32 research outputs found

    The brain microenvironment mediates resistance in luminal breast cancer to PI3K inhibition through HER3 activation

    Get PDF
    Although targeted therapies are often effective systemically, they fail to adequately control brain metastases. In preclinical models of breast cancer that faithfully recapitulate the disparate clinical responses in these microenvironments, we observed that brain metastases evade phosphatidylinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) inhibition despite drug accumulation in the brain lesions. In comparison to extracranial disease, we observed increased HER3 expression and phosphorylation in brain lesions. HER3 blockade overcame the resistance of HER2-amplified and/or PIK3CA-mutant breast cancer brain metastases to PI3K inhibitors, resulting in marked tumor growth delay and improvement in mouse survival. These data provide a mechanistic basis for therapeutic resistance in the brain microenvironment and identify translatable treatment strategies for HER2-amplified and/or PIK3CA-mutant breast cancer brain metastases

    Lymphatic Invasion of Plakoglobin-Dependent Tumor Cell Clusters Drives Formation of Polyclonal Lung Metastases in Colon Cancer

    Get PDF
    Background & Aims: Patients with colon cancer with liver metastases may be cured with surgery, but the presence of additional lung metastases often precludes curative treatment. Little is known about the processes driving lung metastasis. This study aimed to elucidate the mechanisms governing lung vs liver metastasis formation. Methods: Patient-derived organoid (PDO) cultures were established from colon tumors with distinct patterns of metastasis. Mouse models recapitulating metastatic organotropism were created by implanting PDOs into the cecum wall. Optical barcoding was applied to trace the origin and clonal composition of liver and lung metastases. RNA sequencing and immunohistochemistry were used to identify candidate determinants of metastatic organotropism. Genetic, pharmacologic, in vitro, and in vivo modeling strategies identified essential steps in lung metastasis formation. Validation was performed by analyzing patient-derived tissues. Results: Cecum transplantation of 3 distinct PDOs yielded models with distinct metastatic organotropism: liver only, lung only, and liver and lung. Liver metastases were seeded by single cells derived from select clones. Lung metastases were seeded by polyclonal clusters of tumor cells entering the lymphatic vasculature with very limited clonal selection. Lung-specific metastasis was associated with high expression of desmosome markers, including plakoglobin. Plakoglobin deletion abrogated tumor cell cluster formation, lymphatic invasion, and lung metastasis formation. Pharmacologic inhibition of lymphangiogenesis attenuated lung metastasis formation. Primary human colon, rectum, esophagus, and stomach tumors with lung metastases had a higher N-stage and more plakoglobin-expressing intra-lymphatic tumor cell clusters than those without lung metastases. Conclusions: Lung and liver metastasis formation are fundamentally distinct processes with different evolutionary bottlenecks, seeding entities, and anatomic routing. Polyclonal lung metastases originate from plakoglobin-dependent tumor cell clusters entering the lymphatic vasculature at the primary tumor site

    Should we talk about the ‘benefits’ of breastfeeding? The significance of the default in representations of infant feeding

    Get PDF
    Breastfeeding advocates have criticized the phrase “breast is best” as mistakenly representing breastfeeding as a departure from the norm rather than the default for infant feeding. Breastfeeding mothers have an interest in representing breastfeeding as the default, for example to counteract criticism of breastfeeding outside the home. This connects to an increasing trend to frame feeding babies formula as harmful which can be seen in research papers, public policy and information presented to parents and prospective parents. (1) whether we frame infant feeding decisions in terms of harming or benefit, protection or risk matters because these distinctions are generally morally significant and thus (2) holding that those who decide to use formula “harm”, “risk harm” to their babies or describing formula feeding as “dangerous” is likely to contribute to guilt associated with formula feeding and thus to undermine the wellbeing of vulnerable women. It may undermine attempts to improve breastfeeding rates by leading women to reject information about health outcomes surrounding infant feeding decisions. However, (3) these distinctions do not apply easily to infant feeding decisions, in part because of difficulties in determining whether we should treat breastfeeding as the normative baseline for infant feeding. I show that neither the descriptive ‘facts of the matter’ nor moral or pragmatic considerations provide an easy answer before discussing how to respond to these considerations. Keywords: Breastfeeding, Harm, Benefit, Risk-Based Language<br/

    Heatmap of probability distribution slopes for all data sets with respect to the lung development validation time series

    Full text link
    Abbreviations and colors are the same as in Figure 3.<p><b>Copyright information:</b></p><p>Taken from "Analysis of gene expression in a developmental context emphasizes distinct biological leitmotifs in human cancers"</p><p>http://genomebiology.com/2008/9/7/R108</p><p>Genome Biology 2008;9(7):R108-R108.</p><p>Published online 8 Jul 2008</p><p>PMCID:PMC2530866.</p><p></p

    Average expression level of consensus gene sets in the lung development validation time series

    Full text link
    Consensus group 1 = genes overexpressed in 11/16 data sets belonging to group 1; consensus group 2 = genes overexpressed in 5/6 data sets belonging to group 2; consensus group 3 = genes overexpressed in 8/13 data sets belonging to group 3.<p><b>Copyright information:</b></p><p>Taken from "Analysis of gene expression in a developmental context emphasizes distinct biological leitmotifs in human cancers"</p><p>http://genomebiology.com/2008/9/7/R108</p><p>Genome Biology 2008;9(7):R108-R108.</p><p>Published online 8 Jul 2008</p><p>PMCID:PMC2530866.</p><p></p
    corecore