Cellular and genetic diversity in the progression of in situ human breast carcinomas to an invasive phenotype - PubMed (original) (raw)
. 2010 Feb;120(2):636-44.
doi: 10.1172/JCI40724. Epub 2010 Jan 25.
Affiliations
- PMID: 20101094
- PMCID: PMC2810089
- DOI: 10.1172/JCI40724
Cellular and genetic diversity in the progression of in situ human breast carcinomas to an invasive phenotype
So Yeon Park et al. J Clin Invest. 2010 Feb.
Abstract
Intratumor genetic heterogeneity is a key mechanism underlying tumor progression and therapeutic resistance. The prevailing model for explaining intratumor diversity, the clonal evolution model, has recently been challenged by proponents of the cancer stem cell hypothesis. To investigate this issue, we performed combined analyses of markers associated with cellular differentiation states and genotypic alterations in human breast carcinomas and evaluated diversity with ecological and evolutionary methods. Our analyses showed a high degree of genetic heterogeneity both within and between distinct tumor cell populations that were defined based on markers of cellular phenotypes including stem cell-like characteristics. In several tumors, stem cell-like and more-differentiated cancer cell populations were genetically distinct, leading us to question the validity of a simple differentiation hierarchy-based cancer stem cell model. The degree of diversity correlated with clinically relevant breast tumor subtypes and in some tumors was markedly different between the in situ and invasive cell populations. We also found that diversity measures were associated with clinical variables. Our findings highlight the importance of genetic diversity in intratumor heterogeneity and the value of analyzing tumors as distinct populations of cancer cells to more effectively plan treatments.
Figures
Figure 1. Cellular and genetic diversity in breast cancer defined by iFISH analysis.
A representative example (tumor 2) of HER2+ invasive ductal breast carcinoma with adjacent DCIS displaying a high degree of diversity for the expression of HER2, CD44, and CD24 and for copy number gain of ERBB2 and 8q24 based on immunohistochemical staining and iFISH, respectively. CD24 showed membrano-cytoplasmic expression in invasive tumor cells but apical membranous expression in DCIS. In iFISH, blue corresponds to CD24 or CD44 immunofluorescence; ERBB2 and 8q24-specific probes are red; and centromeric probes (chromosomes 17 and 8 for ERBB2 and 8q24, respectively) are green. Faint green and yellow are background autofluorescence. Scale bars: 10 μm; original magnification, ×400 (immunohistochemistry) and ×600 (iFISH).
Figure 2. Clonal evolution during in situ to invasive breast carcinoma progression detected by iFISH.
iFISH analyses using 11q13/CCDN1 (red) and chromosome 11 centromeric probe (green) in a luminal A subtype breast cancer (tumor 10). In the invasive areas, both CD44+ and CD24+ tumor cells (blue) display high-level amplification, whereas in adjacent DCIS, this is restricted to a subset of CD24+CD44+ tumor cells (dotted line), with the majority of the tumor demonstrating normal copy number for this locus. iFISH analysis of adjacent sections using 8q24 (red) and chromosome 8 centromeric probe (green) demonstrates normal (2n) copy numbers for 8q24 in both DCIS and invasive areas. Faint green and yellow are background autofluorescence. Yellow spots and lines are autofluorescent collagen fibers. Scale bars: 10 μm; original magnification, ×600.
Figure 3. Diversity for 8q24 copy number gain in breast tumors.
In basal-like tumors, CD24+ corresponds to CD44– cells, because no CD24 expression is seen in these cases. (A) Box plots depicting the distribution of 8q24 copy number gain defined as the ratio of signal observed for the 8q24-specific and centromeric probes in 100 individual cells in each of the 4 indicated tumor cell subpopulations. The filled circle represents the mean; boxes show the 25th to 75th percentiles; the horizontal lines inside the boxes represent the median; whiskers extend to the 10th and 90th percentiles; and outlying black circles are individual data points outside the 10th and 90th percentiles. Differences are seen between cell populations and also progression stages both for median copy number gain and for range of distribution. (B) Histograms and kernel density estimates depicting the distribution of cells with the indicated copy number ratio. Differences are seen between DCIS and invasive areas of the same tumor (e.g., tumor 4 [T4]) and also between CD24+ and CD44+ cells within the same compartment (e.g., T13A).
Figure 4. Diversity for 8q24 copy number gain in breast tumors defined by Shannon index and Whittaker plots.
In basal-like tumors, CD24+ corresponds to CD44– cells, because no CD24 expression is seen in these cases. (A) The Shannon index, H, indicating diversity within tumor cell subpopulations and tumors. For each tumor, 100 different cells for each of the 4 different types (IDC CD24+, IDC CD44+, DCIS CD24+, and DCIS CD44+) were analyzed, and their Shannon indices are depicted in dark blue, dark red, light blue, and light red, respectively. Higher score indicates higher diversity. Basal-like tumors are all uniformly highly diverse for 8q24, whereas a subset of HER2+ and luminal A tumors show a lower degree of diversity. (B) Whittaker plots (rank-abundance plots) depicting the abundance of unique cancer cells.
Figure 5. Diversity for different chromosomal probes in breast tumor subtypes and their association with histopathologic features.
(A) Hierarchical clustering of tumor samples based on the Shannon index for the 8q24 probe. Heatmap and dendrograms displaying relatedness of cell types and tumor samples based on their Shannon indices. Red and yellow correspond to high and low diversity, respectively, whereas white represents median levels. Tumor names are colored according to subtype: red, basal-like; pink, HER2+; and blue, luminal A. The color key indicates the correlation between diversity and colors. (B) Differences in diversity for different chromosomal regions in the same tumor. Histograms of copy number ratios in 4 distinct cell types for 3 different chromosomal probes are depicted in 2 individual tumors.
Comment in
- The role of genetic diversity in cancer.
Merlo LM, Maley CC. Merlo LM, et al. J Clin Invest. 2010 Feb;120(2):401-3. doi: 10.1172/JCI42088. Epub 2010 Jan 25. J Clin Invest. 2010. PMID: 20101092 Free PMC article.
Similar articles
- Analysis of chromosome aneuploidy in breast carcinoma progression by using fluorescence in situ hybridization.
Mendelin J, Grayson M, Wallis T, Visscher DW. Mendelin J, et al. Lab Invest. 1999 Apr;79(4):387-93. Lab Invest. 1999. PMID: 10211991 - The role of HER2/neu overexpression/amplification in the progression of ductal carcinoma in situ to invasive carcinoma of the breast.
Latta EK, Tjan S, Parkes RK, O'Malley FP. Latta EK, et al. Mod Pathol. 2002 Dec;15(12):1318-25. doi: 10.1097/01.MP.0000038462.62634.B1. Mod Pathol. 2002. PMID: 12481013 - Characterization of extensive genetic alterations in ductal carcinoma in situ by fluorescence in situ hybridization and molecular analysis.
Murphy DS, Hoare SF, Going JJ, Mallon EE, George WD, Kaye SB, Brown R, Black DM, Keith WN. Murphy DS, et al. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995 Nov 15;87(22):1694-704. doi: 10.1093/jnci/87.22.1694. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995. PMID: 7473818 - Intratumor Heterogeneity in Breast Cancer.
Beca F, Polyak K. Beca F, et al. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2016;882:169-89. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-22909-6_7. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2016. PMID: 26987535 Review. - Biological progression of breast cancer and clinical implications.
Vici P, Sergi D, Pizzuti L, Vincenzoni C, Baiocco E, Mancini E, Lopez M, Vizza E, Lauro LD. Vici P, et al. Clin Ter. 2011;162(4):297-9. Clin Ter. 2011. PMID: 21912815 Review.
Cited by
- The Spiral Model of Evolution: Stable Life Forms of Organisms and Unstable Life Forms of Cancers.
Kasperski A, Heng HH. Kasperski A, et al. Int J Mol Sci. 2024 Aug 23;25(17):9163. doi: 10.3390/ijms25179163. Int J Mol Sci. 2024. PMID: 39273111 Free PMC article. Review. - Heterogeneous Evolution of Breast Cancer Cells-An Endogenous Molecular-Cellular Network Study.
Li T, Chen YC, Ao P. Li T, et al. Biology (Basel). 2024 Jul 26;13(8):564. doi: 10.3390/biology13080564. Biology (Basel). 2024. PMID: 39194502 Free PMC article. - Progression from ductal carcinoma in situ to invasive breast cancer: molecular features and clinical significance.
Wang J, Li B, Luo M, Huang J, Zhang K, Zheng S, Zhang S, Zhou J. Wang J, et al. Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2024 Apr 3;9(1):83. doi: 10.1038/s41392-024-01779-3. Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2024. PMID: 38570490 Free PMC article. Review. - Decoding the basis of histological variation in human cancer.
Fujii M, Sekine S, Sato T. Fujii M, et al. Nat Rev Cancer. 2024 Feb;24(2):141-158. doi: 10.1038/s41568-023-00648-5. Epub 2023 Dec 22. Nat Rev Cancer. 2024. PMID: 38135758 Review. - A multiscale model of the role of microenvironmental factors in cell segregation and heterogeneity in breast cancer development.
Romero-Arias JR, González-Castro CA, Ramírez-Santiago G. Romero-Arias JR, et al. PLoS Comput Biol. 2023 Nov 22;19(11):e1011673. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011673. eCollection 2023 Nov. PLoS Comput Biol. 2023. PMID: 37992135 Free PMC article.
References
- Heppner GH, Loveless SE, Miller FR, Mahoney KH, Fulton AM. Mammary tumor heterogeneity. Symp Fundam Cancer Res. 1983;36:209–221. - PubMed
- Heppner GH, Miller BE. Tumor heterogeneity: biological implications and therapeutic consequences. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 1983;2(1):5–23. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous