Derivation of Myoepithelial Progenitor Cells from Bipotent Mammary Stem/Progenitor Cells

There is increasing evidence that breast and other cancers originate from and are maintained by a small fraction of stem/progenitor cells with self-renewal properties. Recent molecular profiling has identified six major subtypes of breast cancer: basal-like, ErbB2-overexpressing, normal breast epithelial-like, luminal A and B, and claudin-low subtypes. To help understand the relationship among mammary stem/progenitor cells and breast cancer subtypes, we have recently derived distinct hTERT-immortalized human mammary stem/progenitor cell lines: a K5+/K19− type, and a K5+/K19+ type. Under specific culture conditions, bipotent K5+/K19− stem/progenitor cells differentiated into stable clonal populations that were K5−/K19− and exhibit self-renewal and unipotent myoepithelial differentiation potential in contrast to the parental K5+/K19− cells which are bipotent. These K5−/K19− cells function as myoepithelial progenitor cells and constitutively express markers of an epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT) and show high invasive and migratory abilities. In addition, these cells express a microarray signature of claudin-low breast cancers. The EMT characteristics of an un-transformed unipotent mammary myoepithelial progenitor cells together with claudin-low signature suggests that the claudin-low breast cancer subtype may arise from myoepithelial lineage committed progenitors. Availability of immortal MPCs should allow a more definitive analysis of their potential to give rise to claudin-low breast cancer subtype and facilitate biological and molecular/biochemical studies of this disease

Adenomyoepithelioma of the breast: A proposal for classification

Breast lesions with a prominent myoepithelial cell component constitute a heterogeneous group of benign and malignant neoplastic proliferations. These lesions are often dual epithelial‐myoepithelial but may be purely myoepithelial cell in nature. Benign epithelial‐myoepithelial lesions typically maintain the morphology and immunophenotype of the normal bilayer epithelial myoepithelial structures. However, the distinction between the two cell components is not always clear‐cut in malignant lesions in which the histogenesis of myoepithelial cells remains uncertain. Neoplastic biphasic epithelial‐myoepithelial lesions of the breast include adenomyoepithelioma (AME), pleomorphic adenoma and adenoid cystic carcinoma. Four histological patterns of classical AME have been described: tubular, lobulated, spindle cell and adenosis variants. Overlapping patterns occur and some AMEs display an intraductal papillary pattern that may represent a fifth variant. AME can be benign or malignant. Classical AME may show atypical features, which are not sufficient for the diagnosis of malignancy (atypical AME). Atypical AME is recognised as a lesion of uncertain malignant potential with limited metastatic capability. Based on the histological features, we propose a classification of malignant AME (M‐AME) into three variants: M‐AME in situ, M‐AME invasive and AME with invasive carcinoma. In this review, we provide an overview of myoepithelial lesions of the breast focusing on the classification of AME to improve not only the consistency of reporting but also help guide further management decision making

Unternehmenspolitik japanischer Warenhaeuser: Ein Vergleich mit der Situation in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland

Bibliothek Weltwirtschaft Kiel C 153453 / FIZ - Fachinformationszzentrum Karlsruhe / TIB - Technische InformationsbibliothekSIGLEDEGerman

Unternehmenspolitik japanischer Warenhaeuser: Ein Vergleich mit der Situation in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland

Bibliothek Weltwirtschaft Kiel C 153453 / FIZ - Fachinformationszzentrum Karlsruhe / TIB - Technische InformationsbibliothekSIGLEDEGerman