Danova Marco, Comolli Giuditta, Manzoni Mariangela, Torchio Martina, Mazzini Giuliano
Internal Medicine and Medical Oncology, Vigevano Hospital, ASST Pavia, I-27029 Vigevano, Italy.
Microbiology and Virology, Biotechnology Laboratories, IRCCS San Matteo Foundation, I-27100 Pavia, Italy.
Mol Clin Oncol. 2016 Jun;4(6):909-917. doi: 10.3892/mco.2016.823. Epub 2016 Mar 18.
Malignant tumors are characterized by uncontrolled cell growth and metastatic spread, with a pivotal importance of the phenomenon of angiogenesis. For this reason, research has focused on the development of agents targeting the vascular component of the tumor microenvironment and regulating the angiogenic switch. As a result, the therapeutic inhibition of angiogenesis has become an important component of anticancer treatment, however, its utility is partly limited by the lack of an established methodology to assess its efficacy . Circulating endothelial cells (CECs), which are rare in healthy subjects and significantly increased in different tumor types, represent a promising tool for monitoring the tumor clinical outcome and the treatment response. A cell population circulating into the blood also able to form endothelial colonies and to promote vasculogenesis is represented by endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs). The number of both of these cell types is extremely low and they cannot be identified using a single marker, therefore, in absence of a definite consensus on their phenotype, require discrimination using combinations of antigens. Multiparameter flow cytometry (FCM) is ideal for rapid processing of high numbers of cells per second and is commonly utilized to quantify CECs and EPCs, however, remains technically challenging since there is as yet no standardized protocol for the identification and enumeration of these rare events. Methodology in studies on CECs and/or EPCs as clinical biomarkers in oncology is heterogeneous and data have been obtained from different studies leading to conflicting conclusions. The present review presented a critical review of the issues that limit the comparability of results of the most significant studies employing FCM for CEC and/or EPC detection in patients with cancer.
恶性肿瘤的特征是细胞生长失控和转移扩散,血管生成现象至关重要。因此,研究集中在开发针对肿瘤微环境血管成分并调节血管生成开关的药物。结果,血管生成的治疗性抑制已成为抗癌治疗的重要组成部分,然而,其效用部分受到缺乏评估其疗效的既定方法的限制。循环内皮细胞(CECs)在健康受试者中很少见,在不同肿瘤类型中显著增加,是监测肿瘤临床结果和治疗反应的有前途的工具。内皮祖细胞(EPCs)代表了一种循环到血液中也能够形成内皮集落并促进血管生成的细胞群体。这两种细胞类型的数量都极低,无法使用单一标记物进行识别,因此,由于对其表型尚无明确共识,需要使用抗原组合进行区分。多参数流式细胞术(FCM)非常适合每秒快速处理大量细胞,通常用于量化CECs和EPCs,然而,由于目前尚无用于识别和计数这些罕见事件的标准化方案,技术上仍然具有挑战性。作为肿瘤学临床生物标志物的CECs和/或EPCs研究方法各异,不同研究的数据得出了相互矛盾的结论。本综述对限制在癌症患者中使用FCM检测CEC和/或EPC的最重要研究结果可比性的问题进行了批判性综述。