4.3 Article

Clinical significance of phenotyping and karyotyping of circulating tumor cells in patients with advanced gastric cancer

期刊

ONCOTARGET
卷 5, 期 16, 页码 6594-6602

出版社

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.2175

关键词

gastric cancer; circulating tumor cells; EpCAM-independent enrichment; HER2; aneuploidy

资金

  1. NSFC [81301323, 81172110]
  2. National High Technology Research and Development Program of China [2012AA 02A 504]
  3. Beijing Municipal Science & Technology Commission Program [Z11110706730000]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Karyotyping and phenotyping of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in therapeutic cancer patients is of particular clinical significance in terms of both identifying chemo-resistant CTC subtypes and understanding CTC evolution. METHODS: The integrated subtraction enrichment (SET) and immunostaining-fluorescence in situ hybridization (iFISH) platform was applied to detect and characterize CTCs in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Status of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expressing and aneuploidy of chromosome 8 in CTCs enriched from the patients was examined by SET-iFISH following clinical chemotherapy or HER2-targeted therapy. CellSearch system was applied as a reference control. RESULTS: Phenotyping of CTCs in HER2 positive AGC patients demonstrated that HER2(+) CTCs could be effectively eliminated in response to HER2-targeted therapy. Karyotyping of CTCs indicated that distinct CTCs with different ploidies of chromosomes 8 in AGC patients correlated to either sensitivity or resistance of paclitaxel or cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Examination of the copy number of chromosome 8 in CTCs provides a potential approach for predicting chemotherapeutic efficacy and monitoring chemo-resistance. CONCLUSIONS: Phenotyping and karyotyping of the enriched CTCs upon ploidy of chromosome 8 or HER2 expression is of clinical potential for monitoring chemoresistance and evaluating therapeutic efficacy for AGC patients.

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

4.3
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