Advertisement

Biological and Clinical Implications of the Stem Cell Concept in Human Malignancy

  • Ronald N. Buick

Abstract

Further advances in cancer biology and therapeutics depend, among other things, on the development of knowledge of the organization and biological potential of cells within tumors. Two widely supported but extreme views of tumor cell organization have been expressed: 1) the view of tumors as consisting of undifferentiated cells, each with potential for tumor development but with phenotypic heterogeneity imposed by genetic and epigenetic events. Also, often superimposed on this model is the notion of “de-differentiation” which implies that carcinogenesis can occur in differentiated cells which can subsequently re-express the phenotype of more primitive cells. 2) The view of tumors as representing a form of the normal differentiating tissue from which the tumor derived. This implies heterogeneity of cells within tumors with respect to differentiation, and also implies that the likely target for carcinogenesis is the stem cell population. Much of the support for the former view is based on study of transplantable tumors in animals while the importance of cell differentiation has been reinforced mostly by study of spontaneous animal or human tumors.

Keywords

Stem Cell Clonogenic Assay Tumor Stem Cell Acute Myeloblastic Leukemia Tumor Cell Population 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    C. S. Potten, R. Schofield, and L. G. Lajtha, A Comparison of Cell Replacement in Bone Marrow, Testis, and Three Regions of Surface Epithelium, Biochim. Biophys. Acta 560: 281 (1979).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    C. P. Leblond and H. Cheng, Identification of Stem Cells in the Small Intestine of the Mouse, in: “Stem Cells of Renewing Populations,” A. B. Cairnie, P. K. Lal_a, and D. E. Osmond, eds., Academic Press, New York (1975).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    W. J. Mackillop, A. Ciampi, J. E. Till, and R. N. Buick, A Stem Cell Model for Human Tumor Growth: Implications for Tumor Cell Clonogenic Assays, J. Nat. Cancer. Inst. 70: 9 (1983).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. E. Till and E. A. McCulloch, A Direct Measurement of the Radiation Sensitivity of Normal Mouse Bone Marrow, Radiat. Res. 18: 96 (1961).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. E. Till, E. A. McCulloch, and L. Siminovitch, A Stochastic Model of Stem Cell Proliferation, Based on the Growth of Spleen Colony-forming Cells, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 51: 2. 9 (1964).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. S. Bush and R. P. Hill, The Kinetics of Cell Reproductive Inhibition, Advances in Radiation Research, Biology and Medicine, 1: 397 (1973).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    R. S. Bush and R. P. Hill, Biologic Discussions Augmenting Radiation Effects and Model Systems, Laryngoscope 85: 1119 (1975).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Ciampi, L. Kates, R. N. Buick, Y. Kruikov, and J. E. Till, A Multitype Galton-Watson Process as a Model for Proliferating Human Factor Cell Populations Derived from Stem Cells, Cell and Tissue Kinetics, in press (1986).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. Selby, R. N. Buick, and I. Tannock, A Critical. Appraisal of the “Human Tumor Stem Cell Assay,” N. Eng. J. Med. 308: 129 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. A-R. Hanauske, U. Hanauske, and D. D. Von Hoff, The Human Tumor Cloning Assay in Cancer Research and Therapy, Current Prob. in Cancer 9:4 (1985).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. N. Buick and M. N. Pollack, Perspectives on Clonogenic Tumor Cells, Stem Cells and Oncogenes, Cancer Res. 44: 4904 (1984).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    R. N. Buick, M. D. Minden, and E. A. McCulloch, Self-renewal in Culture of Proliferative Blast Progenitor Cells in Acute Myeloblastic Leukemia, Blood 54: 95 (1979).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    R. N. Buick and W. J. Mackillop, Measurement of Self-renewal in Culture of Clonogenic Cells from Human Ovarian Carcinoma, Br. J. Cancer 44: 349 (1981).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    S. P. Thomson and F. L. Meyskens, Jr., Method for Measurement of Self-renewal Capacity of Clonogenic Cells from Biopsies of Metastatic Human Malignant Melanoma, Cancer Res. 42: 460 (1982).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    J-P. Bizzari and W. J. Mackillop, The Estimation of Self-renewal in the Clonogenic Cells of Human Solid Tumors: A Comparison of Secondary Plating-efficiency and Colony Size, Br. J. Cancer 52: 189 (1985).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    K. M. Tveit, O. Fodstad, and A. Pihl, The Usefulness of Human Tumor Cell Lines in the Study of Chemosensitivity. A Study of Malignant Melanomas, Int. J. Cancer 28: 403 (1981).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    D. N. Carney, A. F. Gazdar, P. A. Bunn, and J. G. Guccion, Demonstration of the Stem Cell Nature of Clonogenic Tumor Cells from Lung Cancer Patients, Stem Cells 1: 149 (1981).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    R. N. Buick, Cell Heterogeneity in Human Ovarian Carcinoma, J. Cell Physiol. (Suppl. 3)3: 117 (1984).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    F. L. Meyskens, Jr., S. P. Thomson, and T. E. Moon, Similar Self-renewal Properties for Different Sizes of Human Primary Melanoma Colonies Replated in Agar, Cancer Res. 45: 1101 (1985).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    S. S. Guraya, Recent Advances in the Morphology, Histochemistry and Biochemistry of the Developing Mammalian Ovary, Int. Rev. Cytol. 51: 49 (1977).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    S. Knauf and G. I. Urbach, Identification, Purification and Radioimmunoassay of NB/70K, a Human Ovarian Tumor-association Antigen, Cancer Res. 41: 1351 (1981).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    R. C. Bast, Jr., J. L. Klug, E. St. John, E. Janison, J. M. Niloff, H. Lazarus, R. S. Berkowitz, T. Leavitt, C. T. Griffiths, L. Parker, V. R. Zurawski, Jr., and R. E. Knapp, A Radioimmunoassay Using a Monoclonal Antibody to Monitor the Course of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer, N. Eng. J. Med. 309: 883 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    J-P. Bizzarl, W. J. Mackillop, and R. N. Buick, Cellular Specificity of NB/70K, a Putative Human Ovarian Tumor Antigen, Cancer Res. 43: 864 (1983).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    W. J. Mackillop and R. N. Buick, Cellular Heterogeneity in Human Ovarian Carcinoma Studied by Density Gradient Fractionation, Stem Cells 1: 355 (1981).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    W. J. Mackillop, S. S. Stewart, and R. N. Buick, Tumor Progression Studied by Analysis of Cellular Features of Serial Ascitic Ovarian Carcinoma Tumors, Cancer Res. 43: 874 (1983).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    W. J. Mackillop, J-P. Bizzari, and G. K. Ward, Cellular Heterogeneity in Normal and Neoplastic Human Urothelium, Cancer Res. 45: 4360 (1985).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    L. J. Chang, J. E. Till, and E. A. McCulloch, The Cellular Basis of Self-Renewal in Culture by Human Acute Myeloblastic Leukemia Blast Cell Progenitors, J. Cell. Physiol. 102: 217 (1980).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    E. A. McCulloch, J. E. Curtis, H. A. Messner, J. S. Senn, and T. P. Germanson, The Contribution of Blast Cell Properties to Outcome Variation in Acute Myeloblastic Leukemia, Blood 59: 601 (1982).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    S. E. Salmon, A. W. Hamburger, B. Soehnlen, B. G. M. Durie, D. S. Alberts, and T. E. Moon, Quantitation of Differential Sensitivity of Human Tumor Stem Cells to Anticancer Drugs, N. Eng. J. Med. 298: 1321 (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    R. H. Shoemaker, M. K. Wolpert-DeFillipes, D. H. Kern, M. M. Lieber, R. W. Makuch, N. R. Melnick, W. T. Miller, S. E. Salmon, R. M. Simon, J. M. Venditti, and D. D. Von Hoff, Application of a Human Tumor Colony Forming Assay to New Drug Screening, Cancer Res. 45: 2145 (1985).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    J. H. Goldie and A. J. Coldman, A Mathematical Model for Relating the Drug Sensitivity of Tumors to Their Spontaneous Mutation Rate, Cancer Treat. Rep. 63: 1727 (1979).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    J. H. Goldie and A. J. Coldman, Quantitative Model for Multiple Levels of Drug Resistance in Clinical. Tumors, Cancer Treat. Rep. 67: 923 (1983).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    R. S. Bush, G. DeBoer, and R. P. Hill, Long Term Survival with Gynecological Cancer, in: “Prolonged Arrest of Cancer,” B. A. Stoll, ed., John Wiley and Sons, New York (1982).Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    K-R. Trott, The Cellular Interpretation of Tumor Radioresistance, Cancer Treat. Rev. 11: 81 (1984).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    H. E. Skipper and F. M. Schabel, Jr., Tumor Stem Cell Heterogeneity: Implications with Respect to Classification of Cancers by Therapeutic Effect, Cancer Treat. Rep. 68: 43 (1984).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    W. L. McGuire, J. H. Goldie, S. E. Salmon, and V. Ling, Strategies to Identify or Prevent Drug Resistance in Cancer, Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 5: 257 (1985).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ronald N. Buick
    • 1
  1. 1.Ontario Cancer Institute and Department of Medical BiophysicsUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations