Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Low microchimeric cell density in tumors suggests alternative antineoplastic mechanism

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Medical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Microchimerism has generally been shown to protect against cancer (Gilmore et al. in Exp Hematol 36(9):1073–1077, 2008). The mechanism of how this occurs is an area of intense study, as it may lead to new cancer treatments. The leading theory is that microchimeric cells perform immune surveillance by directly fighting cancerous cells and that they also act as stem cells, repairing damaged tissue (Khosrotehrani et al. in JAMA 292:75–80, 2004). However, there is conflicting evidence to support this theory. Several small studies have found few microchimeric cells in tumor tissue (Gadi in Breast Cancer Res Treat 121(1):241–244, 2010; Cirello et al. in Int J Cancer 126:2874–2878, 2010), while another study contradicted these findings by showing microchimeric cells clustered around tumor tissue (O’Donoghue et al. in Reprod Biomed Online 16:382–390, 2008). To date, we have designed the largest and broadest study to investigate this question of whether microchimeric cells really do cluster at tumor tissue. We analyzed 245 samples from a broad range of cancer types. Using PCR for the male chromosome marker TSPY1, we identified only 12 out of 245 samples with microchimerism for a rate of 4.9% (95% confidence interval 2.2–7.6%). Five of these samples were confirmed using Y fluorescence in situ hybridization. This rate of 4.9% microchimerism is the lowest reported in any study. The low percentage of microchimerism observed in our broad study suggests that microchimeric cells do not invade tumors to fight off neoplasm.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kamper-Jorgensen M, Biggar RJ, Tjonneland A, Hjalgrim H, Kroman N, Rostgaard K, et al. Opposite effects of microchimerism on breast and colon cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48(14):2227–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gilmore GL, Haq B, Shadduck RK, Jasthy SL, Lister J. Fetal-maternal microchimerism in normal parous females and parous female cancer patients. Exp Hematol. 2008;36(9):1073–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cirello V, et al. Fetal cell microchimerism in papillary thyroid cancer: studies in peripheral blood and tissues. Int J Cancer. 2010;126:2874–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. O’Donoghue K, Sultan HA, Al-Allaf FA, Anderson JR, Wyatt-Ashmead J, Fisk NM. Microchimeric fetal cells cluster at sites of tissue injury in lung decades after pregnancy. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008;16:382–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gadi VK. Fetal microchimerism in breast from women with and without breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;121(1):241–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Khosrotehrani K, Johnson KL, Cha DH, Salomon RN, Bianchi DW. Transfer of fetal cells with multilineage potential to maternal tissue. JAMA. 2004;292:75–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gadi VK, Nelson JL. Fetal microchimerism in women with breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2007;67:9035–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Dr. Dan Mayer for statistical review.

Funding

Funding was supplied through the Molecular Pathology Core Facility established through the COBRE CCRD award to Rhode Island Hospital (NIH/NCRR #P20RR017695 and NIH/NIGMS #P20GM103421).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Timothy W. Jolis.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

The Lifespan Institutional Review Board granted approval for the project with a waiver of consent for tissue review. Tissue was provided by the COBRE Tissue Bank.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jolis, T.W., Brucker, B.M., Schorl, C. et al. Low microchimeric cell density in tumors suggests alternative antineoplastic mechanism. Med Oncol 34, 65 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-017-0921-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-017-0921-6

Keywords

Navigation