4.7 Article

CD44+CD24- prostate cells are early cancer progenitor/stem cells that provide a model for patients with poor prognosis

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 98, 期 4, 页码 756-765

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604242

关键词

prostate cancer; tumour stem cells; genomics; CD44; CD24

类别

资金

  1. Intramural NIH HHS Funding Source: Medline
  2. NCI NIH HHS [N01-CO-12400, N01CO12400] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent evidence supports the hypothesis that cancer stem cells are responsible for tumour initiation and formation. Using flow cytometry, we isolated a population of CD44(+)CD24(-) prostate cells that display stem cell characteristics as well as gene expression patterns that predict overall survival in prostate cancer patients. CD44(+)CD24(-) cells form colonies in soft agar and form tumours in NOD/SCID mice when as few as 100 cells are injected. Furthermore, CD44(+)CD24(-) cells express genes known to be important in stem cell maintenance, such as BMI-1 and Oct-3/4. Moreover, we can maintain CD44(+)CD24(-) prostate stem-like cells as nonadherent spheres in serum-replacement media without substantially shifting gene expression. Addition of serum results in adherence to plastic and shifts gene expression patterns to resemble the differentiated parental cells. Thus, we propose that CD44(+)CD24(-) prostate cells are stem-like cells responsible for tumour initiation and we provide a genomic definition of these cells and the differentiated cells they give rise to. Furthermore, gene expression patterns of CD44(+)CD24(-) cells have a genomic signature that is predictive of poor patient prognosis. Therefore, CD44(+)CD24(-) LNCaP prostate cells offer an attractive model system to both explore the biology important to the maintenance and differentiation of prostate cancer stem cells as well as to develop the therapeutics, as the gene expression pattern in these cells is consistent with poor survival in prostate cancer 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

4.7
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