Gabrielson E W, Van der Meeren A, Reddel R R, Reddel H, Gerwin B I, Harris C C
Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205.
Carcinogenesis. 1992 Aug;13(8):1359-63. doi: 10.1093/carcin/13.8.1359.
To determine if asbestos exposure could contribute to mesothelial cell carcinogenesis by selection and/or expansion of an initiated cell population, we compared normal human pleural mesothelial cells to either human mesothelioma cell lines or mesothelial cells transfected with cancer-related genes for sensitivity to amosite fibers in vitro. Neither normal nor mesothelioma cells were directly stimulated to replicate or increase DNA synthesis by any of the asbestos exposure conditions tested. The potential selective effect of asbestos exposure was demonstrated by a differential sensitivity of normal mesothelial cells and mesothelioma cells to amosite: for example, up to 20-fold higher concentrations of amosite fibers were required to inhibit replication of mesothelioma cell lines than normal mesothelial cells. In addition, a significant resistance (4-fold) to amosite toxicity was observed for SV40 immortalized mesothelial cell lines that had previously been selected in vitro for resistance to asbestos. SV40 immortalized cells that have become tumorigenic after transfection with either Ha-ras or PDGF A-chain genes were not significantly more resistant to the cytotoxic effects of amosite than primary normal cells, and the primary cells were equally sensitive to amosite as mesothelial cells that were only immortalized by SV40. The sensitivity of normal mesothelial cells to asbestos does not appear to be simply a result of general fragility of the mesothelial cells, since similar levels of hydrogen peroxide and silica were cytotoxic for normal mesothelial cells and mesothelioma cell lines. Because mesothelioma cells have a greater resistance to asbestos cytotoxicity than normal mesothelial cells, we hypothesize that a differential resistance to cell killing by asbestos fibers in vivo may result in a selective expansion of an initiated or transformed cell population and thus contribute to the carcinogenesis process. Since tumorigenicity and asbestos resistance occur independently of one another in genetically altered mesothelial cell lines, genotypic and phenotypic alterations that lead to tumorigenic conversion may not be the same changes that provide resistance to cell killing by asbestos.
为了确定石棉暴露是否可通过选择和/或扩增起始细胞群体来促进间皮细胞癌变,我们将正常人胸膜间皮细胞与人间皮瘤细胞系或转染了癌症相关基因的间皮细胞进行比较,以检测它们在体外对铁石棉纤维的敏感性。在所测试的任何石棉暴露条件下,正常细胞和间皮瘤细胞均未被直接刺激进行复制或增加DNA合成。正常间皮细胞和间皮瘤细胞对铁石棉的敏感性差异证明了石棉暴露的潜在选择作用:例如,抑制间皮瘤细胞系复制所需的铁石棉纤维浓度比正常间皮细胞高20倍。此外,对于先前在体外选择出的对石棉具有抗性的SV40永生化间皮细胞系,观察到其对铁石棉毒性具有显著抗性(4倍)。用Ha-ras或血小板衍生生长因子A链基因转染后已具有致瘤性的SV40永生化细胞,对铁石棉的细胞毒性作用的抗性并不比原代正常细胞显著更高,并且原代细胞对铁石棉的敏感性与仅通过SV40永生化的间皮细胞相同。正常间皮细胞对石棉的敏感性似乎并非仅仅是间皮细胞普遍脆弱性的结果,因为相似水平的过氧化氢和二氧化硅对正常间皮细胞和间皮瘤细胞系均具有细胞毒性。由于间皮瘤细胞对石棉细胞毒性的抗性比正常间皮细胞更强,我们推测在体内对石棉纤维细胞杀伤作用的差异抗性可能导致起始或转化细胞群体的选择性扩增,从而促进癌变过程。由于在基因改变的间皮细胞系中致瘤性和石棉抗性彼此独立发生,导致致瘤性转化的基因型和表型改变可能与赋予对石棉细胞杀伤抗性的变化不同。