4.7 Article

Type I collagen inhibits differentiation and promotes a stem cell-like phenotype in human colorectal carcinoma cells

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 101, 期 2, 页码 320-326

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605143

关键词

colorectal cancer; cancer stem cell; integrin; epithelial-mesenchymal transition; collagen; CD49b

类别

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust [060688]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Human colorectal cancer is caused by mutations and is thought to be maintained by a population of cancer stem cells. Further phenotypic changes occurring at the invasive edge suggest that colon cancer cells are also regulated by their microenvironment. Type I collagen, a promoter of the malignant phenotype in pancreatic carcinoma cells, is highly expressed at the invasive front of human colorectal cancer. METHODS: This study investigates the role of type I collagen in specifying the colorectal cancer cell phenotype. The effect of type I collagen on morphology, localisation of cell-cell adhesion proteins, differentiation and stem cell-like characteristics was examined in a panel of human colorectal carcinoma cell lines. RESULTS: Human colorectal carcinoma cells grown on type I collagen in serum-free medium show an epithelial-mesenchymal-like transition (EMT-like), assuming a more flattened less cohesive morphology. Type I collagen downregulates E-cadherin and beta-catenin at cell-cell junctions. Furthermore, type I collagen inhibits differentiation, increases clonogenicity and promotes expression of stem cell markers CD133 and Bmi1. Type I collagen effects were partially abrogated by a function-blocking antibody to alpha 2 integrin. CONCLUSION: Together, these results indicate that type I collagen promotes expression of a stem cell-like phenotype in human colorectal cancer cells likely through alpha 2 beta 1 integrin. British Journal of Cancer ( 2009) 101, 320-326. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6605143 www.bjcancer.com Published online 30 June 2009 (C) 2009 Cancer Research UK

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