Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Quantitative genetic analysis of tumor progression

  • Published:
Cancer and Metastasis Reviews Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Metastasis and resistance to chemotherapy are common features of progressed cancers. With respect to the latter phenotype, it is thought that during tumor growth drug-resistant cells arise spontaneously at rates characteristic of the genetic alterations involved. On application of chemotherapy, such variant tumor cells are more likely to survive, and they may eventually dominate, resulting in a non-responsive malignancy. Aspects of this model have been confirmed in a number of experimental systems and in patients. In contrast to our understanding of drug resistance, steps involved in the progression to metastatic spread of tumor cells are much less well-understood.

In this review we describe methodologies of quantitative genetic analysis with reference to development of drug resistance. We then describe attempts by ourselves and others to use a similar approach to investigate inetastatic properties. Based on these studies, we have proposed the quantitative ‘dynamic heterogeneity’ model of tumor metastasis, which is presented here. Using an ‘experimental’ metastasis assay and Luria-Delbruck fluctuation analysis, we determined that in murine KHT fibrosarcoma and B16 melanoma lines, metastatic’ variants with a distinct phenotype are generated at high rates. These variants are relatively anstable resulting in a dynamic equilibrium between generation and loss of metastatic variants. The metastatic ability of such a tumor population is thus dependent on the frequency of a subpopulation of metastatic variants which are turning over rapidly. This dynamic heterogeneity model is able to quantitatively provide a unifying explanation for a wide range of observations concerning tumor heterogeneity and clonal instability. Genetic mechanisms involving rapid rates have been characterized in drug-resistant variants. We speculate that similar processes may be involved in different aspects of tumor progression such as those resulting in metastasis.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Foulds L: The experimental study of tumor progression: a review. Cancer Res 14: 327–339, 1954.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Foulds L: Neoplastic development. Academic Press, London, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bellett AJD, Younghusband HB: Spontaneous mutagen-induced, and adenovirus-induced anchorage independent variants of mouse cells. J Cell Physiol 101: 33–48, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Thomassen DG, DeMars R: Clonal analysis of the stepwise appearance of anchorage independence and tumorigenicity in CAK, a permanent line of mouse cells. Can Res 42: 4054–4063, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Crawford BD, Barrett JC, Ts'o POP: Neoplastic conversion of preneoplastic syrian hamster cells: rate estimation by fluctuation analysis. Molec Cell Biol 3: 931–945, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Varshaver NB, Marshak MI, Shapiro NI: genetic nature of one of the traits of malignant cell transformation in vitro. Genetika (Moskra) 19: 981–987, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Shin S, Freedman VH, Risser R, Pollack R: Tumorigenicity of virus-transformed cells in nude mice is correlated specifically with anchorage independent growthin vitro Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 72: 4435–4439, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Smets LA: Cell transformation as a model for tumor induction and neoplastic growth. Biochem Biophys Acta 605: 93–111, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ponten J: The relationship betweenin vitro transformation and tumor formationin vivo. Biochem Biophys Acta 458: 397–422, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Smith BL, Sager R: Multistep origin of tumor-forming ability in Chinese hamster embryo fibroblast cells. Can Res 42: 389–396, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Owen AH, Coffey DS, Baylin SB: Tumor cell heterogeneity: origins and implications. Bristol-Myers Cancer Symposia, Vol 4, Academic Press, New York, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Fidler IJ, Hart IR: Biological diversity in metastatic neoplasms: origins and implications. Science 217: 998–1003, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Heppner GJ, Miller BE: Tumor heterogeneity: biological implications and therapeutic consequences. Cancer Met Reviews 2: 5–23, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Nicolson GL: Generation of phenotypic diversity and progression in metastatic tumor cells. Cancer Met Reviews 3: 25–42, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ling V, Chambers AF, Harris JF, Hill RP: Dynamic heterogeneity and metstasis. J Cell Physiol (suppl) 3: 99–103, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Nowell PC: The clonal evolution of tumor cell populations. Science 194: 23–28, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Nowell PC: Tumor progression and clonal evolution: the role of genetic instability. In: German J (ed) Chromosome mutations and neoplasia. Alan R. Liss, New York, 1983, pp 413–432.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ponder BAJ: Genetics and cancer. Biochim Biophys Acta 605: 369–410, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sugimura T, Sato S, Nagao M: Overlapping of carcinogens and mutagens. In: Magee PN et al (eds) Fundamentals in cancer prevention. University Park Press, Baltimore, 1976, pp 191–215.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Setlow RB: Repair deficient human disorders and cancer. Nature 271: 713–717, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hecht F, McCaw BK: Chromosome instability syndromes. In: Mulvihill JJ, Miller RW and FraumeniJr JF (eds) Genetics of human cancer. Raven Press, New York, 1977, pp 105–123.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Fialkow PJ: Clonal origin of human tumors. Biochim Biophys Acta 458: 283–321, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Yunis JJ: The chromosomal basis of human neoplasia. Science 221: 227–236, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Vogel F: Genetics of retinoblastoma. Hum Genet 52: 1–54, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Sandberg AA: The chromosome in human cancer and leukemia. Elsevier North Holland, Inc., 1980.

  26. Cooper GM: Cellular transforming genes. Science 218: 801–806, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Weinberg RA: Oncogenes of spontaneous and chemically induced tumors. Adv Cancer Res 36: 149–163, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Van de Woude GF, Levine AJ, Topp WC, Watson JD: Cancer cells. Vol 2 Oncogenes and viral genes. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, 1984.

  29. Marx JL: What do oncogenes do? Science 223: 673–676, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Slaman DJ, deKernion JB, Verma IM, Cline MJ: Expression of cellular oncogenes in human malignancies. Science 224: 256–262, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hunter T: Oncogenes and proto-oncogenes: how do they differ? JNCI 73: 773–786, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Thompson LH, Baker RM: Isolation of mutants of cultured mammalian cells. In: Prescott DM (ed) Methods in cell biology. Academic Press, New York, 973, Vol 6 pp 209–281.

  33. Baker RM, Ling V: Membrane mutants of mammalian cells in culture. In: EKorn (ed) Methods in membrane biology. Plenum Publ Corp, New York, 1978, Vol 9, pp 337–384.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Ling V: Genetic basis of drug resistance in mammalian cells. In: NBruchovsky and JHGoldie (eds) Drug and hormone resistance in neoplasia. CRC Press, Miami, 1982, vol 1, pp 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Horns RC, Dower WJ, Schimke RT: Gene amplification in a leukemic patient treated with methotrexate. J Clin Oncol 2: 2–7, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Carman MD, Schornagel JH, Rivest RS, Srimatkandada A, Portlock CS, Duffy T, Bertino JR: Resistance to methotrexate due to gene amplification in a patient with acute leukemia. J Clin Oncol 2: 16–20, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Bell DR, Gerlach JH, Kartner N, Buick RN, Ling V: Detection of P-glycoprotein in ovarian cancer: a molecular marker associated with multidrug resistance. J Clin Oncol 3: 311–315, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Chu EHY, Powell SS: Selective systems in somatic cell genetics. In: HHarris and KHirschhorn (eds) Advances in human genetics. Plenum Publ Corp. New York, 1976. Vol 7, pp 189–258.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Puck TT, Kao F-T: Somatic cell genetics and its application to medicine. Ann Rev Genet 16: 225–271, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Curt GA, Clendeninn NJ, Chabner BA: Drug resistance in cancer. Cancer Treat Rep 68: 87–99, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Chan VL, Whitmore GF, Siminovitch L: Mammalian cells with altered forms of RNA polymerase II. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 69: 3119–3124, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Ingles CJ, Guialis A, Lam J, Siminovitch L: α-amanitin resistance of RNA polymerase II in mutant Chinese hamster ovary cell lines. J Biol Chem 251: 2729–2734, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Ingles CJ, Shales M: DNA-mediated transfer of an RNA polymerase II genes: reversion of the temperature-sensitive hamster cell cycle mutants ts AF8 by mammalian DNA. Molec Cell Biol 2: 666–673, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Chan VL, Juranka P: Isolation and preliminary characterization of 9-β-D-arabinofuranosyladenine-resistant mutants of baby hamster cells. Somat Cell Genet 7: 147–160, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Andrulis IL, Siminovitch L: DNA-mediated gene transfer and β-aspartyl-hydroxamate resistance into Chinese hamster ovary cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 78: 5724–5728, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Andrulis IL, Duff C, Evans-Blackler S, Worton R, Siminovitch L: Chromosomal alterations associated with overproduction of asparagine synthetase in albizziin-resistant Chinese hamster ovary cell. Molec Cell Biol 3: 391–398, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Gantt JS, Chiang C-S, Hatfield GW, Arfin S: Chinese hamster ovary cells resistant to β-aspartyl-hydroxamate contain increased levels of asparagine synthetase. J Biol Chem 255: 4808–4813, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Ling V, Thompson LH: Reduced permeability in CHO cells as a mechanism of resistance to colchicine. J Cell Physiol 83: 103–116, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Bech-Hansen NT, Till JE, Ling V: Pleiotropic phenotype of colchicine-resistant CHO cells: cross-resistance and collateral sensitivity. J Cell Physiol 88: 23–31, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Debenham PG, Kartner N, Siminovitch L, Riordan JR, Ling V: DNA-mediated transfer of multiple drug resistance and plasma membrane glycoprotein expression. Mol Cell Biol 2: 881–889, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Robertson SM, Ling V, Stanners CP: Co-amplification of double minute chromosomes, multidrug-resistance, and cell surface P-glycoprotein in DNA-mediated transformants of mouse cells. Molec Cell Biol 4: 500–506, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Kartner N, Riordan JR, Ling V: Cell surface P-glycoprotein associated with multidrug resistance in mammalian cell lines. Science 221: 1285–1288, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Riordan JR, Ling V: Genetic and biochemical characterization of multidrug resistance. In: Goldman ID (ed) The International Encyclopedia of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Pergamon Press, (in press).

  54. Kartner N, Shales M, Riordan JR, Ling V: Daunorubicin-resistant Chinese hamster ovary cells expressing multidrug resistance and a cell surface P-glycoprotein. Cancer Res 43: 4413–4419, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Gupta RS, Siminovitch L: The isolation and preliminary characterization of somatic cell mutants resistant to the protein synthesis inhibitor emetine. Cell 9: 213–219, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Gupta RS, Siminovitch L: The molecular basis of emetine resistance in Chinese hamster ovary cells: alteration in the 40S ribosomal subunit. Cell 10: 61–66, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Lewis WH, Wright JW: Genetic characterization of hydroxyurea-resistance in Chinese hamster ovary cells. J Cell Physiol 97: 73–85, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Lewis WH, Wright JA: Isolation of hydroxyurea-resistant CHO cells with altered levels of ribonucleotide reductase. Somat Cell Genet 5: 83–95, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Lewis WH, Srinivasan P: Chromosome-mediated gene transfer of hydroxyurea resistance and amplification of ribounucleotide reductase activity. Molec Cell Biol 3: 1053–1061, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Flintoff WF, Davidson SV, Siminovitch L: Isolation and partial characterization of three methotrexate-resistant phenotypes from CHO cells. Somat Cell Genet 2: 245–261, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Flintoff WF, Spindler SM, Siminovitch L: Genetic characterization of methotrexate-resistant CHO cells.In vitro 12: 749–757, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Milbrandt JD, Azizkhan JC, Hamlin JL: Amplification of a cloned Chinese hamster dihydrofolate reductase gene after transfer into a dihydrofolate reductase-deficient cell line. Molec Cell Biol 3: 1274–1282, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Johnston RN, Beverley SM, Schimke RT: Rapid spontaneous dihydrofolate reductase gene amplification shown by fluorescence-activated cell sorting. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 80: 3711–3715, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Baker PM, Brunette DM, Mankovitz R, Thompson LH, Whitmore GF, Siminovitch L, Till JE: Ouabain-resistant mutants of mouse and hamster cells in culture. Cell 1: 9–21, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Kempe TD, Swyryd EA, Bruist M, Stark GR: Stable mutants of mammalian cells that overproduce the first three enzymes of pyrimidine nucleotide biosynthesis. Cell 9: 541–550, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Zieg J, Clayton CE, Ardeshir F, Giulotto E, Swyryd EA, Stark GR: Properties of single-step mutants of Syrian hamster cell lines resistant to N-(phosphonacetyl)-L-aspartate. Molec Cell Biol. 3: 2089–2098, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Cowell JK: Double minutes and homogeneously staining regions: gene amplification in mammalian cells. Ann Rev Genet 16: 21–59, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Schimke RT: Gene amplification. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, New York, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Luria SE, Delbruck M: Mutations of bacteria from virus sensitivity to virus resistance. Genetics 28: 491–511, 1943.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Armitage PJ: The statistical theory of bacterial populations subject to mutations. J Roy Statist Soc B 14: 1–40, 1952.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Kondo S: A theoretical study on spontaneous mutation rate. Mutation Res 14: 365–374, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Lea DE, Coulson CA: The distribution of the numbers of mutants in bacterial populations. J Genet 49: 264–285, 1949.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Hill RP, Chambers AF, Ling V, Harris JF: Dynamic heterogeneity: Rapid generation of metastatic variants in mouse B16 melanoma cells. Science 224: 998–1001, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  74. DeVitaJr V: The relationship between tumor mass and resistance to chemotherapy. Cancer 51: 1209–1220, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Ling V, Gerlach J, Kartner N: Multidrug resistance. Breast Cancer Res and Treat 4: 89–94, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Goldie JH, Coldman AJ: Clinical implications of the phenomenon of drug resistance. In: Bruchovsky N and Goldie JH (eds) Drug and hormone resistance in neoplasia. CRC Press, Florida, 1982, Vol II, pp 111–127.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Skipper HE: The forty-year-old mutation theory of Luria and Delbruck and its pertinence to cancer chemotherapy. Adv Canc Res 40: 331–363, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Goldie JH, Coldman AJ: A mathematical model for relating the drug sensitivity of tumors to their spontaneous mutation rate. Cancer Treat Rep 63: 1727–1733, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Chan VL, Guttman S, Juranka P: Mutator genes of baby hamster kidney cells. Molec and Cell Biol 1: 568–571, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Weinberg G, Ullman B, MartinJr DW: Mutator phenotypes in mammalian cell mutants with distinct biochemical defects and abnormal deoxyribonucleoside triphosphate pools. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 78: 2447–2451, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Meuth M, L'Heureaux-Huard N, Trudel M: Characterization of a mutator gene in Chinese hamster ovary cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 76: 6505–6509, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Drobetsky E, Meuth M: Increased mutational rates in Chinese hamster ovary cells serially selected for drug resistance. Molec Cell Biol 3: 1882–1885, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Goldberg S, Defendi V: Increased mutation rates in doubly viral transformed Chinese hamster cells. Somat Cell Genet 5: 887–895, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Gupta RS, Goldstein S: Diptheria toxin resistance in human fibroblast cell strains from normal and cancer-prone individuals. Mutation Res 73: 331–338, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Warren ST, Schultz RA, Chang C-C, Wade MH, Trosko JE: Elevated spontaneous mutation rate in Bloom syndrome fibroblasts. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 78: 3133–3137, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Cifone MA, Fidler IJ: Increasing metastatic potential is associated with increasing genetic instability of clones isolated from murine neoplasms. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 78: 6949–6952, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Hill RP, Bush RS: A lung-colony assay to determine the radiosensitivity of the cells of a solid tumor. Int J Radiat Biol 15: 435–444, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Fidler IJ: Selection of successive tumour lines for metastasis. Nature New Biol 242: 148–149, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Gershwin ME, Ruebner BH, Ikeda RM: Transplantation and metastasis of NB rat prostate neoplasia in congenitally athymic (nude) mice, nude mice treated with antilymphocyte sera and congenitally athymic rats. Expl Cell Biol 50: 145–154, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Kerbel RS, Man MS, Dexter D: A model of human cancer metastasis: extensive spontaneous and artificial metastasis of a human pigmented melanoma and derived variant sublines in nude mice. J Natl Can Inst 72: 93–108, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Chambers AF, Shafir R, Ling V: A model system for studying metastasis using the embryonic chick. Cancer Res 42: 4018–4025, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Kripke ML, Gruys E, Fidler IJ: Metastatic heterogeneity of cells from an utraviolet light-induced murine fibrosarcoma of recent origin. Cancer Res 38: 2962–2967, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Fidler IJ, Cifone MA: Properties of metastatic and non-metastatic cloned subpopulations of an ultraviolet-light-induced murine fibrosarcoma of recent origin. Amer J Path 97: 633–648, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Welch DR, Neri A, Nicolson GL: Comparison of ‘spontaneous’ and ‘experimental’ metastasis using rat 13762 mammary adenocarcinoma metastatic cell clones. Inv Metast 3: 65–80, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  95. Stackpole CW: Distinct lung-colonizing and lung-metastasizing cell populations in B16 mouse melanoma. Nature 289: 798–800, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Sweeney FL, Pot-Deprun J, Poupon M-F, Chourouliukov I: Heterogeneity of the growth and metastatic behavior of cloned cell lines from a primary rhabdomyosarcoma. Cancer Res 42: 3776–3782, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Price JE, Carr D, Jones LD, Messer P, Tarim D: Experimental analysis of factors affecting metastatic spread using naturally occurring tumours. Inv Metast 2: 77–112, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Glaves D: Correlation between circulating cancer cells and incidence of metastases. Br J Cancer 48: 665–673, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Suzuki N: Spontaneous versus artificial lung metastasis: Discrepant effect of whole-body irradiation in NFSA2ALM and NFSA1SLM tumor systems. J Natl Cancer Inst 71: 835–839, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  100. Ramshaw IR, Carlsen S, Wang HC, Badenoch-Jones P: The use of cell fusion to analyse factors involved in tumour cell metastasis. Int J Cancer 32: 471–478, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  101. Sidebottom E, Clark SR: Cell fusion segregates progressive growth from metastasis. Br J Cancer 47: 399–406, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  102. Hart IR: Tumor cell hybridization and neoplastic progression. In: GLNicolson and LMilas (eds) Cancer invasion and metastases: biologic and therapeutic aspects. Raven Press, New York, 1984, pp 133–143.

    Google Scholar 

  103. DeBaetselier P, Gorelik E, Eshhar Z, Ron Y, Katzav S, Feldman M, Segal S: Metastatic properties conferred on nonmetastatic tumors by hybridization of spleen B-lymphocytes with plasmacytoma cells. J Natl Cancer Inst 67: 1079–1087, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  104. DeBaetselier P, Roos E, Brys L, Ranels L, Gobert M, Dekegel D, Segal S, Feldman M: Non-metastatic tumor cells acquire metastatic properties following somatic hybridization with normal cells. Cancer Metast Rev 3: 5–24, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  105. Kerbel RS, Dennis JW, Lagarde AE, Frost P: Tumor progression in metastasis: an experimental approach using lectin resistant tumor variants. Cancer Metast Rev 1: 99–40, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Kerbel RS, Lagarde AE, Dennis JW, Donaghue TP: Spontaneous fusion in vivo between normal host and tumour cells: possible contribution to tumor progression and metastasis studied with a lectin-resistant mutant tumor. Molec Cell Biol 3: 523–538, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Larizza L, Schirrmacher V: Somatic cell fusion as a source of genetic rearrangement leading to metastatic variants. Cancer Metast Rev 3: 193–222, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Chambers AF, Ling V: Selection for experimental metastatic ability of heterologous tumor cells in the chick embryo after DNA-mediated transfer. Cancer Res 44: 3970–3975, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  109. Chambers AF, Wilson S: Cells transformed with ats viralsrc mutant are temperature sensitive forin vitro growth. Mol Cell Biol 5: 728–733, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Eccles SA, Marshall C, Vousden K, Purvies H: Enhanced metastatic capacity of mouse mammary carcinoma cells transfected with H-ras. In: Hellman K and Eccles SA (eds) Treatment of metastasis. Problems and Prospects. Taylor and Francis, London, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  111. Thorgeirsson UP, Turpeenniemi-Hujanen T, Williams JE, Westin EH, Heilman CA, Talmadge JE, Liotta LA: NIH/3T3 cells transfected with human tumor DNA containing activated ras oncogenes express the metastatic phenotype in nude mice. Molec Cell Biol 5: 259–262, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  112. Harris JF, Chambers AF, Hill RP, Ling V: Metastatic variants are generated spontaneously at a high rate in mouse KHT tumor. Proc Natl Acad Sci 79: 5547–5551, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  113. Chambers AF, Harris JF, Ling V, Hill RP: Rapid phenotype variation in cells derived from lung metastases of KHT fibrosarcoma. Inv Metast 4: 225–237, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  114. Fidler IJ, Kripke ML: Metastasis results from pre-existing variant cells within a malignant tumor. Science 197: 893–895, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  115. Dexter DL, Kowalski HM, Blazar BA, Fligiel Z, Vogel R, Heppner GH: Heterogeneity of tumor cells from a single mouse mammary tumor. Cancer Res 38: 3174–3181, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  116. Nicolson GL, Brunson KW, Fidler IJ: Specificity of arrest, survival and growth of selected metastatic variant cell lines. Cancer Res 38: 4105–4111, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  117. Suzuki N, Withers HR, Koehler MW: Heterogeneity and variability of artificial lung colony-forming ability among clones from mouse fibrosarcoma. Cancer Res 38: 3349–3351, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  118. Cifone MA, Kripke ML, Fidler IJ: Growth rate and chromosome number of tumor cell lines with different metastatic potential. J Supramol Struct 11: 467–476, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  119. Fidler IJ, Cifone MA: Properties of metastatic and non-metastatic cloned subpopulations of an ultra-violet-light-induced murine fibrosarcoma of recent origin. Am J Pathol 97: 633–648, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  120. Schirrmacher V, Shantz G, Claver K, Komitowski D, Zimmerman HP, Lohmann-Mathes ML: Tumor metastases and cell-mediated immunity in a model system in DBA/2 mice. I Tumor invasivenessin vitro and metastasis formationin vivo. Int J Can 23: 233–244, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  121. Chambers AF, Hill RP, Ling V: Tumor heterogeneity and stability of the metastatic phenotype of mouse KHT sarcoma cells. Cancer Res 41: 1368–1372, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  122. Fidler IJ, Hart IR: The origin of metastatic heterogeneity in tumors. Eur J Cancer 17: 487–494, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  123. Poste G, Doll J, Fidler IJ: Interactions between clonal subpopulations affect the stability of the metastatic phenotype in polyclonal populations of B16 melanoma cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci 78: 6226–6230, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  124. Neri A, Welch D, Kawaguchi T, Nicolson GL: Development and biologic properties of malignant cell sublines and clones of a spontaneously metastasizing rat mammary adenocarcinoma. JNCI 68: 507–517, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  125. Talmadge JE: The selective nature of metastasis. Cancer Metast Rev 2: 25–40, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  126. Weiss L: Dynamic aspects of cancer cell populations in metastasis. Am J Path 97: 601–608, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  127. Weiss L: Random and nonrandom processes in metastasis and metastatic inefficiency. Inv Metast 3: 193–207, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  128. Poste G, Greig R: On the genesis and regulation of cellular heterogeneity in malignant tumours. Inv Metast 2: 137–176, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  129. Heppner G, Miller BE, Miller FR: Tumor subpopulation interactions in neoplasms. Biochim Biophys Acta 695: 215–226, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  130. Turner GA: Surface properties of the metastatic cell. Invasion Metastasis 2: 197–216, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  131. Nicolson GL: Cancer Metastasis: organ colonization and the cell-surface properties of malignant cells. Biochim Biophy Acta 695: 113–176, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Ontario Cancer Institute, University of Toronto, 500 Sherbourne Street, M4X 1K9, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

    V. Ling & R. P. Hill

  2. Department of Medical Biophysics, University of Toronto, 500 Sherbourne Street, M4X 1K9, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

    V. Ling & R. P. Hill

  3. Ontario Cancer Foundation London Clinic, University of Western Ontario, 391 South Street, N6A 4G5, London, Ontario, Canada

    A. F. Chambers & J. F. Harris

  4. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Western Ontario, 391 South Street, N6A 4G5, London, Ontario, Canada

    A. F. Chambers & J. F. Harris

Authors
  1. V. Ling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. F. Chambers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. F. Harris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. R. P. Hill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ling, V., Chambers, A.F., Harris, J.F. et al. Quantitative genetic analysis of tumor progression. Cancer Metast Rev 4, 173–192 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00050694

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00050694

Keywords

Search

Navigation