| Literature DB >> 33173428 |
Wei Xu1, Zheng-Yun Zhao2, Qi-Ming An3, Bin Dong4, Ang Lv1, Cheng-Peng Li1, Xiao-Ya Guan1, Xiu-Yun Tian1, Jian-Hui Wu1, Chun-Yi Hao1.
Abstract
Patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models are effective preclinical cancer models that reproduce the tumor microenvironment of the human body. The methods have been widely used for drug screening, biomarker development, co-clinical trials, and personalized medicine. However, the low success rate and the long tumorigenesis period have largely limited their usage. In the present studies, we compared the PDX establishment between hepatocellular cancer (HCC) and metastatic liver cancer (MLC), and identified the key factors affecting the transplantation rate of PDXs. Surgically resected tumor specimens obtained from patients were subcutaneously inoculated into immunodeficient mice to construct PDX models. The overall transplantation rate was 38.5% (20/52), with the HCC group (28.1%, 9/32) being lower than MLC group (56.2%, 9/16). In addition, HCC group took significantly longer latency period than MLC group to construct PDX models. Hematoxylin and eosin staining results showed that the histopathology of all generations in PDX models was similar to the original tumor in all three types of cancer. The transplantation rate of PDX models in HCC patients was significantly associated with blood type (P=0.001), TNM stage (P=0.023), lymph node metastasis (P=0.042) and peripheral blood CA19-9 level (P=0.049), while the transplantation rate of PDX models in MLC patients was significantly associated with tumor size (P=0.034). This study demonstrates that PDX models can effectively reproduce the histological patterns of human tumors. The transplantation rate depends on the type of original tumor. Furthermore, it shows that the invasiveness of the original liver cancer affects the possibility of its growth in immunodeficient mice. © The author(s).Entities:
Keywords: PDX; hepatocellular carcinoma; metastatic liver cancer; transplantation rate
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33173428 PMCID: PMC7646096 DOI: 10.7150/ijms.46686
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Med Sci ISSN: 1449-1907 Impact factor: 3.738
Primary and secondary engraftment outcomes for all tumor types
| Tumor histologic type | All tumor types (n=52) | CRC (n=4) | HCC(n=32) | MLC (n=16) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No growth | 32 (61.5%) | 2 (50%) | 23 (71.9%) | 7 (43.8%) |
| Success | 20 (38.5%) | 2 (50%) | 9 (28.1%) | 9 (56.2%) |
| Latency period, days | 67.7±34.1 | 45±12.7 | 88.2±34.9* | 52.2±25.4 |
| No growth | 7 (43.8%) | 0 (0%) | 5 (83.3%) | 1 (12.5%) |
| Success | 9 (56.2%) | 2 (100%) | 1 (16.7%) | 7 (87.5%) |
| Latency period, days | 45.0±19.6 | 66.5±36.1 | 34±0.0 | 38.9±9.8# |
CRC, colorectal carcinoma; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; MLC, metastatic liver cancer;
*p<0.05 compared with MLC group. #p<0.05 compared with F1 PDXs group.
Figure 1PDX generation in original tumors and NOD/SCID mice. Representative H&E staining results of tumors from HCC, MLC and CRC patients and their two corresponding passages of xenografts (×200). Pathological features of tumor could be conserved within two generations of passage in immunodeficient mice (F0 represents tumor from patient, F1 and F2 represent tumor from PDX line).
Correlations between transplantation rate and clinicopathological parameters of all patients
| Clinicopathological features | No. of patients (%) | Successful engraftment (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.404 | |||
| Female | 10 (19.2%) | 5 (50.0%) | |
| Male | 42 (80.8%) | 15 (35.7%) | |
| 0.264 | |||
| <60 | 31 (59.6%) | 10 (32.3%) | |
| ≥60 | 21 (40.4%) | 10 (47.6%) | |
| 0.079 | |||
| Primary tumor (HCC and CRC) | 36 (69.2%) | 11 (30.6%) | |
| MLC | 16 (30.8%) | 9 (56.3%) | |
| 0.350 | |||
| No | 35 (67.3%) | 15 (42.9%) | |
| Yes | 17 (32.7%) | 5 (29.4%) | |
| 1.000 | |||
| No | 39 (75.0%) | 15 (38.5%) | |
| Yes | 13 (25.0%) | 5 (38.5%) | |
| 0.143 | |||
| <5.2 | 30 (57.7%) | 9 (30.0%) | |
| ≥5.2 | 22 (42.3%) | 11 (50.0%) | |
| 0.008** | |||
| O | 13 (25.0%) | 9 (69.2%) | |
| Non-O (A, B, and AB) | 39 (76.0%) | 11 (28.2%) | |
| 0.924 | |||
| No | 36 (69.2%) | 14 (38.9%) | |
| Yes | 16 (30.8%) | 6 (37.5%) | |
| 1.000 | |||
| No | 30 (57.7%) | 10 (33.3%) | |
| Yes | 3 (5.8%) | 1 (33.3%) | |
| NA | 19 (11.5%) | 9 (47.4%) | |
| 0.583 | |||
| Moderate | 32 (61.6%) | 11 (34.4%) | |
| Poor | 14 (26.9%) | 6 (42.9%) | |
| NA | 6 (11.5%) | 3 (50.0%) | |
| 0.008** | |||
| I-II | 25 (48.1%) | 5 (20.0%) | |
| III-IV | 27 (51.9%) | 15 (55.6%) | |
| 0.120 | |||
| Present | 17 (32.7%) | 9 (52.9%) | |
| Absent | 30 (57.7%) | 9 (30.0%) | |
| NA | 5 (9.6%) | 2 (40.0%) | |
| 0.102 | |||
| Present | 17 (32.7%) | 9 (52.9%) | |
| Absent | 31 (59.6%) | 9 (29.0%) | |
| NA | 4 (7.7%) | 2 (50.0%) | |
| 0.015* | |||
| Normal | 34 (65.4%) | 9 (26.5%) | |
| Abnormal | 18 (34.6%) | 11 (61.1%) | |
| 0.017* | |||
| Normal | 29 (55.8%) | 7 (24.1%) | |
| Abnormal | 23 (44.2%) | 13 (56.5%) | |
| 0.264 | |||
| Normal | 31 (59.6%) | 13 (41.9%) | |
| Abnormal | 21 (40.4%) | 7 (33.3%) | |
| 0.135 | |||
| Normal | 35 (67.3%) | 11 (31.4%) | |
| Abnormal | 17 (32.7%) | 9 (52.9%) |
CRC, colorectal carcinoma; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; MLC, metastatic liver cancer; NA, not available;
*p<0.05, **p<0.01. Chi-square test.
Figure 2The correlations between transplantation rate and clinicopathological parameters. (A) Tumor size, (B) blood type, (C) TNM stage, (D) lymph node metastasis, (E) CEA and (F) CA19-9 level. The transplantation rate of HCC xenografts was statistically significant associated with blood type, TNM stage, lymph node metastasis and peripheral blood CA19-9 level. The transplantation rate of MLC xenografts was statistically with tumor size. * represents p<0.05, ** represents p<0.01.
Figure 3OS and PFS in relation to transplantation status of patients. (A) OS (left) and PFS (right) of all patients with and without success engraftment; (B) OS (left) and PFS (right) of HCC patients with and without success engraftment; (C) OS (left) and PFS (right) of MLC patients with and without success engraftment. Log-rank p-values are shown in each of the result.