Der Urologe

, Volume 47, Issue 9, pp 1199–1204 | Cite as

Entwicklung eines dreidimensionalen Prostatakarzinomzellkulturmodells

  • V. Jung
  • M. Saar
  • R. Grobholz
  • M. Stöckle
  • G. Unteregger
  • J. Kamradt
Leitthema
First Online:

Zusammenfassung

Zahlreiche Erkenntnisse in der Prostatakarzinomforschung basieren auf Zellkulturergebnissen. Neuere genomische Untersuchungen zeigen jedoch, dass verwendete permanente Prostatakarzinomzelllinien sich deutlich von dem klinisch relevanten, primären Prostatakarzinom unterscheiden und damit die Übertragbarkeit dieser Zellkulturergebnisse auf die Klinik nur bedingt gegeben ist.

Das Arbeiten mit Primärzellkulturen aus Gewebestückchen von Prostatektomiepräparaten bietet eine sehr gute Alternative, doch die Etablierung von Primärkulturen gestaltet sich schwierig und recht aufwändig. In dieser Arbeit wurde ein Primärzellkulturmodell mit einem Invasionssystem kombiniert. Hiermit gelang es nicht nur invasiv wachsende Zellpopulationen aus Primärkulturen zu selektionieren, sondern auch diese Zellen in einem 3D-Modell unter der Ausbildung von Sphäroiden weiter zu kultivieren. Zur Charakterisierung dieser Zellpopulation haben wir vergleichende genomische Hybridisierungen durchgeführt, die zahlreiche genetische Alterationen aufzeigen. Das hier dargestellte Modell ermöglicht es erstmalig, invasive Zellklone aus primärem Prostatakarzinomgewebe zu gewinnen und durch Kultivierung für weitere Untersuchungen zu verwenden.

Schlüsselwörter

Prostatakarzinom Primärzellkultur Invasionsassay 3D-Kultur Komparative genomische Hybridisierung 

Development of a three-dimensional primary prostate cancer cell culture model

Abstract

Much prostate cancer research is based on cell culture results. Recent genomic studies found major differences between primary prostate cancer tissue and established prostate cancer cell lines, which calls into question the clinical relevance of study results based on cell cultures.

Using primary cultures of prostate cancer cells from prostatectomy specimens seems to be a reasonable solution, but primary cell cultures are much more difficult to establish. In this study, a primary cell culture model was combined with an invasion assay. With this combination it was possible not only to select invasive cell clones from the primary culture but also to culture these cells in a three-dimensional model, forming spheroids. A further characterization of this cell population was done by comparative genomic hybridization, showing numerous genetic alterations. The presented cell culture model offers, for the first time, an opportunity to isolate invasive growing cells from primary prostate cancer tissue and cultivate these cells for further analyses.

Keywords

Prostate cancer Primary cell culture Invasion assay 3D cell culture Comparative genomic hybridization 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Literatur

  1. 1.
    Alers JC, Rochat J, Krijtenburg PJ et al. (2000) Identification of genetic markers for prostatic cancer progression. Lab Invest 80: 931–942PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allgayer H, Manegold C, Grobholz R (2006) Establishing a tumor tissue bank. An interdisciplinary challange. Am J Cancer 5: 93–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bavik C, Coleman I, Dean JP et al. (2006) The gene expression program of prostate fibroblasts senescence modulates neoplastic epithelial cell proliferation through paracrine mechanisms. Cancer Res 66: 7994–8002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boonstra JJ, van der Velden AW, Beerens ECW et al. (2007) Mistaken identity of widely used esophageal adenocarcinoma cell line TE7. Cancer Res 67: 7996–8001PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bonkhoff H, Fixemer T, Hunsicker I, Remberger K (1999) Estrogen receptor expression in prostate cancer and premalignant prostatic lesions. Am J Pathol 155: 641–647PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cui J, Deubler DA, Rohr R et al. (1998) Chromosome 7 abnormalities in prostate cancer detected by dual-color fluorescence in situ hybridization. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 107: 51–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dawson LA, Maitland NJ, Turner AJ, Usmani BA (2004) Stromal-epithelial interactions influence prostate cancer cell invasion by altering the balance of metallopeptidase expression. Br J Cancer 90: 1577–1582PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Galle J, Loeffler M, Drasdo D (2005) Modeling the effect of deregulated proliferation and apoptosis on the growth dynamics of epithelial cell populations in vitro. Biophys J 88: 62–75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goo YA, Goodlett DR, Pascal LE et al. (2005) Stromal mesenchyme cell genes of the human prostate and bladder. BMC Urol 5: 17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jung V, Wullich B, Kamradt J et al. (2007) An improved in vitro model to characterize invasive growing cancer cells simultaneously by function and genetic aberrations. Toxicol In Vitro 21: 183–190PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ketter R, Zwergel T, Romanakis K et al. (1996) Selection toward diploid cells in prostatic carcinoma derived cell cultures. Prostate 28: 364–371PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Koenig JJ, van Dongen JW, Schroeder FH (1993) Preferential loss of abnormal prostate carcinoma cells by collagenase treatment. Cytometry 14: 805–810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Li W, Wu CL, Febbo PG, Olumi AF (2007) Stromally expressed c-Jun regulates proliferation of prostate epithelial cells. Am J Pathol 171: 1189–1198PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nakashiro K, Okamoto M, Hayashi Y, Oyasu R (2000) Hepatocyte growth factor secreted by prostate-derived stromal cells stimulate growth of androgen-independent human prostatic carcinoma cells. Am J Pathol 157: 795–803PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Padalecki SS, Troyer DA, Hansen MF et al. (2000) Identification of two distinct regions of allelic imbalance on chromosome 18q in metastatic prostate cancer. Int J Cancer 85: 654–658PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Peehl DM (2004) Are primary cultures realistic models of prostate cancer?. J Cell Biochem 91: 185–195PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Peehl DM (2005) Primary cell cultures as models of prostate cancer development. Endocrin Relat Cancer 12: 19–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tuxhorn J, Ayala GE, Smith MJ et al. (2002) Reactive stroma in human prostate cancer: Induction of myofibroblast phenotype and extracellular matrix remodeling. Clin Cancer Res 8: 2912–2923PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yang S, Pham LK, Liao CP et al. (2008) A novel bone morphogenetic protein signaling in heterotypic cell interactions in prostate cancer. Cancer Res 68: 198–205PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang H, Huang S, Shou J et al. (2006) Comparative analysis and integrative classification of NCI60 cell lines and primary tumors using gene rxpression prolfiling data. BMC Genomics 7(166): 1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wullich B, Riedinger S, Brinck U et al. (2004) Evidence for gains at 15q and 20q in brain metastases of prostate cancer. Cancer Genet Cytogen 154: 119–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zwergel T, Kakirman H, Schorr H et al. (1998) A new serial transfer explant cell culture system for human prostatic cancer tissues preventing selection toward diploid cells. Cancer Genet 101: 16–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Medizin Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. Jung
    • 1
  • M. Saar
    • 1
  • R. Grobholz
    • 2
  • M. Stöckle
    • 1
  • G. Unteregger
    • 1
  • J. Kamradt
    • 1
  1. 1.Klink für Urologie und KinderurologieUniversitätsklinikum des Saarlandes Homburg/SaarDeutschland
  2. 2.Institut für PathologieUniversitätsklinikumHomburg/SaarDeutschland

Personalised recommendations