4.7 Article

Hanging drop cultures of human testis and testis cancer samples: a model used to investigate activin treatment effects in a preserved niche

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 110, 期 10, 页码 2604-2614

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2014.160

关键词

tissue culture; ex vivo model; carcinoma in situ; seminoma; pathogenesis of testicular cancer; activin signalling

类别

资金

  1. Danish Cancer Society
  2. Familien Erichsens Mindefond and Dagmar Marshalls Fond
  3. Australian National Health and Medicinal Research Council [APP100248, APP1021156]
  4. Research Fund at Rigshospitalet grant [9615.06.1.15]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Testicular germ cell tumours of young adults, seminoma or non-seminomas, are preceded by a pre-invasive precursor, carcinoma in situ (CIS), understood to arise through differentiation arrest of embryonic germ cells. Knowledge about the malignant transformation of germ cells is currently limited by the lack of experimental models. The aim of this study was to establish an experimental tissue culture model to maintain normal and malignant germ cells within their niche and allow investigation of treatment effects. Methods: Human testis and testis cancer specimens from orchidectomies were cultured in 'hanging drops' and effects of activin A and follistatin treatment were investigated in seminoma cultures. Results: Testis fragments with normal spermatogenesis or CIS cells were cultured for 14 days with sustained proliferation of germ cells and CIS cells and without increased apoptosis. Seminoma cultures survived 7 days, with proliferating cells detectable during the first 5 days. Activin A treatment significantly reduced KIT transcript and protein levels in seminoma cultures, thereby demonstrating a specific treatment response. Conclusions: Hanging drop cultures of human testis and testis cancer samples can be employed to delineate mechanisms governing growth of normal, CIS and tumorigenic germ cells retained within their niche.

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