4.6 Article

Malignant Transformation of Non-Neoplastic Barrett's Epithelial Cells through Well-Defined Genetic Manipulations

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 5, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013093

关键词

-

资金

  1. Office of Medical Research, Department of Veterans Affairs
  2. National Institutes of Health [R01-DK63621, R01-CA134571]
  3. Caris LifeSciences Inc

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Human Barrett's cancer cell lines have numerous, poorly-characterized genetic abnormalities and, consequently, those lines have limited utility as models for studying the early molecular events in carcinogenesis. Cell lines with well-defined genetic lesions that recapitulate various stages of neoplastic progression in Barrett's esophagus would be most useful for such studies. Methodology/Principal Findings: To develop such model cell lines, we started with telomerase-immortalized, nonneoplastic Barrett's epithelial (BAR-T) cells, which are spontaneously deficient in p16, and proceeded to knock down p53 using RNAi, to activate Ras by introducing oncogenic H-Ras(G12V), or both. BAR-T cells infected with either p53 RNAi or oncogenic H-Ras(G12V) alone maintained cell-to-cell contact inhibition and did not exhibit anchorage-independent growth in soft agar. In contrast, the combination of p53 RNAi knockdown with expression of oncogenic H-Ras(G12V) transformed the p16-deficient BAR-T cells, as evidenced by their loss of contact inhibition, by their formation of colonies in soft agar, and by their generation of tumors in immunodeficient mice. Conclusions/Significance: Through these experiments, we have generated a number of transformed and non-transformed cell lines with well-characterized genetic abnormalities recapitulating various stages of carcinogenesis in Barrett's esophagus. These lines should be useful models for the study of carcinogenesis in Barrett's esophagus, and for testing the efficacy of chemopreventive and chemotherapeutic agents.

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

4.6
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