| Literature DB >> 28432274 |
Shinsaku Togo1,2, Nobuyoshi Katagiri3, Yukiko Namba1,2, Miniwan Tulafu1,2, Kumi Nagahama1,2, Kotarou Kadoya1,2, Kazuya Takamochi4, Siaki Oh4, Kenji Suzuki2, Fuminori Sakurai5, Hiroyuki Mizuguchi5, Yasuo Urata3, Kazuhisa Takahashi1,2.
Abstract
Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) have a crucial role in the clinical outcome of cancer patients. Detection of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using an antibody against epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) in captured CTCs has low sensitivity; the loss of epithelial markers leads to underestimation of CTCs with mesenchymal phenotype. We propose a new approach for detection of viable CTCs, including those with epithelial-mesenchymal transition status (EMT-CTCs), using the new telomerase-specific replication-selective adenovirus (OBP-1101), TelomeScan F35. Peripheral venous blood samples and clinicopathological data were collected from 123 NSCLC patients. The sensitivity of CTC detection was 69.1%, and for patients with stage I, II, III and IV, it was 59.6%, 40.0%, 85.7%, and 75.0%, respectively. Among the EMT-CTC samples, 46% were vimentin positive and 39.0% of non-EMT-CTC samples were EpCAM positive. Patients testing positive for EMT-CTCs at baseline had poor response to chemotherapy (P = 0.025) and decreased progression-free survival (EMT-CTC positive vs. negative: 193 ± 47 days vs. 388 ± 47. days, P = 0.040) in comparison to those testing negative. TelomeScan F35 is a highly sensitive CTC detection system and will be a useful screening tool for early diagnosis of NSCLC patients. Mesenchymal-phenotype CTCs are crucial indicators of chemotherapeutic efficacy in NSCLC patients.Entities:
Keywords: EMT; EpCAM; circulating tumor cells; non-small cell lung cancer; telomescan
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28432274 PMCID: PMC5471019 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.16818
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Figure 1In vitro validation of the use of OBP-1101 for CTC detection using lung cancer cell lines with different hTERT expression levels
The ratios of GFP+ cells in human NSCLC cell lines were determined by FACS analysis. (A) NSCLC cell lines were examined 24 h after inoculation of OBP-1101 at 1,000–45,000 VP/cell. Cell images were acquired under a fluorescence microscope. hTERT mRNA expression in human NSCLC cell lines was determined with qRT-PCR analysis. (B) hTERT mRNA expression was normalized to the expression in A549. (C) OBP-1101 could detect any type of lung cancer cells stained with epithelial (cytokeratin, EpCAM), mesenchymal (vimentin), or stem cell (CD133) markers. (D) For assay validation, we determined the sensitivity (GFP+ cells/marker+ cells), specificity (marker+ cells/GFP+ cells), and recovery (detected cells/spiked cells). To this end, 100 A549 cells were spiked into healthy blood and processed according to sample preparation methods. Cytokeratin was used as a cell marker.
Figure 2Viable CTC detection and phenotype characterization in NSCLC patients
Cancer cells from lung cancer tissues were infected with OBP-1101 and characterized by immunostaining for cell markers. (A) Lung cancer cells in lavage solution. EpCAM and cytokeratin were used as epithelial markers, whereas vimentin and CEA were used as a mesenchymal and cancer marker, respectively. (B) Dead CTCs showing positive epithelial marker signal and viable CTCs showing mesenchymal marker signal. CTCs were detected by green fluorescence produced by OBP-1101 in NSCLC patients. These CTCs were viable because the virus can replicate only in viable cells. Additionally, these CTCs were classified as having a mesenchymal phenotype because they were stained by an antibody against vimentin, which is a typical mesenchymal cell marker. The epithelial albeit GFP-positive CTCs were detected by EpCAM staining and these epithelial CTCs were positive in live/dead staining. CD133 and CEA were positive in CTCs with vimentin positive detected by OBP-1101. (C) FISH analysis of GFP-positive cells. To show ALK-rearrangement, GFP-positive cells in blood samples from the metastatic NSCLC patients with confirmed ALK-rearrangement in tumors were subjected to FISH analysis. The nuclei present a split positive pattern with separation between the 5′ ALK green part and the 3′ ALK orange part of the FISH probe, which is consistent with ALK rearrangement.
Figure 3Distribution of CTC count in 7.5 mL peripheral blood from NSCLC patients according to stage
(A) Total CTCs, (B) EMT-CTCs, (C) Non EMT-CTCs.
Characteristics of patients and sensitivity of CTC according to final diagnosis
| Sensitivity | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (≥ 1 cell/7. 5 mL of peripheral blood tested positive) | ||||
| CTC phenotype | Total CTC | EMT-CTC | Non-EMT-CTC | EMT-CTC +Non-EMT-CTC |
| Primary NSCLC | ||||
| All patients ( | 85 (69.1%) | 57 (46.3%) | 48 (39.0%) | 20 (16.3%) |
| Histological type | ||||
| Adenocarcinoma ( | 67 (67.0%) | 43 (43.0%) | 40 (40.0%) | 15 (15.0%) |
| Squamous cell carcinoma ( | 13 (68.4%) | 10 (52.6%) | 6 (31.6%) | 3 (15.8%) |
| Others ( | 4 (100%) | 3 (75.0%) | 2 (50.0%) | 2 (50.0%) |
| Stage | ||||
| 0 ( | 2 (40.0%) | 2 (40.0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
| I ( | 35 (59.6%) | 24(42.1%) | 17 (24.6%) | 6 (9.7%) |
| II ( | 12 (40.0%) | 7 (46.7%) | 7 (46.7%) | 2 (13.3%) |
| III ( | 12 (85.7%) | 7 (50.0%) | 10 (71.4%) | 5 (35.7%) |
| IV ( | 24 (75.0%) | 17 (53.1%) | 14 (48.8%) | 7 (21.9%) |
Diagnostic values of CTC detection and serum CEA level at selected cut-off points in early-stage (0–IA) NSCLC patients
| CEA > 5.0 | Positive | Negative | ||
| Pts. (%) | Pts. (%) | |||
| Total CTC | (+) | 2 (4.7%) | 23 (53.5%) | |
| (−) | 3 (7.0%) | 15 (34.9%) | ||
| CEA > 3.0 | Positive | Negative | ||
| Pts. (%) | Pts. (%) | |||
| Total CTC | (+) | 8 (18.6%) | 17 (39.5%) | |
| (−) | 8 (18.6%) | 10 (23.3%) |
Correlation between CTC detection/count and treatment response
| Responder | Non-responder | Pearson | PFS (days) | Student | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pts. (%) | Pts. (%) | Pts. (%) | Mean ± SE | ||||
| EMT-CTC | (+) | 3 (10.0%) | 12 (40.0%) | 14 (50.0%) | 193.1 ± 47.4 | ||
| (−) | 9 (30.0%) | 6 (20.0%) | 0.0253 | 14 (50.0%) | 338.1 ± 47.4 | 0.0402 | |
| Non EMT-CTC | (+) | 10 (33.3%) | 9 (30.0%) | 17 (60.7%) | 267.8 ± 45.4 | ||
| (−) | 2 (6.67%) | 9 (30.0%) | 0.0634 | 11 (39.3%) | 262.2 ± 60.7 | 0.9414 | |
| Total CTC | (+) | 10 (33.3%) | 14 (46.7%) | 22 (78.6%) | 231.0 ± 38.4 | ||
| (−) | 2 (6.67%) | 4 (13.3%) | 0.7094 | 6 (21.4%) | 392.7 ± 73.5 | 0.0415 | |
| Total CTC | (+) | 3 (27.3%) | 3 (27.3%) | 6 (54.5%) | 291.2 ± 77.2 | ||
| (After 1 cycle) | (−) | 2 (18.2%) | 3 (27.3%) | 0.7401 | 5 (45.5%) | 322.2 ± 84.5 | 0.7933 |