4.8 Article

Evolution of human BCR-ABL1 lymphoblastic leukaemia-initiating cells

期刊

NATURE
卷 469, 期 7330, 页码 362-+

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/nature09733

关键词

-

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR)
  2. Pew Charitable Trusts
  3. Stem Cell Network of Canadian National Centres of Excellence
  4. Canadian Cancer Society
  5. Terry Fox Foundation, Genome Canada through the Ontario Genomics Institute
  6. Ontario Institute for Cancer Research
  7. province of Ontario
  8. Leukemia and Lymphoma Society
  9. Canadian Institutes for Health Research
  10. Canada Research Chair
  11. American and Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities of St Jude Children's Research Hospital
  12. Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care (OMOHLTC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many tumours are composed of genetically diverse cells; however, little is known about how diversity evolves or the impact that diversity has on functional properties. Here, using xenografting and DNA copy number alteration (CNA) profiling of human BCR-ABL1 lymphoblastic leukaemia, we demonstrate that genetic diversity occurs in functionally defined leukaemia-initiating cells and that many diagnostic patient samples contain multiple genetically distinct leukaemia-initiating cell subclones. Reconstructing the subclonal genetic ancestry of several samples by CNA profiling demonstrated a branching multi-clonal evolution model of leukaemogenesis, rather than linear succession. For some patient samples, the predominant diagnostic clone repopulated xenografts, whereas in others it was outcompeted by minor subclones. Reconstitution with the predominant diagnosis clone was associated with more aggressive growth properties in xenografts, deletion of CDKN2A and CDKN2B, and a trend towards poorer patient outcome. Our findings link clonal diversity with leukaemia-initiating-cell function and underscore the importance of developing therapies that eradicate all intratumoral subclones.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据