METHODS: The main aim was to determine the stemness properties of serial-passaged human chorion-derived stem cells (hCDSC). Quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was performed to reveal the following stemness gene expression in serial-passaged hCDSC: Oct-4, Sox-2, FGF-4, Rex-1, TERT, Nanog (3), Nestin, FZD-9, ABCG-2 and BST-1. Cell growth rate was evaluated from passage (P) 1 until P5. The colony-forming unit-fibroblast (CFU-F) frequency of P3 and P5 cells and multilineage differentiation potential of P5 cells were determined. The immunophenotype of hCDSC was compared using the surface markers CD9, CD31, CD34, CD44, CD45, CD73, CD90, CD117, HLA-ABC and HLA-DR, -DP and -DQ. Immunostaining for trophoblast markers was done on P0, P1, P3 and P5 cells to detect the contamination of trophoblasts in culture, while chromosomal abnormality was screened by cytogenetic analysis of P5 cells.
RESULTS: The surface markers for mesenchymal lineage in hCDSC were more highly expressed at P5 compared with P3 and P0, indicating the increased purity of these stem cells after serial passage. Indeed, all the stemness genes except TERT were expressed at P1, P3 and P5 hCDSC. Furthermore, human chorion contained high clonogenic precursors with a 1:30 CFU-F frequency. Successful adipogenic, chondrogenic and osteogenic differentiation demonstrated the multilineage potential of hCDSC. The karyotyping analysis showed hCDSC maintained chromosomal stability after serial passage.
CONCLUSIONS: hCDSC retain multipotent potential even at later passages, hence are a promising source for cell therapy in the future.
METHODS: By utilizing a panel of breast cancer cells and mammospheres culture as cell-based screening platforms, we performed high-throughput chemical library screens to identify agents that are effective against breast CSCs and non-CSCs. The hit molecules were paired with conventional chemotherapy to evaluate the combinatorial treatment effects on breast CSCs and non-CSCs.
RESULTS: We identified a total of 193 inhibitors that effectively targeting both breast CSCs and non-CSCs. We observed that histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACi) synergized conventional chemotherapeutic agents (i.e., doxorubicin and cisplatin) in targeting breast CSCs and non-CSCs simultaneously. Further analyses revealed that quisinostat, a potent inhibitor for class I and II HDACs, potentiated doxorubicin-induced cytotoxicity in both breast CSCs and non-CSCs derived from the basal-like (MDA-MB-468 and HCC38), mesenchymal-like (MDA-MB-231), and luminal-like breast cancer (MCF-7). It was also observed that the basal-like breast CSCs and non-CSCs were more sensitive to the co-treatment of quisinostat with doxorubicin compared to that of the luminal-like breast cancer subtype.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, this study demonstrates the potential of HDACi as therapeutic options, either as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapeutics against refractory breast cancer.
METHODS: EMA detection was performed by flow cytometry in monocytes and monoblasts. EMA expression was compared with other known markers of monocytic-macrophage lineage (CD11c, CD14 and intracellular CD68). Samples of purified monocytes were obtained from 20 healthy volunteers. Twenty-two cases of monocytic AML (M4 and M5) were studied and controls were selected from 20 cases of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) and 18 cases of non-monocytic AML (M0, M1, M2, M3, and M7).
RESULTS: EMA was shown to be expressed strongly on the surface of all purified monocytes. EMA expression was observed on blast cells in 18/22 (81.8%) cases of AML M4 and M5, but not in that of non-monocytic AML or ALL. In this study EMA monoclonal antibody has demonstrated a strong association (P<0.001) with all the other known markers of monocytic-macrophage lineage in acute leukaemia subtypes. EMA had also shown 100% specificity and 81.8% sensitivity in the diagnosis of AML M4 and M5.
CONCLUSIONS: The monoclonal antibody EMA (clone E29) is a useful marker in the classification of acute myeloid leukaemia and can be used as a supplementary analysis for the diagnosis of acute leukemia with monocytic involvement.
METHODS: ALK gene rearrangement was detected by immunostaining of ALK protein and fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) targeting at the 2p23 region.
RESULTS: The expression of ALK protein was detected in 24/34 (71%) of the cases, and it was significantly higher in childhood cases (100%) when compared to adult cases (47%). The analyses by FISH were consistent with the results from immunostaining of ALK protein, but the analyses were only successful in 15/34 (44%) cases. FISH analyses detected extra copies of ALK gene in three cases, including one case that expressed ALK protein and showed 2p23 rearrangement.
CONCLUSIONS: The current series revealed a high frequency of ALK gene rearrangement, especially in the children. Immunostaining of ALK protein is a reliable indication of ALK gene rearrangement, and is superior to FISH. However, FISH analysis is useful in detecting other genetic aberrations that are not related to ALK gene rearrangement.