Martine J Jager1, J Antonio Bermudez Magner1, Bruce R Ksander1, Sander R Dubovy1. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands (Dr Jager); Schepens Eye Research Institute, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts (Dr Jager, Dr Ksander); Florida Lions Ocular Pathology Laboratory, Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, University of Miami, Miami, Florida (Dr Magner, Dr Dubovy); and Instituto de Oftalmologia Conde de Valenciana, Mexico City, Mexico (Dr Magner).
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether some of the most often used uveal melanoma cell lines resemble their original tumor. METHODS: Analysis of the literature, patient charts, histopathology, mutations, chromosome status, HLA type, and expression of melanocyte markers on cell lines and their primary tumors. We examined five cell lines and the primary tumors from which they were derived. RESULTS: Four of the five examined primary tumors were unusual: one occupied the orbit, two were recurrences after prior irradiation, and one developed in an eye with a nevus of Ota. One cell line did not contain the GNA11 mutation, but it was present in the primary tumor. Three of the primary tumors had monosomy 3 (two of these lacked BAP1 expression); however, all five cell lines showed disomy 3 and BAP1 expression. All of the cell lines had gain of 8q. Two cell lines lacked expression of melanocyte markers, although these were present in the corresponding primary tumor. CONCLUSIONS: All cell lines could be traced back to their original uveal melanoma. Four of the five primary tumors were unusual. Cell lines often differed from their primary tumor in chromosome status and melanocyte markers. However, their specific chromosome aberrations and capacity to continue proliferation characterize them as uveal melanoma cell lines.
PURPOSE: To determine whether some of the most often used uveal melanoma cell lines resemble their original tumor. METHODS: Analysis of the literature, patient charts, histopathology, mutations, chromosome status, HLA type, and expression of melanocyte markers on cell lines and their primary tumors. We examined five cell lines and the primary tumors from which they were derived. RESULTS: Four of the five examined primary tumors were unusual: one occupied the orbit, two were recurrences after prior irradiation, and one developed in an eye with a nevus of Ota. One cell line did not contain the GNA11 mutation, but it was present in the primary tumor. Three of the primary tumors had monosomy 3 (two of these lacked BAP1 expression); however, all five cell lines showed disomy 3 and BAP1 expression. All of the cell lines had gain of 8q. Two cell lines lacked expression of melanocyte markers, although these were present in the corresponding primary tumor. CONCLUSIONS: All cell lines could be traced back to their original uveal melanoma. Four of the five primary tumors were unusual. Cell lines often differed from their primary tumor in chromosome status and melanocyte markers. However, their specific chromosome aberrations and capacity to continue proliferation characterize them as uveal melanoma cell lines.
Authors: K Sisley; I G Rennie; M A Parsons; R Jacques; D W Hammond; S M Bell; A M Potter; R C Rees Journal: Genes Chromosomes Cancer Date: 1997-05 Impact factor: 5.006
Authors: Anna E Koopmans; Robert M Verdijk; Rutger W W Brouwer; Thierry P P van den Bosch; Mike M P van den Berg; Jolanda Vaarwater; Christel E M Kockx; Dion Paridaens; Nicole C Naus; Mark Nellist; Wilfred F J van IJcken; Emine Kiliç; Annelies de Klein Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2014-03-14 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: Jahan S Khalili; Xiaoxing Yu; Ji Wang; Brendan C Hayes; Michael A Davies; Gregory Lizee; Bita Esmaeli; Scott E Woodman Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2012-06-25 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Marcel Martin; Lars Maßhöfer; Petra Temming; Sven Rahmann; Claudia Metz; Norbert Bornfeld; Johannes van de Nes; Ludger Klein-Hitpass; Alan G Hinnebusch; Bernhard Horsthemke; Dietmar R Lohmann; Michael Zeschnigk Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2013-06-23 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Catherine D Van Raamsdonk; Karen R Fitch; Helmut Fuchs; Martin Hrabé de Angelis; Gregory S Barsh Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2004-08-22 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Jasmina Ziva Cerne; Sean Michael Hartig; Mark Patrick Hamilton; Sue Anne Chew; Nicholas Mitsiades; Vassiliki Poulaki; Sean Eric McGuire Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2014-04-07 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: I De Waard-Siebinga; D J Blom; M Griffioen; P I Schrier; E Hoogendoorn; G Beverstock; E H Danen; M J Jager Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 1995-07-17 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Rhydian Caines; Antonio Eleuteri; Helen Kalirai; Anthony C Fisher; Heinrich Heimann; Bertil E Damato; Sarah E Coupland; Azzam F G Taktak Journal: Mol Vis Date: 2015-01-12 Impact factor: 2.367
Authors: Alison M McDermott; Hasna Baidouri; Ashley M Woodward; Wendy R Kam; Yang Liu; Xiaomin Chen; Jillian F Ziemanski; Kerry Vistisen; Linda D Hazlett; Kelly K Nichols; Pablo Argüeso; David A Sullivan Journal: Curr Eye Res Date: 2018-06-04 Impact factor: 2.424
Authors: Getachew Boru; Colleen M Cebulla; Klarke M Sample; James B Massengill; Frederick H Davidorf; Mohamed H Abdel-Rahman Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2019-06-03 Impact factor: 4.799