Advertisement

Hormones and Cancer

, Volume 7, Issue 4, pp 236–240 | Cite as

Patient-Derived Prostate Cancer: from Basic Science to the Clinic

  • Gail P. Risbridger
  • Renea A. Taylor
Review

Abstract

Systems that model cancer form the backbone of research discovery, and their accuracy and validity are a key determinant to ensure successful translation. In many tumour types, patient-derived specimens are an important model of choice for pre-clinical drug development. In this review, we consider why this has been such a challenge for prostate cancer, resulting in relatively few patient-derived xenografts (PDXs) of prostatic tumours compared to breast cancers, for example. Nevertheless, with only a few patient specimens and PDXs, we exemplify in three vignettes how important new clinical insights were obtained resulting in benefit for future men with prostate cancer.

Keywords

Prostate Cancer Androgen Receptor Neuroendocrine Carcinoma BRCA2 Mutation Carrier Abiraterone 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Funding

GP Risbridger and RA Taylor are supported by research fellowships from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (ID: 1102752) and the Victorian Cancer Agency (MCRF15023).

References

  1. 1.
    Locke JA et al (2008) Androgen levels increase by intratumoral de novo steroidogenesis during progression of castration-resistant prostate cancer. Cancer Res 68(15):6407–6415CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Knudsen KE, Penning TM (2010) Partners in crime: deregulation of AR activity and androgen synthesis in prostate cancer. Trends Endocrinol Metab 21(5):315–324CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    de Bono JS et al (2011) Abiraterone and increased survival in metastatic prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 364(21):1995–2005CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Scher HI et al (2012) Increased survival with enzalutamide in prostate cancer after chemotherapy. N Engl J Med 367(13):1187–1197CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Peehl DM (2005) Primary cell cultures as models of prostate cancer development. Endocr Relat Cancer 12(1):19–47CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vela I, Chen Y (2015) Prostate cancer organoids: a potential new tool for testing drug sensitivity. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 15(3):261–263CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shen MM (2015) Illuminating the properties of prostate luminal progenitors. Cell Stem Cell 17(6):644–646CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gao D et al (2014) Organoid cultures derived from patients with advanced prostate cancer. Cell 159(1):176–187CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Garralda E et al (2014) Integrated next-generation sequencing and avatar mouse models for personalized cancer treatment. Clin Cancer Res 20(9):2476–2484CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hidalgo M et al (2014) Patient-derived xenograft models: an emerging platform for translational cancer research. Cancer Discov 4(9):998–1013CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Toivanen R et al (2012) Breaking through a roadblock in prostate cancer research: an update on human model systems. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 131(3-5):122–131CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lin D et al (2010) Development of metastatic and non-metastatic tumor lines from a patient’s prostate cancer specimen-identification of a small subpopulation with metastatic potential in the primary tumor. Prostate 70(15):1636–1644CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Michiel Sedelaar JP, Dalrymple SS, Isaacs JT (2013) Of mice and men—warning: intact versus castrated adult male mice as xenograft hosts are equivalent to hypogonadal versus abiraterone treated aging human males, respectively. Prostate 73(12):1316–1325CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zhao H et al (2010) Tissue slice grafts: an in vivo model of human prostate androgen signaling. Am J Pathol 177(1):229–239CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Toivanen R et al (2011) Brief report: a bioassay to identify primary human prostate cancer repopulating cells. Stem Cells 29(8):1310–1314CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wang Y et al. (2015) Subrenal capsule grafting technology in human cancer modeling and translational cancer research. DifferentiationGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lin D et al (2014) High fidelity patient-derived xenografts for accelerating prostate cancer discovery and drug development. Cancer Res 74(4):1272–1283CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Risbridger GP (2015) Prostate cancer: novel xenografts in mice—a new wave of preclinical models. Nat Rev Urol 12(10):540–541CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Saar M et al (2015) Orthotopic tumorgrafts in nude mice: a new method to study human prostate cancer. Prostate 75(14):1526–1537CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lawrence MG et al (2013) A preclinical xenograft model of prostate cancer using human tumors. Nat Protoc 8(5):836–848CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Maund SL, Nolley R, Peehl DM (2014) Optimization and comprehensive characterization of a faithful tissue culture model of the benign and malignant human prostate. Lab Invest 94(2):208–221CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Alsop K et al. (2016) An effective community based model of rapid autopsy in end-stage cancer patients. Nat Biotechnol, (Accepted for Publication)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lawrence MG et al (2015) Establishment of primary patient-derived xenografts of palliative TURP specimens to study castrate-resistant prostate cancer. Prostate 75(13):1475–1483CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    True LD et al (2002) A neuroendocrine/small cell prostate carcinoma xenograft—LuCaP 49. Am J Pathol 161(2):705–715CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Buhler KR, QJ, Liu AY, Wang H, Ellis WJ, Vessella RL (1997) LuCaP 35: an androgen inducible, prostate-specific antigen producing human prostate cancer xenograft. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res (38:1600)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ellis WJ et al (1996) Characterization of a novel androgen-sensitive, prostate-specific antigen-producing prostatic carcinoma xenograft: LuCaP 23. Clin Cancer Res 2(6):1039–1048PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Corey E et al (2002) Establishment and characterization of osseous prostate cancer models: intra-tibial injection of human prostate cancer cells. Prostate 52(1):20–33CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Valta MP et al. (2016) Spheroid culture of LuCaP 136 patient-derived xenograft enables versatile preclinical models of prostate cancer. Clin Exp MetastasisGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Saar M et al (2014) Spheroid culture of LuCaP 147 as an authentic preclinical model of prostate cancer subtype with SPOP mutation and hypermutator phenotype. Cancer Lett 351(2):272–280CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Li ZG et al (2008) Androgen receptor-negative human prostate cancer cells induce osteogenesis in mice through FGF9-mediated mechanisms. J Clin Invest 118(8):2697–2710CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Thorne H et al (2011) Decreased prostate cancer-specific survival of men with BRCA2 mutations from multiple breast cancer families. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 4(7):1002–1010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Risbridger GP et al (2015) Patient-derived xenografts reveal that intraductal carcinoma of the prostate is a prominent pathology in BRCA2 mutation carriers with prostate cancer and correlates with poor prognosis. Eur Urol 67(3):496–503CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kimura K et al (2014) Prognostic value of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate in radical prostatectomy specimens. Prostate 74(6):680–687CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    McNeal JE, Yemoto CE (1996) Spread of adenocarcinoma within prostatic ducts and acini. Morphologic and clinical correlations. Am J Surg Pathol 20(7):802–814CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wang Y et al (2005) Development and characterization of efficient xenograft models for benign and malignant human prostate tissue. Prostate 64(2):149–159CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wang Y et al (2005) An orthotopic metastatic prostate cancer model in SCID mice via grafting of a transplantable human prostate tumor line. Lab Invest 85(11):1392–1404CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lin D et al (2015) Identification of DEK as a potential therapeutic target for neuroendocrine prostate cancer. Oncotarget 6(3):1806–1820CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Beltran H et al. (2016) Divergent clonal evolution of castration-resistant neuroendocrine prostate cancer. Nat MedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kohli M et al (2015) Mutational landscapes of sequential prostate metastases and matched patient derived xenografts during enzalutamide therapy. PLoS One 10(12), e0145176CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kumar A et al. (2016) Substantial interindividual and limited intraindividual genomic diversity among tumors from men with metastatic prostate cancer. Nat MedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Monash Partners Comprehensive Cancer Consortium and Cancer Program, Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Department of Anatomy and Developmental BiologyMonash UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.Monash Partners Comprehensive Cancer Consortium and Cancer Program, Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Department of PhysiologyMonash UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations