4.4 Article

Observation of ovarian cancer stem cell behavior and investigation of potential mechanisms of drug resistance in three-dimensional cell culture

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOSCIENCE AND BIOENGINEERING
卷 118, 期 2, 页码 214-222

出版社

SOC BIOSCIENCE BIOENGINEERING JAPAN
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiosc.2014.01.008

关键词

Three-dimensional culture; Epithelial ovarian cancer; Cancer stem cells; Chemoresistance; Two-dimensional culture

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81071769, 81202372]
  2. 973 Program of China [2011CB933500]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cancer cells behave differently in a three-dimensional (3D) cell culture compared with in the conventional two-dimensional (2D) one. Accumulated evidences indicate that the characteristics of cancer stem cells (CSCs) are different from common cancer cells due to their ability to produce tumors and resist chemoradiation. The objective of this work was to observe CSC behavior and investigate the potential mechanisms of CSC drug resistance in 3D versus 2D in vitro environment. We first demonstrated that the CD44(+)CD117(+) cells isolated from the human epithelial ovarian cancer HO8910 cell line have the properties of CSCs that revealed faster growth, larger tumorsphere and stronger survival potential in the hypoxic environment in 3D cell culture as well as more powerful tumorigenicity in a xenograft mice than the HO8910 cells. The CD44(+)CD117(+)CSCs also exhibited high chemoresistance to anticancer drugs when the cells were incubated with 5-fluorouracil, cisplatin and carboplatin, respectively in 3D versus 2D environment. This might be associated with the high expression of ABCG2, ABCB1 and the high expression of MMP-2 and MMP-9 in CD44(+)CD117(+)CSCs. Overall, these results suggest the advantages of using 3D culture model to accurately display CSC behavior in vitro. 3D model may improve the efficacy of screening anticancer drugs for treatment of ovarian CSCs. (C) 2014, The Society for Biotechnology, Japan. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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