4.6 Article

CD49b, CD87, and CD95 Are Markers for Activated Cancer-Associated Fibroblasts Whereas CD39 Marks Quiescent Normal Fibroblasts in Murine Tumor Models

Journal

FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2019.00716

Keywords

cancer-associated fibroblasts; normal fibroblasts; subcutaneous 4T1 mouse tumor model; subcutaneous CT26.WT mouse tumor model; CD39; CD87; CD49b

Categories

Funding

  1. MMLS master program at HAN University of Applied Sciences

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Fibroblasts are thought to be key players in the tumor microenvironment. Means to identify and isolate fibroblasts as well as an understanding of their cancer-specific features are essential to dissect their role in tumor biology. To date, the identification of cancer-associated fibroblasts is widely based on generic markers for activated fibroblasts in combination with their origin in tumor tissue. This study was focused on a deep characterization of the cell surface marker profile of cancer-associated fibroblasts in widely used mouse tumor models and defining aberrant expression profiles by comparing them to their healthy counterparts. We established a generic workflow to isolate healthy and cancer-associated fibroblasts from solid tissues, thereby reducing bias, and background noise introduced by non-target cells. We identified CD87, CD44, CD49b, CD95, and Ly-6C as cancer-associated fibroblast cell surface markers, while CD39 was identified to mark normal fibroblasts from healthy tissues. In addition, we found a functional association of most cancer-related fibroblast markers to proliferation and a systemic upregulation of CD87, and CD49b in tumor-bearing mice, even in non-affected tissues. These novel markers will facilitate the characterization of fibroblasts and shed further light in their functions and implication in cancer progression.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available