Cell morphology best predicts tumorigenicity and metastasis in vivo across multiple TNBC cell lines of different metastatic potential.

Adhesion Cell lines Invasion Metastasis Migration Triple-negative breast cancer

Journal

Breast cancer research : BCR
ISSN: 1465-542X
Titre abrégé: Breast Cancer Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100927353

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 Mar 2024
Historique:
received: 14 06 2023
accepted: 26 02 2024
medline: 12 3 2024
pubmed: 12 3 2024
entrez: 12 3 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Metastasis is the leading cause of death in breast cancer patients. For metastasis to occur, tumor cells must invade locally, intravasate, and colonize distant tissues and organs, all steps that require tumor cell migration. The majority of studies on invasion and metastasis rely on human breast cancer cell lines. While it is known that these cells have different properties and abilities for growth and metastasis, the in vitro morphological, proliferative, migratory, and invasive behavior of these cell lines and their correlation to in vivo behavior is poorly understood. Thus, we sought to classify each cell line as poorly or highly metastatic by characterizing tumor growth and metastasis in a murine model of six commonly used human triple-negative breast cancer xenografts, as well as determine which in vitro assays commonly used to study cell motility best predict in vivo metastasis. We evaluated the liver and lung metastasis of human TNBC cell lines MDA-MB-231, MDA-MB-468, BT549, Hs578T, BT20, and SUM159 in immunocompromised mice. We characterized each cell line's cell morphology, proliferation, and motility in 2D and 3D to determine the variation in these parameters between cell lines. We identified MDA-MB-231, MDA-MB-468, and BT549 cells as highly tumorigenic and metastatic, Hs578T as poorly tumorigenic and metastatic, BT20 as intermediate tumorigenic with poor metastasis to the lungs but highly metastatic to the livers, and SUM159 as intermediate tumorigenic but poorly metastatic to the lungs and livers. We showed that metrics that characterize cell morphology are the most predictive of tumor growth and metastatic potential to the lungs and liver. Further, we found that no single in vitro motility assay in 2D or 3D significantly correlated with metastasis in vivo. Our results provide an important resource for the TNBC research community, identifying the metastatic potential of 6 commonly used cell lines. Our findings also support the use of cell morphological analysis to investigate the metastatic potential and emphasize the need for multiple in vitro motility metrics using multiple cell lines to represent the heterogeneity of metastasis in vivo.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Metastasis is the leading cause of death in breast cancer patients. For metastasis to occur, tumor cells must invade locally, intravasate, and colonize distant tissues and organs, all steps that require tumor cell migration. The majority of studies on invasion and metastasis rely on human breast cancer cell lines. While it is known that these cells have different properties and abilities for growth and metastasis, the in vitro morphological, proliferative, migratory, and invasive behavior of these cell lines and their correlation to in vivo behavior is poorly understood. Thus, we sought to classify each cell line as poorly or highly metastatic by characterizing tumor growth and metastasis in a murine model of six commonly used human triple-negative breast cancer xenografts, as well as determine which in vitro assays commonly used to study cell motility best predict in vivo metastasis.
METHODS METHODS
We evaluated the liver and lung metastasis of human TNBC cell lines MDA-MB-231, MDA-MB-468, BT549, Hs578T, BT20, and SUM159 in immunocompromised mice. We characterized each cell line's cell morphology, proliferation, and motility in 2D and 3D to determine the variation in these parameters between cell lines.
RESULTS RESULTS
We identified MDA-MB-231, MDA-MB-468, and BT549 cells as highly tumorigenic and metastatic, Hs578T as poorly tumorigenic and metastatic, BT20 as intermediate tumorigenic with poor metastasis to the lungs but highly metastatic to the livers, and SUM159 as intermediate tumorigenic but poorly metastatic to the lungs and livers. We showed that metrics that characterize cell morphology are the most predictive of tumor growth and metastatic potential to the lungs and liver. Further, we found that no single in vitro motility assay in 2D or 3D significantly correlated with metastasis in vivo.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Our results provide an important resource for the TNBC research community, identifying the metastatic potential of 6 commonly used cell lines. Our findings also support the use of cell morphological analysis to investigate the metastatic potential and emphasize the need for multiple in vitro motility metrics using multiple cell lines to represent the heterogeneity of metastasis in vivo.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38468326
doi: 10.1186/s13058-024-01796-8
pii: 10.1186/s13058-024-01796-8
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

43

Subventions

Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R00-CA207866
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R00-CA207866
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : DP2CA271387
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R00-CA207866
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R00-CA207866
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R00-CA207866
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : DP2CA271387
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : DP2CA271387
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : DP2CA271387
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R01CA255742
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : DP2CA271387
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R01CA255742
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R00-CA207866
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIDDK NIH HHS
ID : 1T32DK124170-01
Pays : United States

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s).

Références

Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72(1):7–33. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21708 .
doi: 10.3322/caac.21708 pubmed: 35020204
Moss JL, Tatalovich Z, Zhu L, Morgan C, Cronin KA. Triple-negative breast cancer incidence in the United States: ecological correlations with area-level sociodemographics, healthcare, and health behaviors. Breast Cancer. 2021;28(1):82–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-020-01132-w .
doi: 10.1007/s12282-020-01132-w pubmed: 32671723
Kaplan D, Overview of the Updated NCCN Guidelines on Triple-Negative Breast Cancer HMP Glob. Learn. Netw., Dec. 2021, Accessed: Feb. 05, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.hmpgloballearningnetwork.com/site/jcp/jcp-special-report/overview-updated-nccn-guidelines-triple-negative-breast-cancer
Bianchini G, Balko JM, Mayer IA, Sanders ME, Gianni L. Triple-negative breast cancer: challenges and opportunities of a heterogeneous disease. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.66 .
doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.66 pubmed: 27184417 pmcid: 5461122
Anders CK, Zagar TM, Carey LA. The management of early-stage and metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a review. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 2013;27(4):737–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hoc.2013.05.003 .
doi: 10.1016/j.hoc.2013.05.003 pubmed: 23915742 pmcid: 3737488
Valastyan S, Weinberg RA. Tumor metastasis: molecular insights and evolving paradigms. Cell. 2011;147(2):275–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2011.09.024 .
doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2011.09.024 pubmed: 22000009 pmcid: 3261217
Ritsma L, et al. Intravital microscopy through an abdominal imaging window reveals a pre-micrometastasis stage during liver metastasis. Sci Transl Med. 2012;4(158):158ra145. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.3004394 .
doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3004394 pubmed: 23115354
Waclaw B, Bozic I, Pittman ME, Hruban RH, Vogelstein B, Nowak MA. A spatial model predicts that dispersal and cell turnover limit intratumour heterogeneity. Nature. 2015;525(7568):261–4. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14971 .
doi: 10.1038/nature14971 pubmed: 26308893 pmcid: 4782800
Tse JM, et al. Mechanical compression drives cancer cells toward invasive phenotype. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2012;109(3):911–6. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1118910109 .
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1118910109 pubmed: 22203958
Friedl P, Wolf K. Tumour-cell invasion and migration: diversity and escape mechanisms. Nat Rev Cancer. 2003. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc1075 .
doi: 10.1038/nrc1075 pubmed: 12724734
Oudin MJ, Weaver VM. Physical and chemical gradients in the tumor microenvironment regulate tumor cell invasion, migration, and metastasis. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 2016;81:189–205. https://doi.org/10.1101/sqb.2016.81.030817 .
doi: 10.1101/sqb.2016.81.030817 pubmed: 28424337
Minn AJ, et al. Distinct organ-specific metastatic potential of individual breast cancer cells and primary tumors. J Clin Invest. 2005;115(1):44–55. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI22320 .
doi: 10.1172/JCI22320 pubmed: 15630443 pmcid: 539194
Nguyen A, Yoshida M, Goodarzi H, Tavazoie SF. Highly variable cancer subpopulations that exhibit enhanced transcriptome variability and metastatic fitness. Nat Commun. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms11246 .
doi: 10.1038/ncomms11246 pubmed: 27941762 pmcid: 5160008
Oudin MJ, et al. MENA confers resistance to paclitaxel in triple-negative breast cancer. Mol Cancer Ther. 2017;16(1):143–55. https://doi.org/10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-16-0413 .
doi: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-16-0413 pubmed: 27811011
Fatherree JP, Guarin JR, McGinn RA, Naber SP, Oudin MJ, Chemotherapy-induced collagen IV drives cancer cell invasion through activation of Src/FAK signaling. bioRxiv, p 2021.04.01.438074, (2021) doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.04.01.438074
Guarin JR, Fatherree JP, Oudin MJ. Chemotherapy treatment induces pro-invasive changes in liver ECM composition. Matrix Biol. 2022;112:20–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matbio.2022.08.002 .
doi: 10.1016/j.matbio.2022.08.002 pubmed: 35940338 pmcid: 10690958
Simpson KJ, et al. Identification of genes that regulate epithelial cell migration using an siRNA screening approach. Nat Cell Biol. 2008. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb1762 .
doi: 10.1038/ncb1762 pubmed: 19160483
Lintz M, Muñoz A, Reinhart-King CA. The mechanics of single cell and collective migration of tumor cells. J Biomech Eng. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4035121 .
doi: 10.1115/1.4035121 pubmed: 27814431 pmcid: 5395914
Polacheck WJ, Zervantonakis IK, Kamm RD. Tumor cell migration in complex microenvironments. Cell Mol Life Sci CMLS. 2013;70(8):1335–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00018-012-1115-1 .
doi: 10.1007/s00018-012-1115-1 pubmed: 22926411
Wu P-H, et al. Single-cell morphology encodes metastatic potential. Sci Adv. 2020;6(4):eaaw6938. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaw6938 .
doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aaw6938 pubmed: 32010778 pmcid: 6976289
Wu P-H, et al. Evolution of cellular morpho-phenotypes in cancer metastasis. Sci Rep. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep18437 .
doi: 10.1038/srep18437 pubmed: 26691731 pmcid: 4686909
Baskaran JP, et al. Cell shape, and not 2D migration, predicts extracellular matrix-driven 3D cell invasion in breast cancer. APL Bioeng. 2020;4(2): 026105. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5143779 .
doi: 10.1063/1.5143779 pubmed: 32455252 pmcid: 7202897
Fraley SI, et al. A distinctive role for focal adhesion proteins in three-dimensional cell motility. Nat Cell Biol. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb2062 .
doi: 10.1038/ncb2062 pubmed: 20473295 pmcid: 3116660
Wu P-H, Gambhir SS, Hale CM, Chen W-C, Wirtz D, Smith BR. Particle tracking microrheology of cancer cells in living subjects. Mater Today. 2020;39:98–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mattod.2020.03.021 .
doi: 10.1016/j.mattod.2020.03.021
Charoen KM, Fallica B, Colson YL, Zaman MH, Grinstaff MW. Embedded multicellular spheroids as a biomimetic 3D cancer model for evaluating drug and drug-device combinations. Biomaterials. 2014;35(7):2264–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.11.038 .
doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.11.038 pubmed: 24360576
Yankaskas CL, et al. A microfluidic assay for the quantification of the metastatic propensity of breast cancer specimens. Nat Biomed Eng. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41551-019-0400-9 .
doi: 10.1038/s41551-019-0400-9 pubmed: 31061459 pmcid: 6563615
Lasfargues EY, Ozzello L. Cultivation of human breast carcinomas2. JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst. 1958;21(6):1131–47. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/21.6.1131 .
doi: 10.1093/jnci/21.6.1131 pubmed: 13611537
Dai X, Cheng H, Bai Z, Li J. Breast cancer cell line classification and its relevance with breast tumor subtyping. J Cancer. 2017;8(16):3131–41. https://doi.org/10.7150/jca.18457 .
doi: 10.7150/jca.18457 pubmed: 29158785 pmcid: 5665029
Li Y, et al. Impact of histotypes on preferential organ-specific metastasis in triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer Med. 2019;9(3):872–81. https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2759 .
doi: 10.1002/cam4.2759 pubmed: 31814295 pmcid: 6997059
Gao Y, et al. Patterns of distant metastases in patients with triple-negative breast cancer—A population-based study. Precis Med Sci. 2023;12(3):182–95. https://doi.org/10.1002/prm2.12107 .
doi: 10.1002/prm2.12107
Wright LE, et al. Murine models of breast cancer bone metastasis. BoneKEy Rep. 2016;5:804. https://doi.org/10.1038/bonekey.2016.31 .
doi: 10.1038/bonekey.2016.31 pubmed: 27867497 pmcid: 5108088
Kang Y, et al. A multigenic program mediating breast cancer metastasis to bone. Cancer Cell. 2003;3(6):537–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1535-6108(03)00132-6 .
doi: 10.1016/S1535-6108(03)00132-6 pubmed: 12842083
Chen C, et al. PD-L1 tumor-intrinsic signaling and its therapeutic implication in triple-negative breast cancer. JCI Insight. 2021;6(8):e131458. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.131458 .
doi: 10.1172/jci.insight.131458 pubmed: 33884962 pmcid: 8119208
Bierie B, et al. Integrin-β4 identifies cancer stem cell-enriched populations of partially mesenchymal carcinoma cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017;114(12):E2337–46. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1618298114 .
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1618298114 pubmed: 28270621 pmcid: 5373369
Naba A, Clauser KR, Lamar JM, Carr SA, Hynes RO. Extracellular matrix signatures of human mammary carcinoma identify novel metastasis promoters. Elife. 2014;3:e01308. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.01308 .
doi: 10.7554/eLife.01308 pubmed: 24618895 pmcid: 3944437
Wishart AL, et al. Decellularized extracellular matrix scaffolds identify full-length collagen VI as a driver of breast cancer cell invasion in obesity and metastasis. Sci Adv. 2020;6(43):eabc3175. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abc3175 .
doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abc3175 pubmed: 33087348 pmcid: 7577726
Janes KA, Yaffe MB. Data-driven modelling of signal-transduction networks. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm2041 .
doi: 10.1038/nrm2041 pubmed: 17057752
Yao Y, Chu Y, Xu B, Hu Q, Song Q. Risk factors for distant metastasis of patients with primary triple-negative breast cancer. Biosci Rep. 2019;39(6):BSR20190288.
doi: 10.1042/BSR20190288 pubmed: 31113872 pmcid: 6549086
Pistelli M, et al. Prognostic factors in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer: lessons and limits from clinical practice. Anticancer Res. 2013;33(6):2737–42.
pubmed: 23749934
Rizwan A, Cheng M, Bhujwalla ZM, Krishnamachary B, Jiang L, Glunde K. Breast cancer cell adhesome and degradome interact to drive metastasis. Npj Breast Cancer. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1038/npjbcancer.2015.17 .
doi: 10.1038/npjbcancer.2015.17 pubmed: 28721370 pmcid: 5515192
Minn AJ, et al. Genes that mediate breast cancer metastasis to lung. Nature. 2005;436(7050):518–24. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03799 .
doi: 10.1038/nature03799 pubmed: 16049480 pmcid: 1283098
Jin X, et al. A metastasis map of human cancer cell lines. Nature. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2969-2 .
doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2969-2 pubmed: 33299191 pmcid: 8439149
Gómez-Cuadrado L, Tracey N, Ma R, Qian B, Brunton VG. Mouse models of metastasis: progress and prospects. Dis Model Mech. 2017;10(9):1061–74. https://doi.org/10.1242/dmm.030403 .
doi: 10.1242/dmm.030403 pubmed: 28883015 pmcid: 5611969
Zaritsky A, et al. Interpretable deep learning uncovers cellular properties in label-free live cell images that are predictive of highly metastatic melanoma. Cell Syst. 2021;12(7):733-747.e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cels.2021.05.003 .
doi: 10.1016/j.cels.2021.05.003 pubmed: 34077708 pmcid: 8353662
Lyons SM, et al. Changes in cell shape are correlated with metastatic potential in murine and human osteosarcomas. Biol Open. 2016;5(3):289–99. https://doi.org/10.1242/bio.013409 .
doi: 10.1242/bio.013409 pubmed: 26873952 pmcid: 4810736
Seo BR, et al. Obesity-dependent changes in interstitial ECM mechanics promote breast tumorigenesis. Sci Transl Med. 2015;7(301):301ra130. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.3010467 .
doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3010467 pubmed: 26290412 pmcid: 4837896
Ling L, et al. Obesity-associated adipose stromal cells promote breast cancer invasion through direct cell contact and ECM remodeling. Adv Funct Mater. 2020;30(48):1910650. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.201910650 .
doi: 10.1002/adfm.201910650 pubmed: 33692663 pmcid: 7939099

Auteurs

Sydney J Conner (SJ)

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tufts University, 200 College Ave, Medford, MA, 02155, USA.

Justinne R Guarin (JR)

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tufts University, 200 College Ave, Medford, MA, 02155, USA.

Thanh T Le (TT)

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tufts University, 200 College Ave, Medford, MA, 02155, USA.

Jackson P Fatherree (JP)

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tufts University, 200 College Ave, Medford, MA, 02155, USA.

Charlotte Kelley (C)

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tufts University, 200 College Ave, Medford, MA, 02155, USA.

Samantha L Payne (SL)

Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Rd E, Guelph, ON, Canada.

Savannah R Parker (SR)

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tufts University, 200 College Ave, Medford, MA, 02155, USA.

Hanan Bloomer (H)

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tufts University, 200 College Ave, Medford, MA, 02155, USA.

Crystal Zhang (C)

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tufts University, 200 College Ave, Medford, MA, 02155, USA.

Kenneth Salhany (K)

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tufts University, 200 College Ave, Medford, MA, 02155, USA.

Rachel A McGinn (RA)

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tufts University, 200 College Ave, Medford, MA, 02155, USA.

Emily Henrich (E)

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tufts University, 200 College Ave, Medford, MA, 02155, USA.

Anna Yui (A)

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tufts University, 200 College Ave, Medford, MA, 02155, USA.

Deepti Srinivasan (D)

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tufts University, 200 College Ave, Medford, MA, 02155, USA.

Hannah Borges (H)

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tufts University, 200 College Ave, Medford, MA, 02155, USA.

Madeleine J Oudin (MJ)

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tufts University, 200 College Ave, Medford, MA, 02155, USA. madeleine.oudin@tufts.edu.

Classifications MeSH