).
Figure 4Tca8113 and CAL-27 in CAFs CM grow faster than in NFs CM. XTT assay was used to compare cell growth rates between Tca8113or CAL-27 in CAFs and NFs CM (a, b). Two examples of DNA content comparison between Tca8113 and CAL-27 in CAFs CM, NFs CM and its own CM by flow cytometry. Flow cytometry histogram shows that the percentages of cells in S and G2-M phases were significantly higher in CAFs CM compared with NFs and its own CM (c, d).
Figure 5CAFs promote cell mobility and invasion. a The effect of CAFs on cell migration was determined by wound-healing assay. During a period of 48 h, the spreading speed of CAL-27 in CAFs CM along the wound edge was faster than that in NFs and its own CM. b Representative images showed that Tca8113 and CAL-27 in CAFs, NFs and its own CM invaded through the matrigel. The number of invaded tumour cells was quantified in the right panel. Columns, mean of triplicate experiments, P < 0.01. c Expressions of epithelial markers α-catenin, β-catenin and E-cadherin and mesenchymal markers α-SMA and vimentin were compared by western blotting analysis between Tca8113 and CAL-27 in CAFs, NFs and its own CM. β-actin was used as a loading control.