Eriko Katsuta1, Stephanie C DeMasi2, Krista P Terracina2, Sarah Spiegel3, Giao Q Phan4, Harry D Bear4, Kazuaki Takabe5. 1. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine and The Massey Cancer Center, Richmond, Virginia; Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine and The Massey Cancer Center, Richmond, Virginia; Breast Surgery, Department of Surgical Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, New York. 2. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine and The Massey Cancer Center, Richmond, Virginia; Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine and The Massey Cancer Center, Richmond, Virginia. 3. Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine and The Massey Cancer Center, Richmond, Virginia. 4. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine and The Massey Cancer Center, Richmond, Virginia. 5. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine and The Massey Cancer Center, Richmond, Virginia; Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine and The Massey Cancer Center, Richmond, Virginia; Breast Surgery, Department of Surgical Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, New York. Electronic address: kazuaki.takabe@roswellpark.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Interest in immunotherapy for breast cancer is rapidly emerging, and applicable animal models that mimic human cancer are urgently needed for preclinical studies. This study aimed to improve a technique for orthotopic inoculation of syngeneic breast cancer cells to be used as a preclinical animal model for immunotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used our previously reported murine model of orthotopic cancer cell inoculation under direct vision and compared the efficiency of tumorigenesis with tumor cells suspended in either phosphate-buffered saline or Matrigel containing varying numbers of cells. As a model for immune rejection, murine BALB/c-derived 4T1-luc2 breast cancer cells were inoculated orthotopically into both BALB/c and C57BL/6 mice. RESULTS: Matrigel-suspended cells formed larger tumors with higher efficiency than phosphate-buffered saline-suspended cells. The maximum volume of Matrigel that could be inoculated without spillage was 20 μL and 30 μL in the #2 and #4 mammary fat pads, respectively. Tumor take rates increased as the injected cell number increased. In this immune rejection model, there were no significant differences in tumor weight between the strains up to day 7, after which tumor weight decreased in C57BL/6 mice. Bioluminescence in C57BL/6 mice was also significantly less than that in BALB/c mice and increased up to day 7, then swiftly decreased thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: This improved technique of innoculating murine breast cancer cells using bioluminescence technology may be useful in evaluating the efficacy of tumor regression mediated by immune responses, as shown by an allogeneic response in C57BL/6 mice.
BACKGROUND: Interest in immunotherapy for breast cancer is rapidly emerging, and applicable animal models that mimic humancancer are urgently needed for preclinical studies. This study aimed to improve a technique for orthotopic inoculation of syngeneic breast cancer cells to be used as a preclinical animal model for immunotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used our previously reported murine model of orthotopic cancer cell inoculation under direct vision and compared the efficiency of tumorigenesis with tumor cells suspended in either phosphate-buffered saline or Matrigel containing varying numbers of cells. As a model for immune rejection, murine BALB/c-derived 4T1-luc2 breast cancer cells were inoculated orthotopically into both BALB/c and C57BL/6 mice. RESULTS: Matrigel-suspended cells formed larger tumors with higher efficiency than phosphate-buffered saline-suspended cells. The maximum volume of Matrigel that could be inoculated without spillage was 20 μL and 30 μL in the #2 and #4 mammary fat pads, respectively. Tumor take rates increased as the injected cell number increased. In this immune rejection model, there were no significant differences in tumor weight between the strains up to day 7, after which tumor weight decreased in C57BL/6 mice. Bioluminescence in C57BL/6 mice was also significantly less than that in BALB/c mice and increased up to day 7, then swiftly decreased thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: This improved technique of innoculating murinebreast cancer cells using bioluminescence technology may be useful in evaluating the efficacy of tumor regression mediated by immune responses, as shown by an allogeneic response in C57BL/6 mice.
Authors: Jie Liang; Masayuki Nagahashi; Eugene Y Kim; Kuzhuvelil B Harikumar; Akimitsu Yamada; Wei-Ching Huang; Nitai C Hait; Jeremy C Allegood; Megan M Price; Dorit Avni; Kazuaki Takabe; Tomasz Kordula; Sheldon Milstien; Sarah Spiegel Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2012-12-27 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Suzanne L Topalian; F Stephen Hodi; Julie R Brahmer; Scott N Gettinger; David C Smith; David F McDermott; John D Powderly; Richard D Carvajal; Jeffrey A Sosman; Michael B Atkins; Philip D Leming; David R Spigel; Scott J Antonia; Leora Horn; Charles G Drake; Drew M Pardoll; Lieping Chen; William H Sharfman; Robert A Anders; Janis M Taube; Tracee L McMiller; Haiying Xu; Alan J Korman; Maria Jure-Kunkel; Shruti Agrawal; Daniel McDonald; Georgia D Kollia; Ashok Gupta; Jon M Wigginton; Mario Sznol Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-06-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Omar M Rashid; Masayuki Nagahashi; Suburamaniam Ramachandran; Catherine Dumur; Julia Schaum; Akimitsu Yamada; Krista P Terracina; Sheldon Milstien; Sarah Spiegel; Kazuaki Takabe Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2014-09-09 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Omid Hamid; Caroline Robert; Adil Daud; F Stephen Hodi; Wen-Jen Hwu; Richard Kefford; Jedd D Wolchok; Peter Hersey; Richard W Joseph; Jeffrey S Weber; Roxana Dronca; Tara C Gangadhar; Amita Patnaik; Hassane Zarour; Anthony M Joshua; Kevin Gergich; Jeroen Elassaiss-Schaap; Alain Algazi; Christine Mateus; Peter Boasberg; Paul C Tumeh; Bartosz Chmielowski; Scot W Ebbinghaus; Xiaoyun Nicole Li; S Peter Kang; Antoni Ribas Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-06-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: N C Hait; D Avni; A Yamada; M Nagahashi; T Aoyagi; H Aoki; C I Dumur; Z Zelenko; E J Gallagher; D Leroith; S Milstien; K Takabe; S Spiegel Journal: Oncogenesis Date: 2015-06-08 Impact factor: 7.485
Authors: Akimitsu Yamada; Masayuki Nagahashi; Tomoyoshi Aoyagi; Wei-Ching Huang; Santiago Lima; Nitai C Hait; Aparna Maiti; Kumiko Kida; Krista P Terracina; Hiroshi Miyazaki; Takashi Ishikawa; Itaru Endo; Michael R Waters; Qianya Qi; Li Yan; Sheldon Milstien; Sarah Spiegel; Kazuaki Takabe Journal: Mol Cancer Res Date: 2018-03-09 Impact factor: 5.852
Authors: Eriko Katsuta; Li Yan; Masayuki Nagahashi; Ali Raza; Jamie L Sturgill; Debra E Lyon; Omar M Rashid; Nitai C Hait; Kazuaki Takabe Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2017-06-29 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Eriko Katsuta; Malgorzata Gil-Moore; Justine Moore; Mohamed Yousif; Alex A Adjei; Yi Ding; Justin Caserta; Carmen M Baldino; Kelvin P Lee; Irwin H Gelman; Kazuaki Takabe; Mateusz Opyrchal Journal: Int J Oncol Date: 2022-08-03 Impact factor: 5.884