Literature DB >> 2652316

Therapeutic implications of tumor heterogeneity.

G H Heppner1, B E Miller.   

Abstract

At the outset of this review, we stated that we wished to raise some questions that challenge the commonly held view that tumor heterogeneity is of major significance to treatment failure. The nature of this challenge is the following: although tumor heterogeneity in sensitivity to therapeutic agents has been demonstrated repeatedly, using isolated subpopulations of cells, primarily in cell culture systems, there is very little work that has been directed toward asking the tough questions about how that heterogeneity actually impacts on the response to treatment in vivo. In our own work, when we have attempted to simulate heterogeneity, in vivo or in vitro with mixed populations of tumor cells, we have seen that the simple prediction that treatment response would reflect the sensitivities of the individual subpopulations was not valid. Tumor subpopulation interactions, influencing both growth and drug sensitivity, resulted in treatment responses that were either better or worse than would be expected. Shifts in the distribution of subpopulations under the influence of therapy did not necessarily correlate with treatment response. Marked differences in the relative proportions of subpopulations within tumors did not necessarily translate into marked differences in the behavior of whole tumors. Imposition of in vivo-like three-dimensional tissue architecture caused major changes in the overall drug sensitivity of individual subpopulations, beyond those seen as a result of heterogeneity. Of course we realize that our work is very limited, one tumor system and a few treatment protocols, but that is the challenge. Much more in-depth experimental and clinical research is necessary in order to evaluate how, and how much, tumor heterogeneity really does affect treatment. Without such work, efforts to devise more effective treatment strategies, based on common assumptions and theoretical models, rather than experimental analysis, can only be superficial and, ultimately, useless.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2652316

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Semin Oncol        ISSN: 0093-7754            Impact factor:   4.929


  21 in total

Review 1.  Toward an Ising model of cancer and beyond.

Authors:  Salvatore Torquato
Journal:  Phys Biol       Date:  2011-02-07       Impact factor: 2.583

2.  Molecular characterization of late stomal recurrence following total laryngectomy.

Authors:  Josena K Stephen; Mausumi Symal; Kang Mei Chen; Tamer Ghanem; Robert Deeb; Veena Shah; Shaleta Havard; Maria J Worsham
Journal:  Oncol Rep       Date:  2011-01-10       Impact factor: 3.906

3.  Heterogeneous cell-cycle behavior in response to UVB irradiation by a population of single cancer cells visualized by time-lapse FUCCI imaging.

Authors:  Shinji Miwa; Shuya Yano; Hiroaki Kimura; Mako Yamamoto; Makoto Toneri; Takashi Murakami; Katsuhiro Hayashi; Norio Yamamoto; Toshiyoshi Fujiwara; Hiroyuki Tsuchiya; Robert M Hoffman
Journal:  Cell Cycle       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 4.534

4.  Cell-cycle fate-monitoring distinguishes individual chemosensitive and chemoresistant cancer cells in drug-treated heterogeneous populations demonstrated by real-time FUCCI imaging.

Authors:  Shinji Miwa; Shuya Yano; Hiroaki Kimura; Mako Yamamoto; Makoto Toneri; Yasunori Matsumoto; Fuminari Uehara; Yukihiko Hiroshima; Takashi Murakami; Katsuhiro Hayashi; Norio Yamamoto; Michael Bouvet; Toshiyoshi Fujiwara; Hiroyuki Tsuchiya; Robert M Hoffman
Journal:  Cell Cycle       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 4.534

5.  Effect of glucagon on protein synthesis in human rectal cancer in situ.

Authors:  W H Hartl; H Demmelmair; K W Jauch; B Koletzko; F W Schildberg
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  Tumour fragment spheroids from human non-small-cell lung cancer maintained in organ culture.

Authors:  L Fjellbirkeland; R Bjerkvig; O D Laerum
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 4.064

7.  Disrupting ovarian cancer metastatic colonization: insights from metastasis suppressor studies.

Authors:  Shaheena Khan; Jennifer L Taylor; Carrie W Rinker-Schaeffer
Journal:  J Oncol       Date:  2010-03-14       Impact factor: 4.375

8.  Initial assessment of a model relating intratumoral genetic heterogeneity to radiological morphology.

Authors:  O Noterdaeme; M Kelly; P Friend; Z Soonowalla; G Steers; M Brady
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2009-08-18       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  Morphological heterogeneity and phenotypical instability versus metastatic stability in the murine tumor model ER 15-P.

Authors:  G Edel; A Roessner; B Deneke; B Wörmann
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 4.553

10.  Intrinsic resistance to anticancer agents in the murine pancreatic adenocarcinoma PANC02.

Authors:  T S Priebe; E N Atkinson; B F Pan; J A Nelson
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 3.333

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.