4.7 Article

Characterisation of tumour-derived microvesicles in cancer patients' blood and correlation with clinical outcome

Journal

JOURNAL OF EXTRACELLULAR VESICLES
Volume 6, Issue 1, Pages 1-16

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/20013078.2017.1340745

Keywords

Cancer; extracellular vesicles; microvesicles; EMMPRIN; biomarker; tumour invasion

Categories

Funding

  1. Deutsche Krebshilfe [109615]
  2. Bundesministerium fur Bildung und Forschung (BMBF) [0316173]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To evaluate whether tumour-derived microvesicles(T-MV), originating from the plasma membrane, represent suitable cancer biomarkers, we isolated MV from peripheral blood samples of cancer patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic solid tumours (n = 330, including 79 head & neck cancers, 74 lung cancers, 41 breast cancers, 28 colorectal cancers and 108 with other cancer forms) and controls (n = 103). Whole MV preparations were characterised using flow cytometry. While MV carrying the tumour-associated proteins MUC1, EGFR and EpCAM were found to be enhanced in a tumour-subtype-specific way in patients' blood, expression of the matrix metalloproteinase inducer EMMPRIN was increased independent of tumour type. Higher levels of EMMPRIN+-MV correlated significantly with poor overall survival, whereas the other markers were prognostic only in specific tumour subgroups. By combining all four tumour- associated antigens, cancer patients were separated from healthy controls with an AUC of up to 0.85. Ex vivo, whole MV preparations from cancer patients, in contrast to those of controls, induced a tumour-supporting phenotype in macrophages and increased tumour cell invasion, which was dependent on the highly glycosylated isoform of EMMPRIN. In conclusion, the detection of T-MV in whole blood, even in minor amounts, is feasible with standard techniques, proves functionally relevant and correlates with clinical outcome.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available