乳腺癌类器官共培养技术的建立和优化

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8115.2021.08.004

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的·改进乳腺癌类器官培养传代方法，建立富集肿瘤相关成纤维细胞（cancer associated fibroblasts，CAFs）的共培养体系。方法·采用不同类型胶原酶（Ⅰ型、Ⅲ型、Ⅳ型）处理5例乳腺癌新鲜肿瘤组织，通过细胞计数法计数组织消化后的细胞数量，用流式细胞仪分析细胞活性；采用含有不同含量成纤维细胞生长因子7（fibroblast growth factor 7，FGF7）、FGF10以及表皮生长因子（epidermal growth factor，EGF）的培养基对乳腺癌原发灶单细胞进行三维培养，对比观察不同细胞因子含量对类器官培养成功率和状态的影响；采用不同离心速度，对比类器官传代方法优劣，简化传代步骤。建立原代CAFs与类器官共培养体系，CCK8实验研究CAFs对类器官生长的影响，光学显微镜下观察类器官的形态变化。结果·相比于Ⅰ型胶原酶和Ⅲ型胶原酶，Ⅳ型胶原酶消化乳腺癌组织可得到较高的细胞回收效率（P=0.045，P=0.017），并保持较高的细胞活性（P=0.005，P=0.048）；优化类器官培养基成分（不添加FGF7和FGF10，添加低浓度EGF），并提高离心转速至900×g，可得到更经济、有效、快速的类器官培养传代方法。相比单独培养的类器官，CAFs与类器官共培养，进一步提高类器官体外生长速度（P<0.05），增加类器官形态的异质性。结论·优化后的类器官培养体系可显著增加乳腺癌类器官培养成功率，简化培养步骤并降低培养成本。原代CAFs和类器官共培养体系的建立为研究乳腺癌异质性和肿瘤微环境提供了良好的体外模型。

关键词: 乳腺癌, 类器官, 改进培养, 肿瘤相关成纤维细胞, 共培养

Abstract:

Objective·To improve the cultivating and passaging method of breast cancer organoids, and establish a co-culture system enriching cancer associated fibroblasts (CAFs).

Methods·Different types of collagenases (type Ⅰ, type Ⅲ and type Ⅳ) were used to digest fresh tissues from 5 breast cancer patients. The number of cells after tissue digestion was counted by cell counting method, and cell viability was analyzed by cell flow cytometry. Three-dimensional culture of primary breast cancer single cells was carried out by using culture system containing different contents of fibroblast growth factor 7 (FGF7), FGF10 and epidermal growth factor (EGF). The success rate of cell culture and the growing status of organoids were observed and compared. Different centrifugation speeds were used to compare the advantages and disadvantages of passaging methods and simplify the passaging steps. CCK8 assay was used to study the effect of CAFs on the growth of organoids in the co-culture system of primary CAFs and organoids, and the morphological changes of organoids were observed under optical microscope.

Results·Compared with type Ⅰ and type Ⅲ collagenase, type Ⅳ collagenase got the highest cell yields (P=0.045, P=0.017), and maintained the highest cell viability (P=0.005, P=0.048). By optimizing the composition of organoid medium (omitting FGF7 and FGF10, reducing EGF concentration) and passaging process (improving centrifugal velocity to 900×g), a more economical, effective and rapid method of organoid culture was obtained. Compared with organoids cultured alone, the growth rate (P<0.05) and heterogeneity of organoids increased when organoids were co-cultured with CAFs.

Conclusion·The optimized culture system can significantly increase the success rate of organoids, simplify the culture steps and reduce the culture cost. The establishment of primary CAFs and organoids co-culture system provides a good in vitro model for the study of breast cancer heterogeneity and tumor microenvironment.

Key words: breast cancer, organoid, improved culture condition, cancer-associated fibroblast (CAF), co-culture

中图分类号:

R73-3

周天浩, 辛肇晨, 杜少倩, 曹源, 许静轩, 劳曾红, 王红霞. 乳腺癌类器官共培养技术的建立和优化[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(8): 1017-1024.

Tian-hao ZHOU, Zhao-chen XIN, Shao-qian DU, Yuan CAO, Jing-xuan XU, Zeng-hong LAO, Hong-xia WANG. Establishment and optimization of co-culture technology for breast cancer organoids[J]. JOURNAL OF SHANGHAI JIAOTONG UNIVERSITY (MEDICAL SCIENCE), 2021, 41(8): 1017-1024.

图/表 4

图 1 不同种类的胶原酶对乳腺癌组织的消化效率和对细胞损伤的对比Note：A. The number of cells harvested after digestion of breast cancer tissue by different types of collagenases. B. Representative gating strategy for the identification of live cells after digestion. C. Frequencies of live (DAPI-negative) single tissue cells by different types of collagenases. ①P=0.017, ②P=0.045, ③P=0.005, ④P=0.048.

Fig 1 Comparison of digestion efficiency and cell damage of different types of collagenase in breast cancer tissues

图2 PDO培养和传代条件的优化和改进Note：A/B. The effect of different concentrations of FGF7 and FGF10 (A) and FGF (B) on the growth of organoids. Representative images of PDO were shown. The number and size of 3D spheres after 10 d were quantitatively analyzed. Ⅰ—high concentration group; Ⅱ—low concentration group; Ⅲ—no growth factor group. C. Representative images of different passages of PDO. Scale bar=50 μm. ①P=0.556, ②P=0.842, ③P=0.842, ④P=0.800, ⑤P=0.225, ⑥P=0.000, ⑦P=0.000, ⑧P=0.719, ⑨P=0.000, ⑩P=0.000.

Fig 2 Optimization and improvement of PDO culture and passage conditions

图3 PDO 的表面分子表达情况和组织学特点Note：A. Comparative immunohistochemical images of breast cancer and PDO. PDO expressed conserved ER, PR, and HER2 when compared with primary tumor. B. Quantitative analysis of expression of ER, PR and HER2 between PDOs and primary tumors in five patients. C. PDO expressed conserved CDH1, TROP1 and TROP2 when compared with primary tumor. D. Quantitative analysis of expression of CDH1, TROP1 and TROP2 between PDOs and primary tumors in five patients. Scale bar= 50 μm. ①P=0.976, ②P=0.379, ③P=0.985, ④P=0.859, ⑤P=0.800, ⑥P=0.837.

Fig 3 Molecular expression and histological characteristics of PDO

图4 CAFs和PDO共培养体系构建和CAFs对PDO形态异质性以及生长速度的影响Note：A. PDO molecular phenotyping by tyramide signal amplification. B. CAFs molecular phenotyping by immunofluorescence. C. Co-cultured PDO and CAFs in a stable system. The blue arrows indicate CAFs and the red arrows indicate PDOs. D. Morphological differences between PDO cultured alone and co-culture with CAFs at low magnification. E. Morphological differences between PDO cultured alone and co-culture with CAFs at high magnification. F. CCK8 assay conducted in PDO cultured alone and co-culture with CAFs. Scale bar=50 μm. ①P=0.004, ②P=0.002.

Fig 4 Construction of CAFs and PDO co-culture system and influence of CAFs on morphological heterogeneity and growth rate of PDO

参考文献 27

1	Januškevičienė I, Petrikaitė V. Heterogeneity of breast cancer: the importance of interaction between different tumor cell populations[J]. Life Sci, 2019, 239: 117009.
2	Gooding AJ, Zhang B, Gunawardane L, et al. The lncRNA BORG facilitates the survival and chemoresistance of triple-negative breast cancers[J]. Oncogene, 2019, 38(12): 2020-2041.
3	Testa U, Castelli G, Pelosi E. Breast cancer: a molecularly heterogenous disease needing subtype-specific treatments[J]. Med Sci (Basel), 2020, 8(1): E18.
4	Murayama T, Gotoh N. Patient-derived xenograft models of breast cancer and their application[J]. Cells, 2019, 8(6): E621.
5	Ishiguro T, Ohata H, Sato A, et al. Tumor-derived spheroids: relevance to cancer stem cells and clinical applications[J]. Cancer Sci, 2017, 108(3): 283-289.
6	Rosenbluth JM, Schackmann RCJ, Kenneth Gray G, et al. Organoid cultures from normal and cancer-prone human breast tissues preserve complex epithelial lineages[J]. Nat Commun, 2020, 11: 1711.
7	Drost J, Clevers H. Organoids in cancer research[J]. Nat Rev Cancer, 2018, 18(7): 407-418.
8	Sachs N, de Ligt J, Kopper O, et al. A living biobank of breast cancer organoids captures disease heterogeneity[J]. Cell, 2018, 172(1/2): 373-386.e10.
9	Calar K, Plesselova S, Bhattacharya S, et al. Human plasma-derived 3D cultures model breast cancer treatment responses and predict clinically effective drug treatment concentrations[J]. Cancers, 2020, 12(7): 1722.
10	Zhang L, Adileh M, Martin ML, et al. Establishing estrogen-responsive mouse mammary organoids from single Lgr5⁺ cells[J]. Cell Signal, 2017, 29: 41-51.
11	Houthuijzen JM, Jonkers J. Cancer-associated fibroblasts as key regulators of the breast cancer tumor microenvironment[J]. Cancer Metastasis Rev, 2018, 37(4): 577-597.
12	Truong DD, Kratz A, Park JG, et al. A human organotypic microfluidic tumor model permits investigation of the interplay between patient-derived fibroblasts and breast cancer cells[J]. Cancer Res, 2019, 79(12): 3139-3151.
13	Nayak B, Balachander GM, Manjunath S, et al. Tissue mimetic 3D scaffold for breast tumor-derived organoid culture toward personalized chemotherapy[J]. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces, 2019, 180: 334-343.
14	Richards Z, McCray T, Marsili J, et al. Prostate stroma increases the viability and maintains the branching phenotype of human prostate organoids[J]. iScience, 2019, 12: 304-317.
15	Liu J, Shen JX, Wu HT, et al. Collagen 1A1 (COL1A1) promotes metastasis of breast cancer and is a potential therapeutic target[J]. Discov Med, 2018, 25(139): 211-223.
16	Kauppila S, Stenbäck F, Risteli J, et al. Aberrant type Ⅰ and type Ⅲ collagen gene expression in human breast cancer in vivo[J]. J Pathol, 1998, 186(3): 262-268.
17	Zhu YY, Chen C, Li JJ, et al. The prognostic value of quantitative analysis of CCL5 and collagen Ⅳ in luminal B (HER2-) subtype breast cancer by quantum-dot-based molecular imaging[J]. Int J Nanomedicine, 2018, 13: 3795-3803.
18	Carranza-Rosales P, Guzmán-Delgado NE, Carranza-Torres IE, et al. Breast organotypic cancer models[J]. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol, 2018. DOI:10.1007/82_2018_86.
19	Drost J, van Boxtel R, Blokzijl F, et al. Use of CRISPR-modified human stem cell organoids to study the origin of mutational signatures in cancer[J]. Science, 2017, 358(6360): 234-238.
20	Duarte AA, Gogola E, Sachs N, et al. BRCA-deficient mouse mammary tumor organoids to study cancer-drug resistance[J]. Nat Methods, 2018, 15(2): 134-140.
21	Kondo J, Inoue M. Application of cancer organoid model for drug screening and personalized therapy[J]. Cells, 2019, 8(5): E470.
22	Bager CL, Willumsen N, Leeming DJ, et al. Collagen degradation products measured in serum can separate ovarian and breast cancer patients from healthy controls: a preliminary study[J]. Cancer Biomark, 2015, 15(6): 783-788.
23	Rios AC, Clevers H. Imaging organoids: a bright future ahead[J]. Nat Methods, 2018, 15(1): 24-26.
24	Mazzucchelli S, Piccotti F, Allevi R, et al. Establishment and morphological characterization of patient-derived organoids from breast cancer[J]. Biol Proced Online, 2019, 21: 12.
25	Yu J, Huang W. The progress and clinical application of breast cancer organoids[J]. Int J Stem Cells, 2020, 13(3): 295-304.
26	Su SC, Chen JN, Yao HR, et al. CD10⁺GPR77⁺ cancer-associated fibroblasts promote cancer formation and chemoresistance by sustaining cancer stemness[J]. Cell, 2018, 172(4): 841-856.e16.
27	Costa A, Kieffer Y, Scholer-Dahirel A, et al. Fibroblast heterogeneity and immunosuppressive environment in human breast cancer[J]. Cancer Cell, 2018, 33(3): 463-479.e10.

[1]	季艳杰, 罗浩, 蔡海燕, 刘欣宇, 金诗佳, 粟深月, 徐含章, 雷虎, 吴英理. CDDO-Me对三阴性乳腺癌细胞泛素特异性蛋白酶2a活性及细胞增殖的抑制作用[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(8): 1025-1032.
[2]	王成志, 邓华云, 庞智, 黄雷. MUC1在HER2阳性乳腺癌发病中的作用及机制研究[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(7): 839-848.
[3]	张海燕, 储晓英. 非阿片类镇痛药应用在全身麻醉喉罩置入的乳腺癌保乳手术中的可行性[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(5): 637-641.
[4]	张佳玲, 张凤春, 徐迎春. 乳腺癌脑转移系统治疗的研究进展[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(5): 671-677.
[5]	赵晓军, 乔志刚, 梁挺宇, 安艳玲. 乳腺癌易感基因1蛋白在脑胶质瘤中的表达及对替莫唑胺敏感性的影响[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2021, 41(1): 118-122.
[6]	陈思，刘春良，赵倩，孙海鹏，刘云霞. 基于生存分析的生物信息学方法筛选乳腺癌枢纽基因和关键通路[J]. 上海交通大学学报（医学版）, 2020, 40(3): 294-.
[7]	叶欣，周晓云，杨莉，王杰，何奇. 不同年龄范围界定下的年轻乳腺癌患者的临床病理特征及预后分析[J]. 上海交通大学学报（医学版）, 2020, 40(3): 351-.
[8]	程龙1，徐五琴2，张鹏1，黄建军1，李小宁1. 下调miR-27a表达对三阴乳腺癌细胞增殖、迁移和侵袭的影响[J]. 上海交通大学学报（医学版）, 2020, 40(2): 188-.
[9]	张凤春1, 2，张硕渊3，陈天恩3，徐迎春3. PD-1/PD-L1通路在三阴性乳腺癌预后预测及治疗中的意义[J]. 上海交通大学学报（医学版）, 2020, 40(1): 128-.
[10]	何沁，张伟滨，沈宇辉. 乳腺癌脊柱转移患者预后预测模型的构建[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2020, 40(09): 1243-1248.
[11]	赵伟光，刘志宏. 肿瘤相关成纤维细胞调控肿瘤免疫炎症微环境的研究进展[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2020, 40(09): 1288-1293.
[12]	陆裕杰，金泽宇，李亚芬，沈坤炜，陈伟国，陈小松. 乳腺癌局部区域复发病灶受体状态检测及对后续治疗的指导价值[J]. 上海交通大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 39(9): 1071-.
[13]	孙晓寅，莊志刚，傅韵，成小林. 乳腺癌 X线征象及其术后病理特征分析[J]. 上海交通大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 39(4): 398-.
[14]	董晓晶 1，张男 1，甘露 1，吴怡颖 1，陈允允 1，方琼 2. 个案管理模式下老年乳腺癌患者辅助治疗依从性分析[J]. 上海交通大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 39(2): 170-.
[15]	王志威，王杰，魏敏，杨莉，邵玉国，籍敏，何奇. 多西他赛、表柔比星联合环磷酰胺对局部晚期乳腺癌辅助化学治疗不同周期的疗效研究[J]. 上海交通大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 39(12): 1432-.