4.4 Article

Anti-Epithelial Cell Adhesion Molecule Antibodies and the Detection of Circulating Normal-Like Breast Tumor Cells

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE
Volume 101, Issue 1, Pages 61-66

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djn419

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Netherlands Genomic Initiative/Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Identification of specific subtypes of circulating tumor cells in peripheral blood of cancer patients can provide information about the biology of metastasis and improve patient management. However, to be effective, the method used to identify circulating tumor cells must detect all tumor cell types. We investigated whether the five subtypes of human breast cancer cells that have been defined by global gene expression profiling-025EFnormal-like, basal, HER2-positive, and luminal A and B-025EFwere identified by CellSearch, a US Food and Drug Administration-approved test that uses antibodies against the cell surface-expressed epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) to isolate circulating tumor cells. We used global gene expression profiling to determine the subtypes of a well-defined panel of 34 human breast cancer cell lines (15 luminal, nine normal-like, five basal-like, and five Her2-positive). We mixed 50-150 cells from 10 of these cell lines with 7.5 mL of blood from a single healthy human donor, and the mixtures were subjected to the CellSearch test to isolate the breast cancer cells. We found that the CellSearch isolation method, which uses EpCAM on the surface of circulating tumor cells for cell isolation, did not recognize, in particular, normal-like breast cancer cells, which in general have aggressive features. New tests that include antibodies that specifically recognize normal-like breast tumor cells but not cells of hematopoietic origin are needed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available