4.6 Article

A Small Molecule (Pluripotin) as a Tool for Studying Cancer Stem Cell Biology: Proof of Concept

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 8, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0057099

关键词

-

资金

  1. Division for Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  2. Center for Cancer Research at the National Cancer Institute
  3. NCI Contract [HHSN261200800001E]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Cancer stem cells (CSC) are thought to be responsible for tumor maintenance and heterogeneity. Bona fide CSC purified from tumor biopsies are limited in supply and this hampers study of CSC biology. Furthermore, purified stem-like CSC subpopulations from existing tumor lines are unstable in culture. Finding a means to overcome these technical challenges would be a useful goal. In a first effort towards this, we examined whether a chemical probe that promotes survival of murine embryonic stem cells without added exogenous factors can alter functional characteristics in extant tumor lines in a fashion consistent with a CSC phenotype. Methodology/Principal Findings: The seven tumor lines of the NCI60 colon subpanel were exposed to SC-1 (pluripotin), a dual kinase and GTPase inhibitor that promotes self-renewal, and then examined for tumorigenicity under limiting dilution conditions and clonogenic activity in soft agar. A statistically significant increase in tumor formation following SC-1 treatment was observed (p<0.04). Cloning efficiencies and expression of putative CSC surface antigens (CD133 and CD44) were also increased. SC-1 treatment led to sphere formation in some colon tumor lines. Finally, SC-1 inhibited in vitro kinase activity of RSK2, and another RSK2 inhibitor increased colony formation implicating a role for this kinase in eliciting a CSC phenotype. Conclusions/Significance: These findings validate a proof of concept study exposure of extant tumor lines to a small molecule may provide a tractable in vitro model for understanding CSC biology.

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

4.6
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