↓ Skip to main content

Ex-vivo characterization of circulating colon cancer cells distinguished in stem and differentiated subset provides useful biomarker for personalized metastatic risk assessment

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Translational Medicine, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Ex-vivo characterization of circulating colon cancer cells distinguished in stem and differentiated subset provides useful biomarker for personalized metastatic risk assessment
Published in
Journal of Translational Medicine, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12967-016-0876-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Natalia Malara, Valentina Trunzo, Umberto Foresta, Nicola Amodio, Stefania De Vitis, Laura Roveda, Mariagiovanna Fava, MariaLaura Coluccio, Roberta Macrì, Anna Di Vito, Nicola Costa, Chiara Mignogna, Domenico Britti, Ernesto Palma, Vincenzo Mollace

Abstract

Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) represent one of the most interesting target in improving diagnosis, prognosis and treatment. Herein we evaluate the possibility of using an emo-cytometric approach on the evaluation of the heterogeneous population of CTCs to improve personalized metastatic risk assessment. We benchmarked ex vivo behavior of distinct subsets of circulating colon tumor cells with correspondent clinical behavior of patients from which we isolated CTCs. Isolation and CTC expansion were performed by a gradient protocol. In vitro characterization was determined by flow cytometry, immunofluorescence, western blotting and proteomic profiling. Cell sorter was performed with immunomagnetic beads. Confocal microscopy was used to evaluate tissue sections. Kaplan Mayer curves was cared for through Medcalc program. We collected heterogeneous CTCs, derived from the whole blood of seven patients affected by colon cancer, expressing CD133(pos)CD45(neg) (5 ± 1) and (2 ± 1) and CK20(pos)CD45(neg) of (29 ± 3) (11 ± 1) cells/ml in Dukes D and A stage respectively. Proliferation rate of 57 ± 16 %, expression for CXCR4(pos) of 18 ± 7 % and detectable levels of IL-6, IL-8 and SDF-1 cytokines in conditioned culture medium characterized short-time expanded-CTCs (eCTCs). ECTCs organized in tumor sphere were CD45(neg)CD133(pos) while in adhesion were CXCR4(pos)CK20(pos). These two subsets were separately injected in mice. The first group of xenografts developed superficial lesions within 2 weeks. In the second group, in absence of growing tumour, the survival of injected eCTCs was monitored through SDF-1 serum levels detection. The detection of human cancer cells expressing CK20, in mice tissues sections, suggested a different biological behaviour of injected eCTC-subsets: tumorigenic for the first and disseminating for the second. The benchmarking of the experimental data with the clinical course highlights that patients with prevalence of circulating cancer stem cells (CD45(neg)CD133(pos)) have a lower overall survival. Conversely, patients with prevalence of circulating differentiated cells (CXCR4(pos)CK20(pos)) have a low disease-free survival. On the basis of the heterogeneous composition and despite the low number of CTCs, it was possible to distinguish two subgroups of CTCs, suggesting a different clinical outcome. CTC-subsets detailing is useful to better define the metastatic-risk personalized score thus improving disease management and reducing patient care cost.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 2%
France 1 2%
Unknown 59 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Other 5 8%
Professor 4 7%
Other 12 20%
Unknown 13 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 15%
Psychology 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 19 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 March 2020.
All research outputs
#18,456,836
of 22,869,263 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#2,950
of 4,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#230,355
of 311,729 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#98
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,869,263 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,002 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,729 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.