Fcγ Receptors in Malignancies: Friends or Enemies?

A history of exploring cancer in context

The concept that progression of cancer is regulated by interactions of cancer cells with their microenvironment was postulated by Stephen Paget over a century ago. Contemporary tumour microenvironment (TME) research focuses on the identification of tumour-interacting microenvironmental constituents, such as resident or infiltrating non-tumour cells, soluble factors and extracellular matrix components, and the large variety of mechanisms by which these constituents regulate and shape the malignant phenotype of tumour cells. In this Timeline article, we review the developmental phases of the TME paradigm since its initial description. While illuminating controversies, we discuss the importance of interactions between various microenvironmental components and tumour cells and provide an overview and assessment of therapeutic opportunities and modalities by which the TME can be targeted.

Tumor-microenvironment interactions: dangerous liaisons

The interaction between microenvironmental components and tumor cells is bidirectional. Tumor cells and their products are capable of regulating and altering gene expression in nontumor cells residing in or infiltrating into the microenvironment and exert selective pressures on such cells, thereby shaping their phenotype. Conversely, microenvironmental components regulate gene expression in tumor cells thereby directing the tumor into one or several possible molecular evolution pathways, some of which may lead to metastasis. This review summarizes six instances in which the tumor liaises with different components of its microenvironment. These liaisons result, in most cases, in enhanced tumor progression. In these cases (responses of tumor and nontumor cells to microenvironmental stress, the interaction of the tumor with fibroblasts, endothelial cells and macrophages, the formation of the metastatic niche, and the interaction of the tumor with immunoglobulins) the tumor, directly or indirectly, alters the phenotype of its interaction partners thereby enlisting them to promote its progression. Does the tumor need all these pathways to form metastasis? Is there a hierarchy of interactions with respect to impact on tumor progression? These questions remain open. They may be answered by approaches employed in the analysis of hypercomplex systems.

Contribution of the intracellular domain of murine Fc-gamma receptor type IIB1 to its tumor-enhancing potential

We have previously shown that Fc gamma receptor type II B1 (Fc(gamma)RIIB1), when expressed on non-lymphoid tumor cells, significantly enhanced their tumorigenic phenotype. This study elucidates the role of the intracellular domain of Fc(gamma)RIIB1 in the enhancement of the malignant phenotype of polyoma-transformed 3T3 cells. We investigated the tumorigenic potential conferred by different variants of the receptor: Fc(gamma)RIIB1, a full-length receptor (B1) whose intracellular region is encoded by exons 8, 9 and 10; Fc(gamma)RIIB2, a spliced variant (B2) whose cytoplasmic domain comprises exons 9 and 10 and lacks exon 8; and Fc(gamma)RIIB1-CT53, a deleted mutant whose cytoplasmic domain contains the fragment encoded by exon 8 alone. We have investigated various properties of cells transfected with each of the above variants: tumorigenicity in syngeneic mice, formation of colonies in soft agar, growth rate, production of soluble receptor and capping of the ligand-bound receptor. Results show that while the presence of exon 8 did not enhance growth rate in vitro or production of soluble Fc(gamma)R, it did enhance the tumorigenic phenotype of transfected cells (both in vivo and in vitro growth in soft agar). B1-expressing cells exhibited a significantly higher tumorigenic phenotype than B2 cells. The presence of exon 8 alone (CT53 mutant) conferred the transfected cells a higher tumorigenic phenotype than Fc(gamma)R-negative control cells but lower than intact B1 or B2 cells, indicating that the presence of B1-specific exon 8 is not sufficient but that the presence of an intact B1 intracellular domain is essential, for conferring the high tumorigenicity phenotype upon cells. We conclude that the capping, following ligand binding contributed by exon 8, and the function contributed by the specific localization of exons 9 and 10 in B1 cells may determine their malignant phenotype.