» Articles » PMID: 20578247

Local Regulation of Human Breast Xenograft Models

Overview
Journal J Cell Physiol
Specialties Cell Biology
Physiology
Date 2010 Jun 26
PMID 20578247
Citations 29
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Breast cancer studies implant human cancer cells under the renal capsule, subcutaneously, or orthotopically and often use estrogen supplementation and immune suppressants (etoposide) in xenograft mouse models. However, cell behavior is significantly impacted by signals from the local microenvironment. Therefore, we investigated how the combinatorial effect of the location of injection and procedural differences affected xenograft characteristics. Patient-derived breast cancer cells were injected into mouse abdominal or thoracic mammary glands +/- estrogen and/or etoposide pretreatment. Abdominal xenografts had increased tumor incidence and volume, and decreased latency (P < 0.001) compared to thoracic tumors. No statistically significant difference in tumor volume was found in abdominal xenografts treated +/- estrogen or etoposide; however, etoposide suppressed tumor volume in thoracic xenografts (P < 0.02). The combination of estrogen and etoposide significantly decreased tumor incidence in both sites. In addition, mice treated +/- estradiol were injected orthotopically or subcutaneously with well-characterized breast cancer cell lines (MCF7, ZR75-1, MDA MB-231, or MCF10Ca1h). Orthotopic injection increased tumor volume; growth varied with estrogen supplementation. Location also altered methylation status of several breast cancer-related gene promoters. Lastly, vascularization of orthotopic tumors was significantly enhanced compared to subcutaneous tumors. These data suggest that optimal xenograft success occurs with orthotopic abdominal injections and illustrate molecular details of the compelling influence of the local microenvironment on in vivo models.

Citing Articles

Rat Models of Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer.

Nicotra R, Lutz C, Messal H, Jonkers J J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia. 2024; 29(1):12.

PMID: 38913216 PMC: 11196369. DOI: 10.1007/s10911-024-09566-0.


CBD Inhibits In Vivo Development of Human Breast Cancer Tumors.

Garcia-Morales L, Mendoza-Rodriguez M, Tapia Ramirez J, Meza I Int J Mol Sci. 2023; 24(17).

PMID: 37686042 PMC: 10488207. DOI: 10.3390/ijms241713235.


SCUBE2 mediates bone metastasis of luminal breast cancer by modulating immune-suppressive osteoblastic niches.

Wu Q, Tian P, He D, Jia Z, He Y, Luo W Cell Res. 2023; 33(6):464-478.

PMID: 37142671 PMC: 10235122. DOI: 10.1038/s41422-023-00810-6.


Translation Potential and Challenges of In Vitro and Murine Models in Cancer Clinic.

Long Y, Xie B, Shen H, Wen D Cells. 2022; 11(23).

PMID: 36497126 PMC: 9741314. DOI: 10.3390/cells11233868.


Patient-Derived Xenograft Models in Breast Cancer Research.

Na D, Moon H Adv Exp Med Biol. 2021; 1187:283-301.

PMID: 33983584 DOI: 10.1007/978-981-32-9620-6_14.


References
1.
Singh-Ranger G, Salhab M, Mokbel K . The role of cyclooxygenase-2 in breast cancer: review. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007; 109(2):189-98. DOI: 10.1007/s10549-007-9641-5. View

2.
Visonneau S, Cesano A, Torosian M, Miller E, Santoli D . Growth characteristics and metastatic properties of human breast cancer xenografts in immunodeficient mice. Am J Pathol. 1998; 152(5):1299-311. PMC: 1858587. View

3.
Booth B, Mack D, Androutsellis-Theotokis A, McKay R, Boulanger C, Smith G . The mammary microenvironment alters the differentiation repertoire of neural stem cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008; 105(39):14891-6. PMC: 2567463. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0803214105. View

4.
Stuelten C, Barbul A, Busch J, Sutton E, Katz R, Sato M . Acute wounds accelerate tumorigenesis by a T cell-dependent mechanism. Cancer Res. 2008; 68(18):7278-82. PMC: 2766858. DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-1842. View

5.
Xie X, Brunner N, Jensen G, Albrectsen J, Gotthardsen B, Rygaard J . Comparative studies between nude and scid mice on the growth and metastatic behavior of xenografted human tumors. Clin Exp Metastasis. 1992; 10(3):201-10. DOI: 10.1007/BF00132752. View