Brief Report: Intravital Imaging of Cancer Stem Cell Plasticity in Mammary Tumors

Abstract

It is widely debated whether all tumor cells in mammary tumors have the same potential to propagate and maintain tumor growth or whether there is a hierarchical organization. Evidence for the latter theory is mainly based on the ability or failure of transplanted tumor cells to produce detectable tumors in mice with compromised immune systems; however, this assay has lately been disputed to accurately reflect cell behavior in unperturbed tumors. Lineage tracing experiments have recently shown the existence of a small population of cells, referred to as cancer stem cells (CSCs), that maintains and provides growth of squamous skin tumors and intestinal adenomas. However, the lineage tracing techniques used in these studies provide static images and lack the ability to study whether stem cell properties can be obtained or lost, a process referred to as stem cell plasticity. Here, by intravital lineage tracing, we report for the first time the existence of CSCs in unperturbed mammary tumors and demonstrate CSC plasticity. Our data indicate that existing CSCs disappear and new CSCs form during mammary tumor growth, illustrating the dynamic nature of these cells.

Shown for reading. Its publisher allows quoting it, not republishing it.

References 18

1. 1.

   Valent P, Bonnet D, De Maria R, et al. Cancer stem cell definitions and terminology: The devil is in the details. Nat Rev Cancer. 2012;12:767-775.

   Not in our library10.1038/nrc3368

2. 2.

   Shackleton M, Quintana E, Fearon ER, et al. Heterogeneity in cancer: Cancer stem cells versus clonal evolution. Cell. 2009;138:822-829.

   Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2009.08.017

3. 3.

   Clevers H. The cancer stem cell: Premises, promises and challenges. Nat Med. 2011;17:313-319.

   Not in our library10.1038/nm.2304

4. 4.

   Driessens G, Beck B, Caauwe A, et al. Defining the mode of tumour growth by clonal analysis. Nature. 2012;488:527-530.

   Not in our library10.1038/nature11344

5. 5.

   Schepers AG, Snippert HJ, Stange DE, et al. Lineage tracing reveals Lgr5+ stem cell activity in mouse intestinal adenomas. Science. 2012;337:730-735.

   Not in our library10.1126/science.1224676

6. 6.

   Chaffer CL, Brueckmann I, Scheel C, et al. Normal and neoplastic nonstem cells can spontaneously convert to a stem-like state. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108:7950-7955.

   Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1102454108

7. 7.

   Scheel C, Eaton EN, Li SH, et al. Paracrine and autocrine signals induce and maintain mesenchymal and stem cell states in the breast. Cell. 2011;145:926-940.

   Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2011.04.029

8. 8.

   Iliopoulos D, Hirsch HA, Wang G, et al. Inducible formation of breast cancer stem cells and their dynamic equilibrium with non-stem cancer cells via IL6 secretion. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108:1397-1402.

   Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1018898108

9. 9.

   Vermeulen L, De Sousa EMF, van der Heijden M, et al. Wnt activity defines colon cancer stem cells and is regulated by the microenvironment. Nat Cell Biol. 2010;12:468-476.

   Not in our library10.1038/ncb2048

10. 10.

    Gupta PB, Fillmore CM, Jiang G, et al. Stochastic state transitions give rise to phenotypic equilibrium in populations of cancer cells. Cell. 2011;146:633-644.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2011.07.026

11. 11.

    Li Y, Laterra J. Cancer stem cells: Distinct entities or dynamically regulated phenotypes? Cancer Res. 2012;72:576-580.

    Not in our library10.1158/0008-5472.can-11-3070

12. 12.

    Santisteban M, Reiman JM, Asiedu MK, et al. Immune-induced epithelial to mesenchymal transition in vivo generates breast cancer stem cells. Cancer Res. 2009;69:2887-2895.

    Not in our library10.1158/0008-5472.can-08-3343

13. 13.

    Hatina J. The dynamics of cancer stem cells. Neoplasma. 2012;59:700-707.

    Not in our library10.4149/neo_2012_092

14. 14.

    Lin EY, Jones JG, Li P, et al. Progression to malignancy in the polyoma middle T oncoprotein mouse breast cancer model provides a reliable model for human diseases. Am J Pathol. 2003;163:2113-2126.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0002-9440(10)63568-7

15. 15.

    Kedrin D, Gligorijevic B, Wyckoff J, et al. Intravital imaging of metastatic behavior through a mammary imaging window. Nat Methods. 2008;5:1019-1021.

    Not in our library10.1038/nmeth.1269

16. 16.

    Snippert HJ, van der Flier LG, Sato T, et al. Intestinal crypt homeostasis results from neutral competition between symmetrically dividing Lgr5 stem cells. Cell. 2010;143:134-144.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2010.09.016

17. 17.

    Gligorijevic B, Kedrin D, Segall JE, et al. Dendra2 photoswitching through the mammary imaging window. J Vis Exp. 2009.

    Not in our library10.3791/1278

18. 18.

    Ritsma L, Steller EJA, Beerling E, et al. Intravital microscopy through an abdominal imaging window reveals a pre-micrometastasis stage during liver metastasis. Sci Transl Med. 2012;4:158ra145.

    Not in our library10.1126/scitranslmed.3004394

Cited by papers we hold 7

• Application of the CRISPR/Cas9-based gene editing technique in basic research, diagnosis, and therapy of cancer · 2021
  No notice
• Cancer Stem Cell Plasticity – A Deadly Deal · 2020
  No notice
• CSC Radioresistance: A Therapeutic Challenge to Improve Radiotherapy Effectiveness in Cancer · 2020
  No notice
• Plasticity of Lgr5-Negative Cancer Cells Drives Metastasis in Colorectal Cancer · 2020
  No notice
• In vivo models in breast cancer research: progress, challenges and future directions · 2017
  No notice
• 5-Fluorouracil resistant colon cancer cells are addicted to OXPHOS to survive and enhance stem-like traits · 2015
  No notice
• Cancer stem cell targeted therapy: progress amid controversies · 2015
  No notice

Reads

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.