Zaloguj się

Aby wyświetlić tę treść, wymagana jest subskrypcja JoVE. Zaloguj się lub rozpocznij bezpłatny okres próbny.

W tym Artykule

  • Podsumowanie
  • Streszczenie
  • Wprowadzenie
  • Protokół
  • Wyniki
  • Dyskusje
  • Ujawnienia
  • Podziękowania
  • Materiały
  • Odniesienia
  • Przedruki i uprawnienia

Podsumowanie

In vitro spheres assays are commonly used to identify cancer stem cells. Here we compare single with multi cell-based spheres assays. The more laborious single cell-based assays or methylcellulose supplementation give more accurate results while multi cell-based assays performed in liquid medium can be highly influenced by cell density.

Streszczenie

Years of research indicates that ovarian cancers harbor a heterogeneous mixture of cells including a subpopulation of so-called “cancer stem cells” (CSCs) responsible for tumor initiation, maintenance and relapse following conventional chemotherapies. Identification of ovarian CSCs is therefore an important goal. A commonly used method to assess CSC potential in vitro is the spheres assay in which cells are plated under non-adherent culture conditions in serum-free medium supplemented with growth factors and sphere formation is scored after a few days. Here, we review currently available protocols for human ovarian cancer spheres assays and perform a side-by-side analysis between commonly used multi cell-based assays and a more accurate system based on single cell plating. Our results indicate that both multi cell-based as well as single cell-based spheres assays can be used to investigate sphere formation in vitro. The more laborious and expensive single cell-based assays are more suitable for functional assessment of individual cells and lead to overall more accurate results while multi cell-based assays can be strongly influenced by the density of plated cells and require titration experiments upfront. Methylcellulose supplementation to multi cell-based assays can be effectively used to reduce mechanical artifacts.

Wprowadzenie

There is increasing evidence that ovarian carcinomas are comprised of heterogeneous mixtures of cells and harbor so-called “cancer stem cells” (CSCs) responsible for disease initiation, maintenance and relapse after conventional cytotoxic therapies1-3. Therefore, the development of molecular strategies targeting ovarian CSCs is an important goal and promises to improve the therapy of ovarian cancer patients.

A pre-requisite for the understanding of the molecular features of CSCs is their reliable isolation from the non-CSCs. However, identification of ovarian CSCs appears challenging. While CD133 expression and aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH) activity4,5 have been reported to mark ovarian CSCs, some data indicate that these markers are unstable6. Consistently, in ovarian cancer, other than for example in breast carcinoma7, expression of ALDH1 associates with favorable outcome8 and expression of the proposed stem cell marker CD44 variant has no prognostic value9. More recently, we have shown that expression of the embryonic stem cell protein SOX2 confers stemness to ovarian carcinoma cells10 and high SOX2 expression associates with clinically aggressive ovarian and breast carcinomas11,12. Therefore, in this report we use a lentiviral reporter construct containing a red fluorescence protein (RFP) whose expression is controlled by a SOX2 regulatory region, as a method to isolate putative ovarian CSCs.

By definition, CSCs can both self-renew and differentiate, giving rise to all tumor cell types. Putative CSC populations need to be analyzed in functional assays performed in vivo. For obvious reasons, in human cells such functional tests are confined to xenograft assays, comprising mostly transplantation of human tumor cells into immuno-compromised mice10,13.

An alternative in vitro method was offered by Brent Reynolds and Sam Weiss who firstly reported the so-called neurosphere assay as a surrogate assay evaluating stem potential in neural cells14. Dontu and colleagues later confirmed the use of this assay for evaluation of stem cell potential in breast cells15,16. Here, human mammary cells were plated in different numbers in serum-free medium supplemented with epidermal growth factor (EGF), basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF), B-27 and heparin and cultured under non-adherent conditions for seven to ten days before sphere formation was scored by microscopy. Following this protocol with some adjustments in cell numbers, growth medium and supplements, several groups have explored in vitro stem cell potential from several cancer types such as breast17, brain18, pancreas19 and colon20 tumors. In ovarian carcinoma, we have recently reported feasibility of the spheres assay and compared its results to those collected in in vivo murine xenograft models10. We found that overexpression of the stem cell protein SOX2 enhanced both in vitro sphere formation as well as in vivo tumorigenicity of human ovarian carcinoma cells10. However, the frequency of sphere-initiating cells was higher than the frequency of tumor-initiating cells measured in vivo10 suggesting that either the sphere assay may lead to false positive results due to technical reasons or, alternatively, the in vivo assay may be inefficient and result in false negative results.

In this report, we analyze multi cell-based ovarian spheres assays in more detail, review the different protocols available in the literature and compare them to a single cell-based assay. We show that the single cell-based assay provides more accurate and reproducible results than multi cell-based assays, which can be highly influenced by the density of plated cells unless methylcellulose is added to the cultures to immobilize cells. However, also in single cell-based assays, in vitro sphere-initiating potential is observed at higher frequency than in vivo tumor-initiating potential.

Protokół

1. Generation of OVCAR-3 Human ovarian Carcinoma Cells Stably Transduced with Lentiviruses Containing the SOX2 Regulatory Region Reporter Construct

  1. Generate lentiviral particles by transfecting the HEK 293T-packaging cell line with a reporter construct recognizing a SOX2 regulatory region as described10,21.
    NOTE: The reporter construct further contains a destabilization domain of the ProteoTuner Shield System ahead of the tdTomato fluorescence protein. Shield1 binds to the destabilization domain thereby preventing the proteasome to degrade the fluorescence protein22.
  2. Transduce OVCAR-3 cells with lentiviral particles over a time period of 24 hr. Afterwards, remove the viral supernatant and wash the cells with phosphate buffered saline (PBS) and cultured in complete medium (RPMI supplemented with 10% FBS, 100 U/ml penicillin, 100 μg/ml streptomycin).
  3. 48 hr later, 10 μg/ml puromycin were added to the cultures and maintained for 5 days to allow selection of properly transduced cells.

2. Preparation of Cell Sorting and Plating

  1. Add Shield1 at 1:1,000 dilution 24 hr prior to cell sorting. Use stably transduced OVCAR-3 cells without Shield1 treatment as negative controls (Figure 1). Aspirate media from flask, wash cells with 1x PBS and trypsinize cells with 0.05% Trypsin-EDTA for 3 min.
  2. Stop trypsin by using complete medium (see above), count cell numbers, centrifuge cells at 300 x g at RT (15 - 25 °C) for 5 min.
  3. Decant supernatant and resuspend cells carefully in 0.5 - 1 ml sterile PBS.
  4. Use 40 µm cell strainer cap filter to obtain single-cell suspension.
  5. Adjust cell count to 5 million cells per ml.
  6. Prepare ultra low-attachment 96-well plates with 100 μl spheres medium (MEGM supplemented with growth factors, cytokines, and supplements, B-27, heparine-sodium; or DMEM/F12 supplemented with growth factors, cytokines, and supplements, B-27, heparine-sodium with or without addition of 1% methylcellulose, see also Table 1). Optionally add antibiotics to the medium at a concentration of 100 U/ml penicillin and 100 μg/ml streptomycin to minimize the risk of possible contamination.
  7. Sort RFP+ and RFP- cells into prepared 96-well plates from above, 1 cell per well (single cell-based spheres assay) and 100 cells per well (multi cell-based spheres assay), respectively. Perform sort on commercially available cell sorter (see Materials) using single cell mode, Sort setup: 100 μ nozzle, sheath pressure 20 psi, and yield mask 0, purity mask 32, phase mask 16.
  8. Assess plating efficiency by microscopically scoring wells containing cells (for the single cell-based assay) and by counting cell numbers in individual wells (for the multi cell-based assay; Figure 2).
  9. Incubate cells under standard conditions in spheres medium (for composition see step 2.6) at 37 °C and 5% CO2. Supplement daily bFGF (20 ng/ml) and EGF (20 ng/ml).
  10. After one week, count numbers of emerging tumor spheres using a standard microscope with 4X or 10X magnification and a fluorescence microscope to detect fluorescence signal from the integrated reporter system. Count spheres with a diameter exceeding 100 μm as “large” spheres, and spheres with a diameter 50 - 100 μm as “small” spheres (Figure 3). Be sure that you count real spheres and not cell clusters.
    NOTE: In single cell-based assays sphere formation is easier to score microscopically after 10 (versus 7) days of culture.
  11. Calculate the proportion of sphere-forming cells in RFP+ and respectively RFP- cells in single cell-based assays (one 96-well plate for each individual experiment) or multi cell-based spheres assays (one well for each individual experiment) as presented by Shaw et al.16
    NOTE: Proportion of sphere forming cells (%) = (number of spheres) / (number of seeded cells) x 100

3. Serial Passaging of Spheres

  1. Place the content of each well in an appropriate sterile tube and centrifuge at 300 x g for 10 min at RT. For multi cell-based spheres assays, collect together the spheres from one well. Wash the well 3 - 5 times with PBS and centrifuge 2 min longer. For single cell-based spheres assays, collect individual spheres. Due to the low numbers of cells, use 1.5 ml tubes for centrifugation and washing steps.
  2. Remove supernatant and resuspend pellet in 200 µl of 0.05% Trypsin-EDTA.
  3. In order to achieve optimal cell separation, incubate the cell suspension at 37 °C for 5 min in a soft shaker. Optimize trypsinization time for your cell line to lower cell death rate: if no large spheres is visible triturate gently using a 100 μl pipette tip. In case large spheres are still present, incubate with trypsin another 3 min and then proceed to the trituration step. In case of single cell-based assays make sure to optimize the time for optimal cell yield of living cells during the trypsinization step.
  4. To inactivate the trypsin, add 500 µl complete medium and centrifuge at 300 x g for 10 min, in the case of single cell assays, centrifuge for additional 2 min.
  5. Remove supernatant and resuspend cells carefully in spheres medium.
  6. Use a 40 µm cell strainer cap filter to obtain a single-cell suspension.
  7. In the case of using RFP+ and RFP- cells in multi cell-bassed assays, assess the percentage of fluorescent cells in each well after resuspension via flow cytometer analysis.
  8. For serial replating assays of single cells, seed 1 cell per well into a new ultra low-attachment 96-well plate prepared as detailed above. From one individual sphere, seed approximately 20 individual wells. For replating assays of multi cell-based primary spheres, seed cells obtained from one well of primary spheres into a new 96-well plate and count the cell numbers next day by microscopy.
  9. Assess the proportion of sphere-forming cells in secondary spheres assays using the formula described in step 2.11.

4. Result Analysis

  1. Analyze results from experiments performed in independent triplicates and use two-sided Student’s t-Test to analyze normally distributed values and otherwise Mann-Whitney-Tests for statistical analysis.

Wyniki

In conventional spheres assays, nearly 40% of RFP+ OVCAR-3 cells vs. 20% of RFP- cells gave rise to an individual tumor sphere in the primary spheres assay (Figure 4A). Moreover, spheres formed by RFP+ cells were larger in size than those formed by RFP- cells.

When plated in single cell-based assays, RFP+ cells also formed more spheres than RFP- cells, confirming the results above. However, there was a tendency towards generation of fewer spheres per plated in the single versu...

Dyskusje

Spheres cultures are a widely used method to assay cancer stem cell potential and enrich for stem-like cells in a wide range of human tumor cells15,25,26. Under these culture conditions, cancer cells that lack self-renewal ability are expected to differentiate and eventually undergo cell death. Although they may initially form cell clusters or even tumor spheres especially in primary assays, they are not able to sustain sphere-forming ability upon serial replating due to lack of self-renewing properties. Spher...

Ujawnienia

The authors have nothing to disclose.

Podziękowania

This study was supported by a grant from the Baden-Württemberg Stiftung (Adult Stem Cells Program II) awarded to C.L. We thank Dr. Martina Konantz for critical input and review of the manuscript. We thank Emmanuel Traunecker and Toni Krebs from the DBM FACS Facility (University Hospital Basel) for assistance with FACS sorting.

Materiały

NameCompanyCatalog NumberComments
Name of Material/ EquipmentCompanyCatalog NumberComments/Description
low-Attachment-plate Corning3474
MEGMLonzaCC-3151
InsulinLonzaCC-4136SingleQuots™ Kit
HydrocortisonLonzaCC-4136SingleQuots™ Kit
EGFLonzaCC-4136SingleQuots™ Kit
EGFSigmaE9644end concentration: 20 ng/ml
FGFPeproTech100-18Bend concentration: 20 ng/ml
B-27Invitrogen/ Gibco17504-044end concentration: 1x
Heparin-Natrium-25000 IERatiopharmN68542.02dilution 1:1000
Pen/StrepGibco15140-122
FCS Gibco10500-064
RPMI 1640Gibco21875-034
Trypsin-EDTA Gibco25300-054
Dulbecco’s PBS (1x)Gibco14190-094
Shield1 Clontech632189dilution 1:1000
DMEM/F12Gibco21041-025
DMEM/F12 (powder)Gibco42400-010
Methyl celluloseSigmaM0387
Puromycin dihydrochlorideapplichemA2856
cell sorter BDAria III cell sorter 
FACS analyserBDaccuri c6 flow cytometer
microscopeOlympus IX50 Osiris

Odniesienia

  1. Pardal, R., Clarke, M. F., Morrison, S. J. Applying the principles of stem-cell biology to cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 3 (12), 895-902 (2003).
  2. Reya, T., Morrison, S. J., Clarke, M. F., Weissman, I. L. Stem cells, cancer, and cancer stem cells. Nature. 414 (6859), 105-111 (2001).
  3. Ahmed, N., Abubaker, K., Findlay, J. K. Ovarian cancer stem cells: Molecular concepts and relevance as therapeutic targets. Mol Aspects Med. 39, 110-125 (2014).
  4. Silva, I. A., et al. Aldehyde dehydrogenase in combination with CD133 defines angiogenic ovarian cancer stem cells that portend poor patient survival. Cancer Res. 71 (11), 3991-4001 (2011).
  5. Kryczek, I., et al. Expression of aldehyde dehydrogenase and CD133 defines ovarian cancer stem cells. Int J Cancer. 130 (1), 29-39 (2012).
  6. Stewart, J. M., et al. Phenotypic heterogeneity and instability of human ovarian tumor-initiating cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 108 (16), 6468-6473 (2011).
  7. Ginestier, C., et al. ALDH1 is a marker of normal and malignant human mammary stem cells and a predictor of poor clinical outcome. Cell Stem Cell. 1 (5), 555-567 (2007).
  8. Chang, B., et al. ALDH1 expression correlates with favorable prognosis in ovarian cancers. Mod Pathol. 22 (6), 817-823 (2009).
  9. Cannistra, S. A., et al. CD44 variant expression is a common feature of epithelial ovarian cancer: lack of association with standard prognostic factors. J Clin Oncol. 13 (8), 1912-1921 (1995).
  10. Bareiss, P. M., et al. SOX2 expression associates with stem cell state in human ovarian carcinoma. Cancer Res. 73 (17), 5544-5555 (2013).
  11. Pham, D. L., et al. SOX2 expression and prognostic significance in ovarian carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 32 (4), 358-367 (2013).
  12. Lengerke, C., et al. Expression of the embryonic stem cell marker SOX2 in early-stage breast carcinoma. BMC Cancer. 11, 42 (2011).
  13. Lapidot, T., et al. A cell initiating human acute myeloid leukaemia after transplantation into SCID mice. Nature. 367 (6464), 645-648 (1994).
  14. Reynolds, B. A., Weiss, S. Generation of neurons and astrocytes from isolated cells of the adult mammalian central nervous system. Science. 255 (5052), 1707-1710 (1992).
  15. Dontu, G., et al. In vitro propagation and transcriptional profiling of human mammary stem/progenitor cells. Genes Dev. 17 (10), 1253-1270 (2003).
  16. Shaw, F. L., et al. A detailed mammosphere assay protocol for the quantification of breast stem cell activity. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia. 17 (2), 111-117 (2012).
  17. Leis, O., et al. Sox2 expression in breast tumours and activation in breast cancer stem cells. Oncogene. 31 (11), 1354-1365 (2012).
  18. Higgins, D. M., et al. Brain tumor stem cell multipotency correlates with nanog expression and extent of passaging in human glioblastoma xenografts. Oncotarget. 4 (5), 792-801 (2013).
  19. Wang, Y. J., Bailey, J. M., Rovira, M., Leach, S. D. Sphere-forming assays for assessment of benign and malignant pancreatic stem cells. Methods Mol Biol. 980, 281-290 (2013).
  20. Li, Y. F., Xiao, B., Tu, S. F., Wang, Y. Y., Zhang, X. L. Cultivation and identification of colon cancer stem cell-derived spheres from the Colo205 cell line. Braz J Med Biol Res. 45 (3), 197-204 (2012).
  21. Wu, F., et al. Identification of two novel phenotypically distinct breast cancer cell subsets based on Sox2 transcription activity. Cell Signal. 24 (11), 1989-1998 (2012).
  22. Banaszynski, L. A., Chen, L. C., Maynard-Smith, L. A., Ooi, A. G., Wandless, T. J. A rapid, reversible, and tunable method to regulate protein function in living cells using synthetic small molecules. Cell. 126 (5), 995-1004 (2006).
  23. Kawase, Y., Yanagi, Y., Takato, T., Fujimoto, M., Okochi, H. Characterization of multipotent adult stem cells from the skin: transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-beta) facilitates cell growth. Exp Cell Res. 295 (1), 194-203 (2004).
  24. Walia, V., et al. Loss of breast epithelial marker hCLCA2 promotes epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition and indicates higher risk of metastasis. Oncogene. 31 (17), 2237-2246 (2012).
  25. Leung, E. L., et al. Non-small cell lung cancer cells expressing CD44 are enriched for stem cell-like properties. PLoS One. 5 (11), e14062 (2010).
  26. Bertolini, G., et al. Highly tumorigenic lung cancer CD133+ cells display stem-like features and are spared by cisplatin treatment. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 106 (38), 16281-16286 (2009).
  27. Ma, L., Lai, D., Liu, T., Cheng, W., Guo, L. Cancer stem-like cells can be isolated with drug selection in human ovarian cancer cell line SKOV3. Acta Biochim Biophys Sin (Shanghai). 42 (9), 593-602 (2010).
  28. Wang, H., Zhang, Y., Du, Y. Ovarian and breast cancer spheres are similar in transcriptomic features and sensitive to fenretinide). Biomed Res Int. 2013, 510905 (2013).
  29. Du, Y. R., et al. Effects and mechanisms of anti-CD44 monoclonal antibody A3D8 on proliferation and apoptosis of sphere-forming cells with stemness from human ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 23 (8), 1367-1375 (2013).
  30. Xiang, T., et al. Interleukin-17 produced by tumor microenvironment promotes self-renewal of CD133 cancer stem-like cells in ovarian cancer. Oncogene. , (2013).
  31. Liu, T., Cheng, W., Lai, D., Huang, Y., Guo, L. Characterization of primary ovarian cancer cells in different culture systems. Oncol Rep. 23 (5), 1277-1284 (2010).
  32. Soritau, O., et al. Enhanced chemoresistance and tumor sphere formation as a laboratory model for peritoneal micrometastasis in epithelial ovarian cancer. Rom J Morphol Embryol. 51 (2), 259-264 (2010).
  33. Shi, M. F., et al. Identification of cancer stem cell-like cells from human epithelial ovarian carcinoma cell line. Cell Mol Life Sci. 67 (22), 3915-3925 (2010).
  34. Zhang, S., et al. Identification and characterization of ovarian cancer-initiating cells from primary human tumors. Cancer Res. 68 (11), 4311-4320 (2008).
  35. Liang, D., et al. The hypoxic microenvironment upgrades stem-like properties of ovarian cancer cells. BMC Cancer. 12, 201 (2012).

Przedruki i uprawnienia

Zapytaj o uprawnienia na użycie tekstu lub obrazów z tego artykułu JoVE

Zapytaj o uprawnienia

Przeglądaj więcej artyków

Keywords Ovarian CarcinomaCancer Stem CellsCSCsSpheres AssayMulti Cell based AssaysSingle Cell based AssaysIn VitroSerum free MediumGrowth FactorsSphere FormationMethylcellulose

This article has been published

Video Coming Soon

JoVE Logo

Prywatność

Warunki Korzystania

Zasady

Badania

Edukacja

O JoVE

Copyright © 2025 MyJoVE Corporation. Wszelkie prawa zastrzeżone