このコンテンツを視聴するには、JoVE 購読が必要です。 サインイン又は無料トライアルを申し込む。
* These authors contributed equally
Here, we detail a straightforward live imaging approach for quantifying the sensitivity of patient-derived tumor organoids to ionizing radiation.
Radiation therapy (RT) is one of the mainstays of modern clinical cancer management. However, not all cancer types are equally sensitive to irradiation, often (but not always) because of differences in the ability of malignant cells to repair oxidative DNA damage as elicited by ionizing rays. Clonogenic assays have been employed for decades to assess the sensitivity of cultured cancer cells to ionizing irradiation, largely because irradiated cancer cells often die in a delayed manner that is difficult to quantify with short-term flow cytometry- or microscopy-assisted techniques. Unfortunately, clonogenic assays cannot be employed as such for more complex tumor models, such as patient-derived tumor organoids (PDTOs). Indeed, irradiating established PDTOs may not necessarily abrogate their growth as multicellular units, unless their stem-like compartment is completely eradicated. Moreover, irradiating PDTO-derived single-cell suspensions may not properly recapitulate the sensitivity of malignant cells to RT in the context of established PDTOs. Here, we detail an adaptation of conventional clonogenic assays that involves exposure of established PDTOs to ionizing radiation, followed by single-cell dissociation, replating in suitable culture conditions and live imaging. Non-irradiated (control) PDTO-derived stem-like cells reform growing PDTOs with a PDTO-specific efficiency, which is negatively influenced by irradiation in a dose-dependent manner. In these conditions, PDTO-forming efficiency and growth rate can be quantified as a measure of radiosensitivity on time-lapse images collected until control PDTOs achieve a predefined space occupancy.
External beam radiation therapy (RT) is one of the mainstays of modern oncology, reflecting not only a pronounced anticancer activity associated with a well-defined spectrum of generally manageable side effects1, but also an exceptionally widespread clinical availability (most cancer centers in developed countries are equipped with modern linear accelerators for external beam RT)2. In line with this notion, RT is globally employed with success for both curative purposes, generally in the context of early-stage disease3,4, and palliative applications, to contain s....
The reagents and equipment used in the study are listed in the Table of Materials.
1. Organoid culture
NOTE: TNBC#1 PDTOs were established in our lab based on tumor tissue surgically removed from a patient with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) who provided informed consent to participate in a biobanking protocol (IRB21-06023682). After validation by histology and RNA sequencing (RNAseq), TNBC#1 PDTOs are cultured in 66% matrigel d.......
TNBC#1 PDTOs were exposed to a single radiation dose of 0 (unirradiated controls), 2 Gy, 4 Gy, 6 Gy, 8 Gy, or 10 Gy on day 0. Immediately thereafter, PDTOs were dissociated to obtain a single-cell suspension for each experimental condition. PDTO-derived cells were next seeded in 48-well plates within 66% matrigel domes (50 µL each) deposited at the center of the wells, in 3 technical replicates per condition. Plates were placed in a live imaging system and imaged every 6 h using the organoid module 4X objective for .......
Here, we describe an adaptation of conventional clonogenic assays that harnesses breast cancer PDTOs and live imaging to quantify PDTO radiosensitivity based on (1) the persistence of PTDO-forming stem-like cells upon PDTO irradiation in vitro, and (2) the growth rate of the PDTOs these cells (may) generate. Critical steps of this protocol include (1) the establishment of PDTOs to a dome occupancy enabling good viability, (2) PDTO exposure to ionizing irradiation at different doses, including mock irradiated con.......
We thank Raymond Briones and Wen H. Shen (Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA) for their help with the development of this protocol. This work has been supported by a Transformative Breast Cancer Consortium Grant from the US DoD BCRP (#W81XWH2120034, PI: Formenti).
....Name | Company | Catalog Number | Comments |
40 µm mesh filter | Thomas Scientific | 1164H35 | |
B27 | Invitrogen | 17504-044 | |
Cellometer Auto T4 Bright Field Cell Counter | Nexcelom | ||
DMEM F/12 | Corning | 12634-010 | |
Epidermal Growth Factor hEGF | Peprotech | AF-100-15 | |
EVOS FL Digital Inverted Fluorescence Microscope | Thermo Fisher Scientific | 12-563-460 | |
FGF10 | Peprotech | 100-26 | |
FGF7 | Peprotech | 100-19 | |
GlutaMax | Invitrogen | 35050061 | |
Hepes | Invitrogen | 15630-080 | |
IncuCyte software 2021A | Sartorius | version: 2021A | |
Incucyte SX1 | Sartorius | model SX1 | |
Incucyte validated 48 well plate | Corning | 3548 | |
Matrigel | Discovery Labware | 354230 | |
nAc | Sigma Aldrich | A9165-5G | |
Nicotinamide | Sigma-Aldrich | N0636 | |
Noggin | Purchased from the Englander Institute for Precision Medicine, Weill Cornell, NY, USA | ||
Non-treated 6 well plate | Cellstar | 657 185 | |
NR (Heregulin) | Peprotech | 100-03 | |
p38 MAP inhibitor p38i SB202190 | Sigma Aldrich | S7067 | |
PBS | Corning | 21-040-CV | |
PenStrep | Invitrogen | 15140-122 | |
Primocin | Invivogen | ant-pm-1 | |
Rspondin Media | Purchased from the Englander Institute for Precision Medicine, Weill Cornell, NY, USA | ||
Small Animal Radiation Research Platform (SARRP) | Xstrahl Ltd | ||
TGFbeta Receptor Inhibitor A83-01 | Tocris | 2939 | |
Trypan blue Stain (0.4%) | Gibco | 15250-61 | |
TrypLE | Gibco | 112605-028 | |
Y-27632 (RhoKi) | Selleck | S1049 |
This article has been published
Video Coming Soon
JoVEについて
Copyright © 2023 MyJoVE Corporation. All rights reserved