4.3 Article

Heterogeneity in cancer cells: variation in drug response in different primary and secondary colorectal cancer cell lines in vitro

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11626-016-0126-x

关键词

Colorectal cancer; Fluorouracil; Oxaliplatin; Drug combination; Chou-Talalay

资金

  1. University of Malaya Research University [RG534-13HTM]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tumor heterogeneity may give rise to differential responses to chemotherapy drugs. Therefore, unraveling tumor heterogeneity has an implication for biomarker discovery and cancer therapeutics. To test this phenomenon, we investigated the differential responses of three secondary colorectal cancer cell lines of different origins (HCT116, HT29, and SW620 cells) and four novel primary cell lines obtained from different colorectal cancer patients to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and oxaliplatin (L-OHP) and explored the differences in gene expression among the primary cell lines in response to exposure to cytotoxic drugs. Cells were exposed to different doses of 5-FU and L-OHP separately or in combinations of equitoxic drug or equimolar drug ratios (median effect of Chou-Talalay principle). Cell viability was assessed using MTT assay and the respective IC50 values were determined. Changes in gene expression in primary cell lines after exposure to the same drug doses were compared using real-time PCR array. The sensitivities (IC50) of different cell lines, both secondary and primary, to 5-FU and L-OHP were significantly different, whether in monotherapy or combined treatment. Primary cell lines needed higher doses to reach IC50. There were variations in gene expression among the primary cell lines of different chemosensitivities to the challenge of the same combined dose of 5-FU and L-OHP. The results confirm the heterogeneous nature of colorectal cancer cells from different patient tumors. Studies using primary cancer cells established from patient's tumors rather than secondary cell lines will more closely reflect the actual character of the disease.

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