4.2 Article

CD133/CD15 defines distinct cell subpopulations with differential in vitro clonogenic activity and stem cell-related gene expression profile in in vitro propagated glioblastoma multiforme-derived cell line with a PNET-like component

期刊

FOLIA NEUROPATHOLOGICA
卷 50, 期 4, 页码 357-368

出版社

TERMEDIA PUBLISHING HOUSE LTD
DOI: 10.5114/fn.2012.32365

关键词

GBM; PNET; brain tumour stem-like cell; CD133; clonogenicity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), as many other solid tumours, contains a subpopulation of cells termed cancer stem-like cells responsible for the initiation and propagation of tumour growth. However, a unique immunophenotype/surface antigen composition for the clear identification of brain tumour stem cells (BTSC) has not yet been found. Here we report a novel code of cell surface markers for the identification of different cell subpopulations in neurospheres derived from a GBM with a primitive neuroectodermal tumour (PNET) -like component (GBM-PNET). These subgroups differ in their CD133/CD15 expression pattern and resemble cells with different stem-like genotype and developmental pathway activation levels. Strikingly, clonogenic analysis of cultures differentially expressing the investigated markers enabled the identification of distinct subpopulations of cells endowed with stem cell characteristics. High clonogenicity could be found in CD133(-)/CD15(-) and CD133(+)/CD15(+) but not in CD133(-)/CD15(+) cells. Moreover, cell subpopulotions with pronounced clonogenic growth were characterized by high expression of stem cell-related genes. Interestingly, these observations were unique for GBM-PNET and differed from ordinary GBM cultures derived from tumours lacking a PNET component. This work elucidates the complex molecular heterogeneity of in vitro propagated glioblastoma-derived cells and potentially contributes to the development of novel diagnostic modalities aiming at the identification of the brain tumour stem-like cell population in a subgroup of GBMs.

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

4.2
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