Cancer cell lines as genetic models of their parent histology: Analyses based on array comparative genomic hybridization

Cancer Research

Volumn 67, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 3594-3600

  Greshock, Joel ^a   Nathanson, Katherine ^b   Martin, Anne Marie ^a   Zhang, Lin ^b   Coukos, George ^b   Weber, Barbara L ^a   Zaks, Tal Z ^a  

^a GLAXOSMITHKLINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER CELL CULTURE; COMPARATIVE GENOMIC HYBRIDIZATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; CYTOGENETICS; GENE AMPLIFICATION; GENE DELETION; GENE FREQUENCY; GENE LOSS; GENETIC ANALYSIS; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; IN VITRO SELECTION; PHENOTYPE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TUMOR GENE;

CELL LINE, TUMOR; CHROMOSOME ABERRATIONS; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS; NUCLEIC ACID HYBRIDIZATION;

EID: 34248582829     PISSN: 00085472     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-3674     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Weisenthal LM, Kern DH. Prediction of drug resistance in cancer chemotherapy: the Kern and DiSC assays. Oncology (Huntingt) 1991;5:93-103; discussion 4, 11-4, 17-8.
2. Vescio RA, Connors KM, Kubota T, Hoffman RM. Correlation of histology and drug response of human tumors grown in native-state three-dimensional histoculture and in nude mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1991;88:5163-6.
3. Bertucci F, Goncalves A, Monges G, et al. Acquired resistance to imatinib and secondary KIT exon 13 mutation in gastrointestinal stromal tumour. Oncol Rep 2006;16:97-101.
4. Kobayashi S, Boggon TJ, Dayaram T, et al. EGFR mutation and resistance of non-small-cell lung cancer to gefitinib. N Engl J Med 2005;352:786-92.
5. Pao W, Miller VA, Politi KA, et al. Acquired resistance of lung adenocarcinomas to gefitinib or erlotinib is associated with a second mutation in the EGFR kinase domain. PLoS Med 2005;2:e73.
6. Tinker AV, Boussioutas A, Bowtell DD. The challenges of gene expression microarrays for the study of human cancer. Cancer Cell 2006;9:333-9.
7. Ross DT, Scherf U, Eisen MB, et al. Systematic variation in gene expression patterns in human cancer cell lines. Nat Genet 2000;24:227-35.
8. Sandberg R, Ernberg I. Assessment of tumor characteristic gene expression in cell lines using a tissue similarity index (TSI). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;102:2052-7.
9. Bignell GR, Huang J, Greshock J, et al. High-resolution analysis of DNA copy number using oligonucleotide microarrays. Genome Res 2004;14:287-95.
10. Greshock J, Naylor TL, Margolin A, et al. 1-Mb resolution array-based comparative genomic hybridization using a BAC clone set optimized for cancer gene analysis. Genome Res 2004;14:179-87.
11. Ishkanian AS, Malloff CA, Watson SK, et al. A tiling resolution DNA microarray with complete coverage of the human genome. Nat Genet 2004;36:299-303.
12. Aguirre AJ, Brennan C, Bailey G, et al. High-resolution characterization of the pancreatic adenocarcinoma genome. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2004;101:9067-72.
13. Jin Y, Zhang H, Tsao SW, et al. Cytogenetic and molecular genetic characterization of immortalized human ovarian surface epithelial cell lines: consistent loss of chromosome 13 and amplification of chromosome 20. Gynecol Oncol 2004;92:183-91.
14. Ratsch SB, Gao Q, Srinivasan S, Wazer DE, Band V. Multiple genetic changes are required for efficient immortalization of different subtypes of normal human mammary epithelial cells. Radiat Res 2001;155:143-50.
15. Meisner LF, Wu SQ, Christian BJ, Reznikoff CA. Cytogenetic instability with balanced chromosome changes in an SV40 transformed human uroepithelial cell line. Cancer Res 1988;48:3215-20.
16. Kees UR, Rudduck C, Ford J, et al. Two malignant peripheral primitive neuroepithelial tumor cell lines established from consecutive samples of one patient: characterization and cytogenetic analysis. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 1992;4:195-204.
17. Lee H, Maihle NJ. Isolation and characterization of four alternate c-erbB3 transcripts expressed in ovarian carcinoma-derived cell lines and normal human tissues. Oncogene 1998;16:3243-52.
18. Mackay AR, Ballin M, Pelina MD, et al. Effect of phorbol ester and cytokines on matrix metalloproteinase and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase expression in tumor and normal cell lines. Invasion Metastasis 1992;12:168-84.
19. Naylor TL, Greshock J, Wang Y, et al. High resolution genomic analysis of sporadic breast cancer using array-based comparative genomic hybridization. Breast Cancer Res 2005;7:R1186-98.
20. Garnis C, Lockwood WW, Vucic E, et al. High resolution analysis of non-small cell lung cancer cell lines by whole genome tiling path array CGH. Int J Cancer 2006;118:1556-64.
21. Zhao X, Weir BA, LaFramboise T, et al. Homozygous deletions and chromosome amplifications in human lung carcinomas revealed by single nucleotide polymorphism array analysis. Cancer Res 2005;65:5561-70.
22. Olshen AB, Venkatraman ES, Lucito R, Wigler M. Circular binary segmentation for the analysis of array-based DNA copy number data. Biostatistics 2004;5:557-72.
23. Brazma A, Hingamp P, Quackenbush J, et al. Minimum information about a microarray experiment (MIAME) - toward standards for microarray data. Nat Genet 2001;29:365-71.
24. Futreal PA, Coin L, Marshall M, et al. A census of human cancer genes. Nat Rev Cancer 2004;4:177-83.
25. Douglas EJ, Fiegler H, Rowan A, et al. Array comparative genomic hybridization analysis of colorectal cancer cell lines and primary carcinomas. Cancer Res 2004;64:4817-25.
26. Nakao K, Mehta KR, Fridlyand J, et al. High-resolution analysis of DNA copy number alterations in colorectal cancer by array-based comparative genomic hybridization. Carcinogenesis 2004;25:1345-57.
27. Jong K, Marchiori E, van der Vaart A, et al. Cross-platform array comparative genomic hybridization meta-analysis separates hematopoietic and mesenchymal from epithelial tumors. Oncogene 2007;26:1499-506.
28. Curtin JA, Fridlyand J, Kageshita T, et al. Distinct sets of genetic alterations in melanoma. N Engl J Med 2005;353:2135-47.
29. Singh B, Kim SH, Carew JF, et al. Genome-wide screening for radiation response factors in head and neck cancer. Laryngoscope 2000;110:1251-6.
30. Hattinger CM, Reverter-Branchat G, Remondini D, et al. Genomic imbalances associated with methotrexate resistance in human osteosarcoma cell lines detected by comparative genomic hybridization-based techniques. Eur J Cell Biol 2003;82:483-93.
31. O'Toole SA, Sheppard BL, Sheils O, O'Leary JJ, Spengler B, Christoffel V. Analysis of DNA in endometrial cancer cells treated with phyto-estrogenic compounds using comparative genomic hybridisation microarrays. Planta Med 2005;71:435-9.
32. de Angelis PM, Fjell B, Kravik KL, et al. Molecular characterizations of derivatives of HCT116 colorectal cancer cells that are resistant to the chemotherapeutic agent 5-fluorouracil. Int J Oncol 2004;24:1279-88.
33. Rhodes DR, Yu J, Shanker K, et al. Large-scale meta-analysis of cancer microarray data identifies common transcriptional profiles of neoplastic transformation and progression. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2004;101:9309-14.
34. Fridlyand J, Snijders AM, Ylstra B, et al. Breast tumor copy number aberration phenotypes and genomic instability. BMC Cancer 2006;6:96.
35. Schwab M, Ellison J, Busch M, Rosenau W, Varmus HE, Bishop JM. Enhanced expression of the human gene N-myc consequent to amplification of DNA may contribute to malignant progression of neuroblastoma. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1984;81:4940-4.
36. Pollack JR, Sorlie T, Perou CM, et al. Microarray analysis reveals a major direct role of DNA copy number alteration in the transcriptional program of human breast tumors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2002;99:12963-8.
37. Garnis C, Coe BP, Lam SL, MacAulay C, Lam, WL. High-resolution array CGH increases heterogeneity tolerance in the analysis of clinical samples. Genomics 2005;85:790-3.
38. Chin K, de Solorzano CO, Knowles D, et al. In situ analyses of genome instability in breast cancer. Nat Genet 2004;36:984-8.
39. Nielsen TO. Microarray analysis of sarcomas. Adv Anat Pathol 2006;13:166-73.
40. Li HM, Man C, Jin Y, et al. Molecular and cytogenetic changes involved in the immortalization of nasopharyngeal epithelial cells by telomerase. Int J Cancer 2006;119:1567-76.
41. Savelieva E, Belair CD, Newton MA, et al. 20q gain associates with immortalization:20q13.2 amplification correlates with genome instability in human papillomavirus 16 E7 transformed human uroepithehal cells. Oncogene 1997;14:551-60.
42. Rickardson L, Fryknas M, Dhar S, et al. Identification of molecular mechanisms for cellular drug resistance by combining drug activity and gene expression profiles. Br J Cancer 2005;93:483-92.
43. Bild AH, Yao G, Chang JT, et al. Oncogenic pathway signatures in human cancers as a guide to targeted therapies. Nature 2006;439:353-7.
44. Solit DB, Garraway LA, Pratilas CA, et al. BRAF mutation predicts sensitivity to MEK inhibition. Nature 2006;439:358-62.
45. Smolen GA, Sordella R, Muir B, et al. Amplification of MET may identify a subset of cancers with extreme sensitivity to the selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor PHA-665752. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2006; 103:2316-21.
46. Mehta KR, Nakao K, Zuraek MB, et al. Fractional genomic alteration detected by array-based comparative genomic hybridization independently predicts survival after hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2005;11:1791-7.