The Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) and its mutations contribute in various ways to tumorigenesis and biology of human cancers. They are associated with tumor proliferation, progression, drug resistance and the process of apoptosis. There are also reports that overexpression and activation of wild-type EGFR may lead to cell apoptosis. To study this phenomenon, we overexpressed in an AD293 cell line two most frequently observed forms of the EGFR receptor: wild-type and the constitutively active mutant–EGFR variant III (EGFRvIII). Then, we compared the effect of EGF stimulation on cell viability and downstream EGFR signaling. AD293 cells overexpressing wild-type EGFR, despite a significant proliferation increase in serum supplemented medium, underwent apoptosis after EGF stimulation in serum free conditions. EGFRvIII expressing cells, however, were unaffected by either serum starvation or EGF treatment. The effect of EGF was completely neutralized by tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), indicating the specificity of this observation. Moreover, apoptosis was not prevented by inhibiting EGFR downstream proteins (PI3K, AKT and mTOR). Here we showed another EGFR function, dependent on environmental factors, which could be employed in therapy and drug design. We also proposed a new tool for EGFR inhibitor analysis.

Primary cancer cells constitute a favorable testing platform for in vitro research in oncology field as they reflect tumour state more accurately than the most commonly employed stable cell lines. Unfortunately, due to limited availability of material and difficulties with protocols validation, primary models are rarely implemented into laboratory practice. We have compared protocols for primary cultures, differing in media components and plate coatings. In terms of culture establishment, application of Geltrex® coating demonstrated equal efficiency to feeder layer (83 vs. 72% successfully established breast and 80 vs. 80% prostate tumour specimens), yet it was substantially less complicated and easier to validate. Both Geltrex® coating and tissue-specific primary cell medium were permanently required to successfully maintain primary epithelial prostate cancer cells (PEPCs) in culture. In case of primary epithelial breast cancer cells (PEBCs), collagen I coating enabled to obtain comparable number of passages to Geltrex® coating (p=0.438). Commercial primary cell media demonstrated lower efficiency than tissue-specific (PEPCs - 5 vs. 8 and PEBCs - 6 vs. 9 passages). Interestingly, both analysed tumour types were unsusceptible to induction of culture lifespan extension when transduced with SV40LT , BMI-1 or hEST2 genes, commonly applied as potential immortalizing agents. In conclusion, the approach based on extracellular matrix reconstitution and tissue-specific primary cell media is easy to validate and provides in vitro expansion sufficient for analytical purposes (approximately 8 passages). Therefore, it may facilitate implementation of hardly available experimental models for a variety of analyses.

Spandidos Publications is a scientific publisher with a long-standing international reputation for excellent standards and high quality science publications

// <![CDATA[ $('.header-date').hide();$('#titleAuthors').hide();$('#abstractHeader').hide(); // ]]> Wojciech J. Stec1, Kamila Rosiak1,2, Paulina Siejka1,2, Joanna Peciak1,2, Marta Popeda1, Mateusz Banaszczyk1, Roza Pawlowska1,3, Cezary Treda1, Krystyna Hulas-Bigoszewska1, Sylwester Piaskowski1,2, Ewelina Stoczynska-Fidelus1,2 and Piotr Rieske1,2 1 Research and Development Unit, Celther Polska Ltd., Lodz, Poland 2 Department of Tumor Biology, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland 3 Centre of Molecular and Macromolecular Studies, Polish Academy of Sciences, Lodz, Poland Correspondence to: Wojciech J. Stec, email: // <![CDATA[ mail("wojciech.stec","celther",0,"") // ]]> Keywords: EGFR, EGFRvIII, DK-MG, glioblastoma Received: August 28, 2015 Accepted: March 10, 2016 Published: March 19, 2016

Multidrug Resistance (MDR) is defined as insensitivity to administered medicines that are structurally unrelated and have different molecular targets. Cancers possess numerous mechanisms of drug resistance, involving various aspects of cell biology. A pivotal role in this phenomenon is played by proteins--enzymatic or structural parts of the cell. Membrane transporters, including the main members of ABC protein family--P-gp, MRP1 and BCRP, as well as LRP, which builds structure of vaults, determine the multidrug-resistant phenotype by decreasing drug concentration within the cell or modifying its distribution to intracellular compartments. The π isoform of protein enzyme--glutathione S-transferase (GSTP-1), is responsible for excessive intensity of detoxification of cytostatics. A common example of altered drug target site that does not respond to chemotherapy is topoisomerase II α (TopoIIa). Alterations of programmed cell death result from expression of metallothionein (MT)--inhibitor of the process, and cytokeratin 18 (CK18), which, if in high concentration, also prevents apoptosis of cells. Several methods of decreasing activity of these proteins have been developed, aiming to overcome MDR in cancer cells. However, for a variety of reasons, their clinical suitability is still very low, leading to continuous increase in death rate among patients. This paper presents current state of knowledge on the most important examples of proteins responsible for MDR of cancer cells and molecular mechanisms of their action.

Estrogen receptor α (ERα) and progesterone receptor (PgR) are crucial prognostic and predictive biomarkers that are usually co-expressed in breast cancer (BC). However, 12–24% of BCs present ERα(+)/PgR(−) phenotype at immunohistochemical evaluation. In fact, BC may either show primary PgR(−) status (in chemonaïve tumor sample), lose PgR expression during neoadjuvant treatment, or acquire PgR(−) phenotype in local relapse or metastasis. The loss of PgR expression in ERα(+) breast cancer may signify resistance to endocrine therapy and poorer outcomes. On the other hand, ERα(+)/PgR(−) BCs may have a better response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy than double-positive tumors. Loss of PgR expression may be a result of pre-transcriptional alterations (copy number loss, mutation, epigenetic modifications), decreased transcription of the PGR gene (e.g., by microRNAs), and post-translational modifications (e.g., phosphorylation, sumoylation). Various processes involved in the down-regulation of PgR have distinct consequences on the biology of cancer cells. Occasionally, negative PgR status detected by immunohistochemical analysis is paradoxically associated with enhanced transcriptional activity of PgR that might be inhibited by antiprogestin treatment. Identification of the mechanism of PgR loss in each patient seems challenging, yet it may provide important information on the biology of the tumor and predict its responsiveness to the therapy.