| Literature DB >> 31303863 |
Elsa N Garza Treviño1, Paulina Delgado González1, Carlos I Valencia Salgado1, Alejandra Martinez Garza1.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one type of tumor with the highest frequency and mortality worldwide. Although current treatments increase patient survival, it is important to detect CRC in early stages; however, most CRC, despite responding favorably to treatment, develop resistance and present recurrence, a situation that will inevitably lead to death. In recent years, it has been shown that the main reason for drug resistance is the presence of colon cancer stem cells (CSC). Pericytes are also capable of tumor homing and are important cellular components of the tumor microenvironment (TME), contributing to the formation of vessels and promoting metastasis; however, they have not been considered very important as a therapeutic target in cancer. In this review, we highlight the contribution of pericytes and cancer stem cells to some classical hallmarks of cancer, namely, tumor angiogenesis, growth, metastasis, and evasion of immune destruction, and discuss therapies targeting pericytes and cancer stem cells in CRC.Entities:
Keywords: CRC treatment; Cancer stem cells; Chemoresitance; Pericytes
Year: 2019 PMID: 31303863 PMCID: PMC6604392 DOI: 10.1186/s12935-019-0888-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Cell Int ISSN: 1475-2867 Impact factor: 5.722
Fig. 1Interaction pericytes and cancer stem cells. Tumorigenesis activates EMT-promoting transcription factors (TWIST, SNAIL and ZEB) through pathways known to play critical as WNT, NOTCH, TGF-β and NF-κB cascades and hypoxia. Cancer stem cells were recently found to function as pericyte progenitors thus reciprocal interaction between pericytes and CSC is highly beneficial to tumor development, contributing to tumor angiogenesis and metastasis
Therapeutic approaches using, microRNAs against colon CSCs and pericytes [89, 90]
| miRNA | Expression level | Target | Findings | Technique | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21* | ↑ | ITGβ4 | A prognostic tool, proliferation, invasion and metastasis | qPCR | 10.4161/epi.26842 [ |
| 23a | ↑ | E-cadherin | Induced EMT process associated CRC metastasis | qPCR | 10.1093/carcin/bgt274 [ |
| ↓ | ZO-1 | Increasing vascular permeability and migration | 10.3892/etm.2017.4972 [ | ||
| 24* | ↑ | Paxillin | Inhibited the killing effect of NK cells to colorectal cancer cells | qRT-PCR and Western blot | 10.1016/j.biopha.2018.02.024 [ |
| 34a | ↓ | Inh3 | Increased lymph node infiltration and metastasis in colon cancer patients | miRNA target prediction software miRWalk | 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.04.017 [ |
| 126 | ↑ | BCL-2 and p53 | Potential tumour suppressor | qRT-PCR | 10.1016/j.yexcr.2015.10.004 [ |
| 137 | ↓ | TCF4 | Suppresses cell proliferation, migration and invasion in colon cancer cell lines | RT-qPCR | 10.3892/ol.2018.8364 [ |
| 143* | ↑ | IGF-IR | Inhibited cell proliferation, migration, tumor growth, angiogenesis and increased chemosensitivity to oxaliplatin treatment | qRT-PCR and western blot | 10.4161/cc.24477 [ |
| 150 | ↑ | c-Myb | Inhibits cell proliferation, induces cell apoptosis and inhibits cell migration and invasion in human CRC cells | qRT-PCR, western blot and DNA constructs and luciferase target assay | 10.1111/jcmm.12398 [ |
| 200 | ↓ | Increased EMT | TaqMan MicroRNA assays | ||
| 203 | ↑ | SOCS3 | Potential for metastasis; promoted the differentiation of monocytes to M2 macrophages | RT-qPCR and Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA) TargetScan and miRanda | 10.18632/oncotarget.20009 [ 10.1177/1947601911425832 [ |
| 221 | ↑ | RECK, RelA and STAT3 | Migration and invasion in vitro and metastasis in vivo | qRT-PCR and western blot qRT-PCR and western blot | 10.1016/j.febslet.2013.11.014 [ 10.1053/j.gastro.2014.06.006 [ |
| 1246 | ↑ | CCNG2 | Promoted the proliferation, colony formation, invasion and migration, and inhibited the apoptosis | RT-qPCR and Dual luciferase reporter assay | 10.3892/mmr.2015.4557 [ |
↑ = ; ↓ = *clinical trials
Vector systems
| Vectors | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|
| Using VIRUS | ||
| Adenovirus | ↑ Efficiency and vector titers Insert capacity (max 8 Kb) | No integration Short-term expression ↑Immunogenicity |
| Adeno-associated virus | ↑ Efficiency and vector titers ↓ Toxicity, no pathogenic ↓ Risk of mutagenesis Remains predominantly episomal | Requires helper virus to replicate Insert capacity (3-5 Kb) |
| Retrovirus | ↓ Immune response in host Insert capacity (8 Kb) Integrates into genome | ↓ Vector titers Incorpotates into dividing cells only Restricted tropism ↑ Risk of insertional mutagenesis |
| Lentivirus | Uptake in dividing and not dividing cells ↑ Insert capacity (8 Kb) Integrates into genome Next generation is self-inactiving for safe | ↓ Vector titers Restricted tropism Risk of insertional mutagenesis |
| Non VIRAL | ||
| Liposomes | Protect degradation by nucleasas Dose-dependent toxicity cationic polymers (PEI and PAMAM) ↓ Immune response in host rapid clearance from the bloodstream | Toxic effects on the liver and the kidney in mice ↓ Circulation half-life (minute–hours) |
| Nanoparticles | Protect degradation by nucleasas ↑ Circulation half-life (synthetic polymers sustained release over a period of days to several weeks) Dose-dependent toxicity ↑ Penetrability and solubility enhanced drug stability and biocompatibility facile synthesis and easy structural modification targeted drug delivery (specify and inespecify) | Toxic effects depends on the size and biodistribution |
| DNA nanostructures | Protect degradation by nucleasas Small size ↑ Precision and flexibility Non-toxic DNA nanostructures with their powerful structural control ↑ Biodistribution, biocompatibility | Localization and mapping of nanorobots in the human body are difficult using conventional optical microscopy techniques Effect desired require coordination collective nanorobots |
Cationic polymers that are frequently used for intracellular delivery are polyethyleneimine (PEI) and polyamide amine dendrimers (PAMAM)