1
|
Ye JC, Heng HH. Tracking Karyotype Changes in Treatment-Induced Drug-Resistant Evolution. Methods Mol Biol 2024; 2825:263-280. [PMID: 38913315 DOI: 10.1007/978-1-0716-3946-7_15] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/25/2024]
Abstract
Karyotype coding, which encompasses the complete chromosome sets and their topological genomic relationships within a given species, encodes system-level information that organizes and preserves genes' function, and determines the macroevolution of cancer. This new recognition emphasizes the crucial role of karyotype characterization in cancer research. To advance this cancer cytogenetic/cytogenomic concept and its platforms, this study outlines protocols for monitoring the karyotype landscape during treatment-induced rapid drug resistance in cancer. It emphasizes four key perspectives: combinational analyses of phenotype and karyotype, a focus on the entire evolutionary process through longitudinal analysis, a comparison of whole landscape dynamics by including various types of NCCAs (including genome chaos), and the use of the same process to prioritize different genomic scales. This protocol holds promise for studying numerous evolutionary aspects of cancers, and it further enhances the power of karyotype analysis in cancer research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jing Christine Ye
- Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma, Division of Cancer Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Henry H Heng
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
M. Weerakoon-Ratnayake K, Vaidyanathan S, Larkey N, Dathathreya K, Hu M, Jose J, Mog S, August K, K. Godwin A, L. Hupert M, A. Witek M, A. Soper S. Microfluidic Device for On-Chip Immunophenotyping and Cytogenetic Analysis of Rare Biological Cells. Cells 2020; 9:E519. [PMID: 32102446 PMCID: PMC7072755 DOI: 10.3390/cells9020519] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2019] [Revised: 02/10/2020] [Accepted: 02/18/2020] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
The role of circulating plasma cells (CPCs) and circulating leukemic cells (CLCs) as biomarkers for several blood cancers, such as multiple myeloma and leukemia, respectively, have recently been reported. These markers can be attractive due to the minimally invasive nature of their acquisition through a blood draw (i.e., liquid biopsy), negating the need for painful bone marrow biopsies. CPCs or CLCs can be used for cellular/molecular analyses as well, such as immunophenotyping or fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). FISH, which is typically carried out on slides involving complex workflows, becomes problematic when operating on CLCs or CPCs due to their relatively modest numbers. Here, we present a microfluidic device for characterizing CPCs and CLCs using immunofluorescence or FISH that have been enriched from peripheral blood using a different microfluidic device. The microfluidic possessed an array of cross-channels (2-4 µm in depth and width) that interconnected a series of input and output fluidic channels. Placing a cover plate over the device formed microtraps, the size of which was defined by the width and depth of the cross-channels. This microfluidic chip allowed for automation of immunofluorescence and FISH, requiring the use of small volumes of reagents, such as antibodies and probes, as compared to slide-based immunophenotyping and FISH. In addition, the device could secure FISH results in <4 h compared to 2-3 days for conventional FISH.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kumuditha M. Weerakoon-Ratnayake
- Department of Chemistry, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66047, USA; (K.M.W.-R.); (K.D.); (S.M.)
- Center of BioModular Multiscale Systems for Precision Medicine, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA; (S.V.); (N.L.); (M.H.); (J.J.)
| | - Swarnagowri Vaidyanathan
- Center of BioModular Multiscale Systems for Precision Medicine, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA; (S.V.); (N.L.); (M.H.); (J.J.)
- Bioengineering, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA
| | - Nicholas Larkey
- Center of BioModular Multiscale Systems for Precision Medicine, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA; (S.V.); (N.L.); (M.H.); (J.J.)
- Department of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS 66160, USA;
| | - Kavya Dathathreya
- Department of Chemistry, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66047, USA; (K.M.W.-R.); (K.D.); (S.M.)
- Center of BioModular Multiscale Systems for Precision Medicine, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA; (S.V.); (N.L.); (M.H.); (J.J.)
| | - Mengjia Hu
- Center of BioModular Multiscale Systems for Precision Medicine, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA; (S.V.); (N.L.); (M.H.); (J.J.)
- Department of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS 66160, USA;
| | - Jilsha Jose
- Center of BioModular Multiscale Systems for Precision Medicine, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA; (S.V.); (N.L.); (M.H.); (J.J.)
| | - Shalee Mog
- Department of Chemistry, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66047, USA; (K.M.W.-R.); (K.D.); (S.M.)
- Center of BioModular Multiscale Systems for Precision Medicine, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA; (S.V.); (N.L.); (M.H.); (J.J.)
| | - Keith August
- Children’s Mercy Hospital, Kansas City, MO 64108, USA;
| | - Andrew K. Godwin
- Department of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS 66160, USA;
| | - Mateusz L. Hupert
- Biofluidica Inc., BioFluidica Research Laboratory, Lawrence, KS 66047, USA
| | - Malgorzata A. Witek
- Department of Chemistry, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66047, USA; (K.M.W.-R.); (K.D.); (S.M.)
- Center of BioModular Multiscale Systems for Precision Medicine, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA; (S.V.); (N.L.); (M.H.); (J.J.)
| | - Steven A. Soper
- Department of Chemistry, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66047, USA; (K.M.W.-R.); (K.D.); (S.M.)
- Center of BioModular Multiscale Systems for Precision Medicine, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA; (S.V.); (N.L.); (M.H.); (J.J.)
- Department of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS 66160, USA;
- Biofluidica Inc., BioFluidica Research Laboratory, Lawrence, KS 66047, USA
- Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Heng HHQ, Stevens JB, Bremer SW, Liu G, Abdallah BY, Ye CJ. Evolutionary mechanisms and diversity in cancer. Adv Cancer Res 2012; 112:217-53. [PMID: 21925306 DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-387688-1.00008-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
The recently introduced genome theory of cancer evolution provides a new framework for evolutionary studies on cancer. In particular, the established relationship between the large number of individual molecular mechanisms and the general evolutionary mechanism of cancer calls upon a change in our strategies that have been based on the characterization of common cancer gene mutations and their defined pathways. To further explain the significance of the genome theory of cancer evolution, a brief review will be presented describing the various attempts to illustrate the evolutionary mechanism of cancer, followed by further analysis of some key components of somatic cell evolution, including the diversity of biological systems, the multiple levels of information systems and control systems, the two phases (the punctuated or discontinuous phase and gradual Darwinian stepwise phase) and dynamic patterns of somatic cell evolution where genome replacement is the driving force. By linking various individual molecular mechanisms to the level of genome population diversity and tumorigenicity, the general mechanism of cancer has been identified as the evolutionary mechanism of cancer, which can be summarized by the following three steps including stress-induced genome instability, population diversity or heterogeneity, and genome-mediated macroevolution. Interestingly, the evolutionary mechanism is equal to the collective aggregate of all individual molecular mechanisms. This relationship explains why most of the known molecular mechanisms can contribute to cancer yet there is no single dominant mechanism for the majority of clinical cases. Despite the fact that each molecular mechanism can serve as a system stress and initiate the evolutionary process, to achieve cancer, multiple cycles of genome-mediated macroevolution are required and are a stochastically determined event. Finally, the potential clinical implications of the evolutionary mechanism of cancer are briefly reviewed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Henry H Q Heng
- Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Wayne State University School of Medicine, MI, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Abstract
This chapter presents past and present FISH techniques and specific applications of FISH. Although array technology has revolutionized cytogenetics, FISH remains indispensible. While array technology provides a high resolution screen of the entire genome for gains and losses, it does not allow for visualization of the genomic structure of gains. Thus, FISH continues to be useful as an adjunct to arrays. FISH also continues to be widely used in conjunction with banded chromosome analysis, and as a stand-alone technique for the detection of genomic alterations in neoplastic disorders.
Collapse
|
6
|
Heng HHQ, Stevens JB, Bremer SW, Ye KJ, Liu G, Ye CJ. The evolutionary mechanism of cancer. J Cell Biochem 2010; 109:1072-84. [PMID: 20213744 DOI: 10.1002/jcb.22497] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
Identification of the general molecular mechanism of cancer is the Holy Grail of cancer research. Since cancer is believed to be caused by a sequential accumulation of cancer gene mutations, the identification, characterization, and targeting of common genetic alterations and their defined pathways have dominated the field for decades. Despite the impressive data accumulated from studies of gene mutations, epigenetic dysregulation, and pathway alterations, an overwhelming amount of diverse molecular information has offered limited understanding of the general mechanisms of cancer. To solve this paradox, the newly established genome theory is introduced here describing how somatic cells evolve within individual patients. The evolutionary mechanism of cancer is characterized using only three key components of somatic cell evolution that include increased system dynamics induced by stress, elevated genetic and epigenetic heterogeneity, and genome alteration mediated natural selection. Cancer progression represents a macro-evolutionary process where karyotype change or genome replacement plays the key dominant role. Furthermore, the recently identified relationship between the evolutionary mechanism and a large number of diverse individual molecular mechanisms is discussed. The total sum of all the individual molecular mechanisms is equal to the evolutionary mechanism of cancer. Individual molecular mechanisms including all the molecular mechanisms described to date are stochastically selected and unpredictable and are therefore clinically impractical. Recognizing the fundamental importance of the underlying basis of the evolutionary mechanism of cancer mandates the development of new strategies in cancer research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Henry H Q Heng
- Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI 48201.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Drennan KJ, Linnemann AK, Platts AE, Heng HH, Armant DR, Krawetz SA. Nuclear matrix association: switching to the invasive cytotrophoblast. Placenta 2010; 31:365-72. [PMID: 20346505 DOI: 10.1016/j.placenta.2010.02.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/24/2009] [Revised: 02/16/2010] [Accepted: 02/19/2010] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
Abnormal trophoblast invasion is associated with the most common and most severe complications of human pregnancy. The biology of invasion, as well as the etiology of abnormal invasion remains poorly understood. The aim of this study was to characterize the transcriptome of the HTR-8/SVneo human cytotrophoblast cell line which displays well characterized invasive and non-invasive behavior, and to correlate the activity of the transcriptome with nuclear matrix attachment and cell phenotype. Comparison of the invasive to non-invasive HTR transcriptomes was unremarkable. In contrast, comparison of the MARs on chromosomes 14-18 revealed an increased number of MARs associated with the invasive phenotype. These attachment areas were more likely to be associated with silent rather than actively transcribed genes. This study supports the view that nuclear matrix attachment may play an important role in cytotrophoblast invasion by ensuring specific silencing that facilitates invasion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K J Drennan
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Wayne State University, 253 C. S. Mott Center, 275 E. Hancock St., Detroit, MI 48201, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Heng HHQ. Elimination of altered karyotypes by sexual reproduction preserves species identity. Genome 2007; 50:517-24. [PMID: 17612621 DOI: 10.1139/g07-039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
Resolving the persistence of sexual reproduction despite its overwhelming costs (known as the paradox of sex) is one of the most persistent challenges of evolutionary biology. In thinking about this paradox, the focus has traditionally been on the evolutionary benefits of genetic recombination in generating offspring diversity and purging deleterious mutations. The similarity of pattern between evolution of organisms and evolution among cancer cells suggests that the asexual process generates more diverse genomes owing to less controlled reproduction systems, while sexual reproduction generates more stable genomes because the sexual process can serve as a mechanism to “filter out” aberrations at the chromosome level. Our reinterpretation of data from the literature strongly supports this hypothesis. Thus, the principal consequence of sexual reproduction is the reduction of drastic genetic diversity at the genome or chromosome level, resulting in the preservation of species identity rather than the provision of evolutionary diversity for future environmental challenges. Genetic recombination does contribute to genetic diversity, but it does so secondarily and within the framework of the chromosomally defined genome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Henry H Q Heng
- Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Karmanos Cancer Institute, Department of Pathology, 3226 Scott Hall, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI 48201, USA.
| |
Collapse
|