Suppr超能文献

[体外化学敏感性测定结果:人肿瘤克隆形成及闪烁测定]

[Results of in vitro chemosensitivity assays: human tumor clonogenic and scintillation assay].

作者信息

Tanigawa N, Morimoto H, Akita T, Inoue H, Tanaka T

出版信息

Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 1986 Apr;13(4 Pt 2):1176-84.

PMID:3729439
Abstract

The authors reviewed their experiences to date with chemosensitivity testing of 629 tumors by human tumor clonogenic assay (HTCA) and of 199 tumors by scintillation assay (SA). HTCA and SA were both performed using a double-layer-soft-agar system with continuous exposure of cells to one concentration of standard anticancer drugs. Overall, 60% of specimens in HTCA and 58% in SA produced significant growth in vitro. HTCA was 52% (13/25) reliable for predicting in vivo sensitivity, and 95% (36/38) reliable for in vivo resistance, whereas SA was 40% (8/20) reliable for in vivo sensitivity and 88% (21/24) for in vivo resistance. The current results indicate that there is no particular difference in the success rate and in the predictive accuracy for in vivo sensitivity and resistance between HTCA and SA. Therefore, it is doubtful whether only clonogenic tumor cells among whole tumor cell populations should be selected in assessing the chemosensitivities of human tumors. In vitro success rates were variable, depending on the tumor histology. In vitro growth of gastric cancer specimens was characteristically lower than that of colon cancer specimens (48% and 60% in HTCA, and 46% and 68% in SA, respectively). (p less than 0.005). Optimal in vitro-in vivo drug concentrations and culture conditions are still being defined. Correlation studies of in vitro-in vivo responses of gastrointestinal cancers suggested that in vitro concentrations of 5-fluorouracil and mitomycin C used in this study were considerably higher than their optimal doses. Tumor cell heterogeneity poses significant problems in the clinical use of chemosensitivity assays. The question arises as to whether a single biopsy specimen is representative of a patient's disease. In this last study, we sought evidence of tumor heterogeneity by comparing chemosensitivity responses between: 1) different portions of a single tumor, 2) a primary and a metastatic biopsy taken from a patient on the same day, and 3) different metastases from a patient taken on the same day. The results demonstrated the presence of considerable heterogeneity of response to chemotherapy among different tumors from the same patient, and even within the same tumor. The reported discrepancies of in vitro and in vivo sensitivity may be due to such therapeutic heterogeneity among tumors.

摘要

作者回顾了他们目前使用人肿瘤克隆形成试验(HTCA)对629个肿瘤进行化学敏感性测试以及使用闪烁试验(SA)对199个肿瘤进行化学敏感性测试的经验。HTCA和SA均采用双层软琼脂系统进行,细胞持续暴露于一种浓度的标准抗癌药物。总体而言,HTCA中60%的标本和SA中58%的标本在体外产生了显著生长。HTCA预测体内敏感性的可靠性为52%(13/25),预测体内耐药性的可靠性为95%(36/38),而SA预测体内敏感性的可靠性为40%(8/20),预测体内耐药性的可靠性为88%(21/24)。目前的结果表明,HTCA和SA在成功率以及对体内敏感性和耐药性的预测准确性方面没有特别差异。因此,在评估人类肿瘤的化学敏感性时,是否只应选择整个肿瘤细胞群体中的克隆形成肿瘤细胞值得怀疑。体外成功率各不相同,取决于肿瘤组织学类型。胃癌标本的体外生长特征性地低于结肠癌标本(HTCA中分别为48%和60%,SA中分别为46%和68%)。(p<0.005)。最佳的体外-体内药物浓度和培养条件仍在确定中。胃肠道癌体外-体内反应的相关性研究表明,本研究中使用的5-氟尿嘧啶和丝裂霉素C的体外浓度大大高于其最佳剂量。肿瘤细胞异质性在化学敏感性试验的临床应用中带来了重大问题。一个问题是单个活检标本是否代表患者的疾病。在最后这项研究中,我们通过比较以下方面的化学敏感性反应来寻找肿瘤异质性的证据:1)单个肿瘤的不同部分;2)同一天从患者身上获取的原发灶和转移灶活检标本;3)同一天从患者身上获取的不同转移灶。结果表明,同一患者的不同肿瘤之间,甚至同一肿瘤内部,对化疗的反应存在相当大的异质性。所报道的体外和体内敏感性差异可能归因于肿瘤之间的这种治疗异质性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验