Distinct MDM2 and P14ARF expression and centrosome amplification in well-differentiated liposarcomas

Centrosome amplification: a quantifiable cancer cell trait with prognostic value in solid malignancies

Numerical and/or structural centrosome amplification (CA) is a hallmark of cancers that is often associated with the aberrant tumor karyotypes and poor clinical outcomes. Mechanistically, CA compromises mitotic fidelity and leads to chromosome instability (CIN), which underlies tumor initiation and progression. Recent technological advances in microscopy and image analysis platforms have enabled better-than-ever detection and quantification of centrosomal aberrancies in cancer. Numerous studies have thenceforth correlated the presence and the degree of CA with indicators of poor prognosis such as higher tumor grade and ability to recur and metastasize. We have pioneered a novel semi-automated pipeline that integrates immunofluorescence confocal microscopy with digital image analysis to yield a quantitative centrosome amplification score (CAS), which is a summation of the severity and frequency of structural and numerical centrosome aberrations in tumor samples. Recent studies in breast cancer show that CA increases across the disease progression continuum, while normal breast tissue exhibited the lowest CA, followed by cancer-adjacent apparently normal, ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive tumors, which showed the highest CA. This finding strengthens the notion that CA could be evolutionarily favored and can promote tumor progression and metastasis. In this review, we discuss the prevalence, extent, and severity of CA in various solid cancer types, the utility of quantifying amplified centrosomes as an independent prognostic marker. We also highlight the clinical feasibility of a CA-based risk score for predicting recurrence, metastasis, and overall prognosis in patients with solid cancers.

Centrosome amplification in chondrosarcomas: A primary cell culture and cryopreserved tumor sample study

The genetics background underlying the aggressiveness of chondrosarcoma (CS) is poorly understood. One possible cause of malignant transformation is chromosomal instability, which involves an error in mitotic segregation due to numerical and/or functional abnormalities of centrosomes. The present study aimed to evaluate centrosome amplification in cryopreserved samples of tumor tissue from patients with CS. An analysis was performed on 3 primary cultures of tumors from patients who underwent surgery between January 2012 and December 2012 at the Department of Orthopedics at the Barretos Cancer Hospital (Barretos, Brazil). Additionally, cryopreserved tumor specimens were analyzed from 10 patients. The data were assessed using immunocytochemistry and immunohistochemistry staining techniques with monoclonal antibody anti-γ-tubulin. A total of 4 samples of CS cultured cells were obtained from 3 patients. A recurrence of a histological grade III tumor was detected in a female patient with Ollier's syndrome. The other 2 cases were grade I and III. The incidence of centrosome amplification in the primary cultures ranged from 15-64% of the cells. Whereas control cultured fibroblasts showed baseline levels of 4% amplified cells. For the cryopreserved specimens, two independent observers analyzed each sample and counted the cells stained with γ-tubulin, verifying the percentage of affected cells to be a mean of 14%, with the number of clusters ranging between 0-6 per slide. In conclusion, centrosome amplification was found to be a consistent biological feature of CS and may underlie chromosomal instability in this tumor.

Heading off with the herd: how cancer cells might maneuver supernumerary centrosomes for directional migration

The complicity of centrosomes in carcinogenesis is unmistakable. Mounting evidence clearly implicates a robust correlation between centrosome amplification (CA) and malignant transformation in diverse tissue types. Furthermore, CA has been suggested as a marker of cancer aggressiveness, in particular the invasive phenotype, in breast and prostate cancers. One means by which CA promotes malignancy is through induction of transient spindle multipolarity during mitosis, which predisposes the cell to karyotypic changes arising from low-grade chromosome mis-segregation. It is well recognized that during cell migration in interphase, centrosome-mediated nucleation of a radial microtubule array is crucial for establishing a polarized Golgi apparatus, without which directionality is precluded. The question of how cancer cells maneuver their supernumerary centrosomes to achieve directionality during cell migration is virtually uncharted territory. Given that CA is a hallmark of cancers and has been correlated with cancer aggressiveness, malignant cells are presumably competent in managing their centrosome surfeit during directional migration, although the cellular logistics of this process remain unexplored. Another key angle worth pondering is whether an overabundance of centrosomes confers some advantage on cancer cells in terms of their migratory and invasive capabilities. Recent studies have uncovered a remarkable strategy that cancer cells employ to deal with the problem of excess centrosomes and ensure bipolar mitoses, viz., centrosome clustering. This review aims to change the narrative by exploring how an increased centrosome complement may, via aneuploidy-independent modulation of the microtubule cytoskeleton, enhance directional migration and invasion of malignant cells. We postulate that CA imbues cancer cells with cytoskeletal advantages that enhance cell polarization, Golgi-dependent vesicular trafficking, stromal invasion, and other aspects of metastatic progression. We also propose that centrosome declustering may represent a novel, cancer cell-specific antimetastatic strategy, as cancer cells may rely on centrosome clustering during migration as they do in mitosis. Elucidation of these details offers an exciting avenue for future research, as does investigating how CA may promote metastasis through enhanced directional migration.

A clinical overview of centrosome amplification in human cancers

The turn of the 21st century had witnessed a surge of interest in the centrosome and its causal relation to human cancer development - a postulate that has existed for almost a century. Centrosome amplification (CA) is frequently detected in a growing list of human cancers, both solid and haematological, and is a candidate "hallmark" of cancer cells. Several lines of evidence support the progressive involvement of CA in the transition from early to advanced stages of carcinogenesis, being also found in pre-neoplastic lesions and even in histopathologically-normal tissue. CA constitutes the major mechanism leading to chromosomal instability and aneuploidy, via the formation of multipolar spindles and chromosomal missegregation. Clinically, CA may translate to a greater risk for initiation of malignant transformation, tumour progression, chemoresistance and ultimately, poor patient prognosis. As mechanisms underlying CA are progressively being unravelled, the centrosome has emerged as a novel candidate target for cancer treatment. This Review summarizes mainly the clinical studies performed to date focusing on the mechanisms underlying CA in human neoplasia, and highlights the potential utility of centrosomes in the diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of human cancers.

The G1 phase Cdks regulate the centrosome cycle and mediate oncogene-dependent centrosome amplification

Because centrosome amplification generates aneuploidy and since centrosome amplification is ubiquitous in human tumors, a strong case is made for centrosome amplification being a major force in tumor biogenesis. Various evidence showing that oncogenes and altered tumor suppressors lead to centrosome amplification and aneuploidy suggests that oncogenes and altered tumor suppressors are a major source of genomic instability in tumors, and that they generate those abnormal processes to initiate and sustain tumorigenesis. We discuss how altered tumor suppressors and oncogenes utilize the cell cycle regulatory machinery to signal centrosome amplification and aneuploidy.

RB1 and TP53 pathways in radiation-induced sarcomas

The tumour suppressor genes, TP53 and RB1, and four genes involved in their regulation, INK4a, ARF, MDM2 and MDMX, were analysed in a series of 36 post-radiotherapy radiation-induced sarcomas. One-third of the tumours developed in patients carrying a germline mutation of RB1 that predisposed them to retinoblastoma and radiation-induced sarcomas. The genetic inactivation of RB1 and/or TP53 genes was frequently observed in these sarcomas. These inactivations were owing to an interplay between point mutations and losses of large chromosome segments. Radiation-induced somatic mutations were observed in TP53, but not in RB1 or in the four other genes, indicating an early role of TP53 in the radio-sarcomagenesis. RB1 and TP53 genes were biallelically coinactivated in all sarcomas developing in the context of the predisposition, indicating that both genes played a major role in the formation of these sarcomas. In the absence of predisposition, TP53 was biallelically inactivated in one-third of the sarcomas, whereas at least one allele of RB1 was wild type. In both genetic contexts, the TP53 pathway was inactivated by genetic lesions and not by the activation of the ARF/MDM2/MDMX pathway, as recently shown in retinoblastomas. Together, these findings highlight the intricate tissue- and aetiology-specific relationships between TP53 and RB1 pathways in tumorigenesis.

Deregulation of the centrosome cycle and the origin of chromosomal instability in cancer

Although we have begun to tap into the mechanisms behind Boveri's initial observation that supernumerary centrosomes cause chromosome missegregation in sea urchin eggs, there is still much left to discover with regard to chromosomal instability in cancer. Many of the molecular players involved in regulation of the centrosome and cell cycles, and the coupling of the two cycles to produce a bipolar mitotic spindle have been identified. One theme that has become apparent is that cross talk and interrelatedness of the pathways serve to provide redundant mechanisms to maintain genomic integrity. In spite of this, cells occasionally fall prey to insults that initiate and maintain the chromosomal instability that results in viable malignant tumours. Deregulation of centrosome structure is an integral aspect of the origin of chromosomal instability in many cancers. There are numerous routes to centrosome amplification including: environmental insults such as ionising radiation and exposure to estrogen (Li et al., 2005); failure of cytokinesis; and activating mutations in key regulators of centrosome structure and function. There are two models for initiation of centrosome amplification (Figure 2). In the first, centrosome duplication and chromosome replication remain coupled and cells enter G2 with 4N chromosomes and duplicated centrosomes. However, these cells may fail to complete mitosis, and thus reenter G1 as tetraploid cells with amplified centrosomes. In the second, the centrosome cycle is uncoupled from chromosome replication and cells go through one or more rounds of centriole/centrosome duplication in the absence of chromosome replication. If these cells then go through chromosome replication accompanied by another round of centrosome duplication, cells complete G2 with 4N chromosomes and more than 2 centrosomes, and therefore are predisposed to generate multipolar mitotic spindles. Fragmentation of centrosomes due to ionising radiation is a variation of the second model. Once centrosome amplification is present, even in a diploid cell, that cell has the potential to yield viable aneuploid progeny. The telophase cell in Figure 3C illustrates this scenario. In a normal telophase configuration, the total number of chromosomes is 92 (resulting from the segregation of 46 pairs of chromatids), with each daughter nucleus containing 46 individual chromosomes. Based on the number of kinetochore signals present, the lower nucleus in Figure 3C has approximately 28 chromosomes, and the elongate upper nucleus has approximately 60, for a total of 88. Due to superimposition of kinetochores in this maximum projection image, 88 is an underestimate of the actual number of kinetochores and is not significantly different from the expected total of 92. A cell resulting from the lower nucleus with only around 28 chromosomes would probably not be viable, much as Boveri's experiments indicated. However, the upper nucleus with at least 60 chromosomes could be viable. This cell would enter G1 as hypotriploid (69 chromosomes = triploid) with 2 centrosomes. During S and G2, the centrosomes and chromosomes would double, and the following mitosis could be tetrapolar with a 6N chromosome content. When centrosome amplification is accompanied by permissive lapses in cell cycle checkpoints, the potential for malignant growth is present. These lapses could result from specific genetic mutations and amplifications, epigenetic gene silencing, or from massive chromosomal instability caused by the centrosome amplification. Centrosome amplification, therefore, can serve to exacerbate and/or generate genetic instabilities associated with cancers.

Liposarcoma retroperitoneal gigante

Liposarcoma is a malignancy of fat cells and is the most frequent soft tissue sarcoma localized in the retroperitoneum. It can reach substantial proportions. It is a slow-growing tumor, and the most frequent symptom is nonspecific abdominal pain and diffuse abdominal enlargement. Treatment is radical surgery and complete resection is essential for local control of the disease. We present a case of giant right retroperitoneal liposarcoma, which was well-encapsulated and could be completely excised. The patient is currently in follow up and at 2 years is disease-free.