| Literature DB >> 35765505 |
Ali Hojat1, Shabnam Jeibouei2, Amir Reza Aref3,4, Alireza Kalbasi4, Maryam Moghaddam5, Farzaneh Mohammadi6, Seyed Mohammadreza Javadi7, Mohammad Ajoudanian8, Kazem Sharifi1, Hakimeh Zali9, Mohammad Esmaeil Akbari2.
Abstract
Surgery is the standard treatment for breast malignancies, although local and distant relapses might occur. Previous studies have shown that surgery-induced wound fluid (WF) contains tumor-initiating and progressing factors; however, these experiments have only been performed on breast cancer cell lines. Since a cancerous tumor includes various components like malignant cells, recruited non-malignant cells and extracellular matrix, those investigations that only focused on cancer cell lines themselves are not adequate to establish WF's effects. We conducted a 3D model study where we mimicked the tumor microenvironment to re-assess previous in-vitro findings. We generated human-derived breast tumor spheroids from 23 patient specimens, dissociated and cultured them in microfluidic devices. The spheroids from each sample were treated with the patients' WF or RPMI medium. The proportion of live and dead cells was assessed using live/dead assays and fluorescent imaging on day 6. In 22 samples, the percentage of live cells was significantly higher in the WF-treated group than in the RPMI-treated group. In one sample, we observed an opposite trend. The results were contrary in one of the samples, and we reported that case with more details. We compared the two groups using the 3D culture environment of human-derived tumor spheroids prepared from different microfluidic devices to mimic the tumor environment heterogeneity. Our findings showed that most patients with breast cancer benefit from surgical wound healing. However, removal of the surgical-induced serum may not be a method of inhibiting the tumor in all patients.Entities:
Keywords: 3D Cell Culture; Breast Cancer; Microfluidics; Tumor; Wound Fluid (WF)
Year: 2021 PMID: 35765505 PMCID: PMC9191216 DOI: 10.5812/ijpr.123828
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Iran J Pharm Res ISSN: 1726-6882 Impact factor: 1.962
Characteristics of the Patients. This Table Shows Age, BMI, Marital Status, the Grade of the Tumors, Marital Stats, Parietal Status and Menopausal Status of the Patients. We Selected Patients Aged 25 - 75.
| Patients | Age | BMI | Marital Status | Parietal Status | Menopausal Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 33 | 20.3 | Married | _ | Pre-menopause |
|
| 57 | 22.6 | Married | 4 | Post-menopause |
|
| 49 | 23 | Married | 2 | Pre=menopause |
|
| 74 | 21.1 | Married | 5 | Post-menopause |
|
| 43 | 25.5 | Married | 2 | Pre-menopause |
|
| 27 | 24.5 | Married | 1 | Pre-menopause |
|
| 28 | 17.3 | Single | _ | Pre-menopause |
|
| 72 | 33.4 | Married | 3 | Post-menopause |
|
| 40 | 23.2 | Married | 2 | Pre-menopause |
|
| 55 | 22.2 | Married | 5 | Post-menopause |
|
| 32 | 19.3 | Married | 2 | Pre-menopause |
|
| 49 | 24.7 | Married | _ | Pre-menopause |
|
| 60 | 23.3 | Married | 4 | Post-menopause |
|
| 53 | 21 | Married | 3 | Post-menopause |
|
| 48 | 25.6 | Married | 3 | Post-menopause |
|
| 41 | 20.9 | Married | 1 | Pre-menopause |
|
| 69 | 24 | Married | 4 | Post-menopause |
|
| 61 | 21.1 | Married | 3 | Post-menopause |
|
| 41 | 22 | Married | 2 | Pre-menopause |
|
| 39 | 19.2 | married | 1 | Pre-menopause |
|
| 50 | 23 | Married | 3 | Pre-menopause |
|
| 50 | 22.4 | Married | 2 | Post-menopause |
|
| 37 | 26 | Married | 1 | Pre-menopause |
Characteristics of the Tumors. This Table Shows the Size, Grade, Molecular Profile and Location of the Tumors in the Breast. All the Tumors Were Grade II or III. S18 That Showed Different Results from the Other Samples, is in Red.
| Patients | Tumor Size (cm) | Tumor Grade | HER2/ ER/ PR | Tumor Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 3.2 | II | + / -/ - | Left |
|
| 1 | II | -/ -/ - | Right |
|
| 5 | III | -/ +/+ | Right |
|
| 1.9 | II | -/ +/ + | Right |
|
| 3.5 | III | -/ +/ + | Left |
|
| 5 | III | +/ +/ + | Right |
|
| 4.5 | III | +/ +/ + | Right |
|
| 1 | II | -/ +/ - | Left |
|
| 1.6 | II | -/ +/ + | Right |
|
| 4.5 | III | -/ +/ + | Left |
|
| 5 | III | +/ -/- | Left |
|
| 1.5 | II | +/ +/ + | Right |
|
| 3.3 | III | -/ +/ + | Left |
|
| 1 | II | +/ +/ + | Left |
|
| 1.5 | II | -/ +/ + | Left |
|
| 2.5 | III | +/ -/ - | Left |
|
| 3.5 | III | +/ +/ + | Right |
|
| 3 | III | -/ +/ + | Left |
|
| 4.3 | III | -/ +/ + | Right |
|
| 2 | II | +/ +/ + | Left |
|
| 5 | III | +/ -/ - | Right |
|
| 4.3 | III | -/ +/ + | Right |
|
| 3.7 | III | -/ +/ + | Left |
Figure 1.Work flow of the study. At day 0, tumor specimens were removed, sent to pathology lab for preparing frozen and permanent section and, to cell culture lab. Also, Suction drains were placed at the site of the surgery. (A and B). The samples were mechanically and enzymatically dissociated, respectively. (C and D) The dissociated specimens were filtered by 100 µm and 40 µm cell strainers. (E) 40 - 100 µm spheroids were mixed with collagen, on ice. (F) The mixed gel and spheroids were injected to the central channel of the chips. At day 1, 24h-wound fluids of the patients were centrifuged, filtered, and injected to the media channels of the ‘’Test’’ chambers. Also, RPMI was injected to the media channels of the ‘’Control’’ chambers. At day 0 to day 6, optical imaging was performed and, WFs and RPMI were replaced with new media. At day 6, Live/Dead staining and fluorescent imaging were performed. For each sample, 3 ‘’test’’ and 3 ‘’control’’ chambers were loaded with specimens and media.
Figure 2.Different cell and ECM density are shown in six different tumors. In these images, white circles encompass tumor spheroids, yellow arrows point to single cells, and blue arrows point to the ECM. S1 has a high spheroid density but has no ECM and no single cell. S4 shows low ECM density, but a high number of single cells. S7 depicts high spheroid and ECM density, but a low to a moderate number of single cells. S3 and S18 both have no single cell but have moderate ECM densities. S9 shows moderate density ECM, but it depicts a low number of single cells.
Figure 3.(A) Some images from WF-treated and RPMI-treated spheroids belong to S11, S14, S19, S22 have been shown here. All the pictures were taken at Day 6 and the spheroids were stained by AO/PI (live/dead staining solution). Red color shows dead cells and green color shows live cells. (B) The percentage of the live cells under WF treatment is significantly more than the live cells under RPMI treatment. The graph shows the results from 22 samples. Dark gray column shows the percentage of the live cells and light gray column shows the percentage of the dead cells. (C) Wound fluid treated spheroids compared with RPMI treated spheroids in microfluidic devices. Spheroids were derived from reported case (S18). All the pictures were taken at Day 6 and the spheroids were stained by AO/PI (live/dead staining solution). Red color shows dead cells and green color shows live cells. (D) The percentage of the live cells under RPMI treatment is significantly more than the live cells under wound fluid treatment. Dark gray column shows the percentage of the live cells and light gray column shows the percentage of the dead cells. scale bars show 100 µm. (RPMI-treated spheroids are control samples and WF-treated spheroids are Test samples). AO/PI: Acridine Orange/ Propidium Iodide. WF: wound fluid.