| Literature DB >> 31547836 |
Zeli Yin1,2,3, Chengyong Dong1,2,3, Keqiu Jiang1,2,3, Zhe Xu3, Rui Li1,2,3, Kun Guo4,5, Shujuan Shao6, Liming Wang7,8,9.
Abstract
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a lethal disease, and recurrence and metastasis are the major causes of death in HCC patients. Cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs), a major stromal cell type in the HCC microenvironment, promote HCC progression, and have gradually become a hot research topic in HCC-targeted therapy. This review comprehensively describes and discusses the heterogeneous tissue distribution, cellular origin, phenotype, and biological functions of HCC-associated fibroblasts. Furthermore, the possible use of CAFs for predicting HCC prognosis and in targeted therapeutic strategies is discussed, highlighting the critical roles of CAFs in HCC progression, diagnosis, and therapy.Entities:
Keywords: Cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs); Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); Tumor microenvironment (TME)
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31547836 PMCID: PMC6757399 DOI: 10.1186/s13045-019-0782-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Hematol Oncol ISSN: 1756-8722 Impact factor: 17.388
Fig. 1The distribution of α-SMA-positive CAFs in HCC tissues. a CAFs located in the tumor fibrous capsule (× 100). b CAFs located in the tumor fibrous septum (× 200). c–d HCC cells positive for α-SMA expression (× 200, × 400, respectively). e–f CAFs in the blood sinus (× 200, × 400, respectively)
Fig. 2Heterogeneous cellular origins of CAFs. CAFs in the HCC microenvironment may be derived from HCC cells, HSCs, MSCs, and HSECs. Hypoxia and TGF-β can induce EMT and expression of α-SMA and FAP in HCC cells. HSCs can differentiate into CAFs under stimulation with CM or exosomal miRNA-21 secreted by HCC cells. CM generated from HCC cells can also induce the expression of tenascin-C and SDF-1 in MSCs. HSECs are a potential cellular origin of CAFs in the HCC microenvironment
Phenotype and biological function of CAFs in the HCC microenvironment
| Phenotype | Protein markers | Function | Molecular mechanism | Reference | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Activated myofibroblast phenotype | α-SMA, collagen 1α, fibronectin | Maintain and enhance the stemness of HCC cells | In vitro: promote HCC cell proliferation, invasion, EMT In vivo: promote tumorigenesis, growth and metastasis | COMP | Sun et al. [ |
| α-SMA, vimentin | In vitro: promote proliferation, invasion | IL-6, IL-8, CCL2 | Mono et al. [ | ||
| α-SMA, FAP, vimentin | In vitro: increased sorafenib resistance, proliferation rate, migration, and invasion In vivo: promote tumorigenesis | HGF/c-Met/STAT3 IL-6/IL6R/STAT3 | Li et al. [ | ||
| α-SMA, FAP, vimentin | In vitro: promote proliferation, migration and invasion, and the expression of stemness genes In vivo: promote tumorigenesis and HCC growth | IL-6/STAT3/notch | Xiong et al. [ | ||
| α-SMA, PDGFR-α | Maintain and enhance the stemness of HCC cells | Notch 3 signaling | Liu et al. [ | ||
| α-SMA, FSP1, vimentin | In vivo: promote HCC initiation and growth | FOXQ1/NDRG1/CCL26 feedback loop | Luo et al. [ | ||
| α-SMA, FSP1, vimentin | In vitro: promote migration, invasion, EMT In vivo: promote metastasis | CCL2/CCL5/Hh, CCL7/CXCL16/TGF-β pathway | Liu et al. [ | ||
| Activated myofibroblast phenotype | α-SMA, FAP | Maintain and enhance the stemness of HCC cells | In vitro: promote proliferation, self-renewal In vivo: promote tumorigenesis | HGF/c-Met/Erk/FRA1/HEY1 signaling | Lau et al. [ |
| α-SMA, FAP, vimentin | In vitro: promote proliferation In vivo: promote growth | HGF | Jia et al. [ | ||
| α-SMA, vimentin | Enhance HCC blood supply | Promote vasculogenic mimicry | TGF-β, SDF-1 | Yang et al. [ | |
| α-SMA, FAP, vimentin | Immunosuppression | Recruit and promote the differentiation of neutrophils, monocytes, and dendritic cells into cells with immunosuppressive phenotypes | Recruitment: SDF-1α/CXCR4 Education: IL-6/STAT3 | [ | |
| Mesenchymal stromal cell phenotype | Positive: CD90, CD73, CD105, CD29, CD44, CD166 Negative: CD34,CD31, CD45, HLA-DR | Immunosuppression | Attenuate the cytotoxic activity of NK cells (downregulation of granzyme B and perforin) | PEG2, IDO | Li et al. [ |
Positive: CD90, CD44, CD29, CD13, CD105, CD166 Negative: CD34, CD45, CD117 multipotent differentiation: adipogenic, osteogenic, and pancreatic differentiation | – | – | – | Sukowati et al. [ | |
CAFs are potential pathological indicators for predicting HCC prognosis
| Selection criteria of HCC cases | Source/number/staining of HCC specimens | Quantification of immunohistochemistry | Mean DFS/OS | HCC prognosis | Predictive value | Reference | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Methods | Cut-off value | High-density group | Low-density group | ||||||
| HCC cases underwent curative radical surgery without neo-adjuvant radiotherapy or chemotherapy | Clinical cases/101 HCC patients/α-SMA | Stromal thickness was measured using the CRi Nuance multispectral imaging system | Mean value of stromal thickness: 238.6 μm | DFS: 3 months | DFS: 12 months | Inverse correlation with DFS | Independent prognostic factor for DFS | Fang et al. [ | |
| No modality other than LDLT available to treat patients with HCC and end-stage liver disease; no extrahepatic metastasis or macrovascular invasion such as portal vein or hepatic vein infiltration | Clinical cases/22 HCC patients/α-SMA | The percentage of α-SMA expression in the stromal area was calculated | α-SMA expression in stromal area: < 1%, < 10%, > 10% | > 10% | < 10% | > 1% | Inverse correlation with DFS and OS | Independent prognostic factor for DFS | Takamura et al. [ |
| – | – | – | |||||||
| HCC without a history of preoperative treatment | Clinical cases/314 HCC patients/FAP | Scoring was performed according to staining intensity and the percentage of positive cells | Score (positive: 2, moderate staining in ≥5%, and 3, strong staining in ≥ 5% cells; negative: 0, staining in < 5% cells, and 1, weak staining in ≥5%) | – | – | No association with HCC prognosis | – | Kim et al. [ | |