Literature DB >> 3594440

Rate of generation of major karyotypic abnormalities in relationship to the metastatic potential of B16 murine melanoma.

W S Kendal, R Y Wang, T C Hsu, P Frost.   

Abstract

To test the hypothesis that genetic instability correlates with malignant potential, we compared the rate of generation of marker chromosomal abnormalities in clones of B16 F1 and B16 F10 murine melanoma. These rates were estimated through an adaptation of fluctuation analysis of Luria and Delbruck (S. E. Luria and M. Delbruck, Genetics, 28: 491-511, 1943). The highly metastatic F10 line showed the same degree of marker chromosomal instability as the poorly metastatic F1 line (0.01 variants/cell/generation). When subclones of a karyotypically unstable F10 clone were compared with those of a more stable F10 clone, both groups caused the same number of pulmonary metastases, thus demonstrating a further lack of correlation of malignant potential with the level of genomic instability. Since measurements based on marker chromosomes may not truly reflect all of the changes detectable by G-banding, we also analyzed the G-banded karyotypes of the cell lines and their clones (chromatid or chromosomal breaks were not considered in this study). The F10 clones possessed an additional copy of chromosome 1 and also a significantly higher prevalence of the translocation t(9,12) when compared with the F1 clones. Rather than general rates of major karyotypic change determining tumor progression, we suggest the importance of other genetic or epigenetic mechanisms, particularly subtle nonrandom genetic or molecular changes, as the determining factors for malignant potential.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1987        PMID: 3594440

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Res        ISSN: 0008-5472            Impact factor:   12.701


  6 in total

Review 1.  Genomics screens for metastasis genes.

Authors:  Jinchun Yan; Qihong Huang
Journal:  Cancer Metastasis Rev       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 9.264

Review 2.  Cellular interactions in metastasis.

Authors:  F R Miller; G H Heppner
Journal:  Cancer Metastasis Rev       Date:  1990-07       Impact factor: 9.264

3.  Direct Tumor Killing and Immunotherapy through Anti-SerpinB9 Therapy.

Authors:  Liwei Jiang; Yi-Jun Wang; Jing Zhao; Mayuko Uehara; Qingming Hou; Vivek Kasinath; Takaharu Ichimura; Naima Banouni; Li Dai; Xiaofei Li; Dale L Greiner; Leonard D Shultz; Xiaolong Zhang; Zhen-Yu Jim Sun; Ian Curtin; Nicholas E Vangos; Zoe C Yeoh; Ezekiel A Geffken; Hyuk-Soo Seo; Ze-Xian Liu; Gregory J Heffron; Khalid Shah; Sirano Dhe-Paganon; Reza Abdi
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 41.582

4.  Vascular channels formed by subpopulations of PECAM1+ melanoma cells.

Authors:  James M Dunleavey; Lin Xiao; Joshua Thompson; Mi Mi Kim; Janiel M Shields; Sarah E Shelton; David M Irvin; Victoria E Brings; David W Ollila; Rolf A Brekken; Paul A Dayton; Juan M Melero-Martin; Andrew C Dudley
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2014-10-22       Impact factor: 14.919

5.  Cell-cell fusion as a mechanism of DNA exchange in cancer.

Authors:  Stephen C Searles; Endi K Santosa; Jack D Bui
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-12-27

6.  A simple method using CRISPR-Cas9 to knock-out genes in murine cancerous cell lines.

Authors:  Airi Ishibashi; Kotaro Saga; Yuuta Hisatomi; Yue Li; Yasufumi Kaneda; Keisuke Nimura
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-12-18       Impact factor: 4.379

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.