Skip to main content
NCBI home page
British Journal of Cancer logoLink to British Journal of Cancer
. 1987 Nov;56(5):561–569. doi: 10.1038/bjc.1987.242

Analysis of tumour cell composition in tumours composed of paired mixtures of mammary tumour cell lines.

B E Miller 1, F R Miller 1, D J Wilburn 1, G H Heppner 1
PMCID: PMC2001912  PMID: 3426919

Abstract

In order to quantitate the effects of tumour subpopulation interactions, we have devised a method to determine the subpopulation composition of tumours by using paired tumour cell lines able to grow in different selective media. Line 4T07 forms colonies in thioguanine but not in HAT and line 168 forms colonies in HAT but not in thioguanine. An independent technique of determining tumour cell content was used to validate this method: line 168 and 4T07 cells are distinguishable by flow cytometry after staining with propidium iodide for DNA content. Mixtures of cell suspensions prepared from each unmixed tumour, as well as from tumours arising from mixtures of these lines, were analysed by both the colony formation assay and by the DNA content assay. The colony formation assay yielded values in good agreement with the DNA content assay, but was considerably more sensitive in that it was able to quantitate minority subpopulations that constituted less than 10% of the tumour. Both methods revealed that in tumours arising from mixtures, the tumour cells were almost entirely line 4T07, even when the inoculum had contained a high proportion of 168 cells. Since line 168 cells are very tumorigenic per se, these results suggest that line 4T07 cells are capable of interfering with 168 proliferation in mixed tumours, either directly or through a host-mediated mechanism.

Full text

PDF
561

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Blazar B. A., Laing C. A., Miller F. R., Heppner G. H. Activity of lymphoid cells separated from mammary tumors in blastogenesis and Winn assays. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1980 Aug;65(2):405–410. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Brodt P., Parhar R., Sankar P., Lala P. K. Studies on clonal heterogeneity in two spontaneously metastasizing mammary carcinomas of recent origin. Int J Cancer. 1985 Feb 15;35(2):265–273. doi: 10.1002/ijc.2910350220. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Caignard A., Martin M. S., Michel M. F., Martin F. Interaction between two cellular subpopulations of a rat colonic carcinoma when inoculated to the syngeneic host. Int J Cancer. 1985 Aug 15;36(2):273–279. doi: 10.1002/ijc.2910360221. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Dexter D. L., Calabresi P. Intraneoplastic diversity. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1982 Dec 21;695(2):97–112. doi: 10.1016/0304-419x(82)90019-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Dexter D. L., Kowalski H. M., Blazar B. A., Fligiel Z., Vogel R., Heppner G. H. Heterogeneity of tumor cells from a single mouse mammary tumor. Cancer Res. 1978 Oct;38(10):3174–3181. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Fidler I. J., Hart I. R. Biological diversity in metastatic neoplasms: origins and implications. Science. 1982 Sep 10;217(4564):998–1003. doi: 10.1126/science.7112116. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Heppner G. H., Dexter D. L., DeNucci T., Miller F. R., Calabresi P. Heterogeneity in drug sensitivity among tumor cell subpopulations of a single mammary tumor. Cancer Res. 1978 Nov;38(11 Pt 1):3758–3763. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Heppner G. H., Miller B. E. Tumor heterogeneity: biological implications and therapeutic consequences. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 1983;2(1):5–23. doi: 10.1007/BF00046903. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Heppner G. H. Tumor heterogeneity. Cancer Res. 1984 Jun;44(6):2259–2265. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Leith J. T., Faulkner L. E., Bliven S. F., Lee E. S., Glicksman A. S., Dexter D. L. Disaggregation studies of xenograft solid tumors grown from pure or admixed clonal subpopulations from a heterogeneous human colon adenocarcinoma. Invasion Metastasis. 1985;5(6):317–335. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Loveless S. E., Heppner G. H. Tumor-associated macrophages of mouse mammary tumors. I. Differential cytotoxicity of macrophages from metastatic and nonmetastatic tumors. J Immunol. 1983 Oct;131(4):2074–2078. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Miller B. E., McInerney D., Jackson D., Miller F. R. Metabolic cooperation between mouse mammary tumor subpopulations in three-dimensional collagen gel cultures. Cancer Res. 1986 Jan;46(1):89–93. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Miller B. E., Miller F. R., Heppner G. H. Assessing tumor drug sensitivity by a new in vitro assay which preserves tumor heterogeneity and subpopulation interactions. J Cell Physiol Suppl. 1984;3:105–116. doi: 10.1002/jcp.1041210413. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Miller B. E., Miller F. R., Heppner G. H. Factors affecting growth and drug sensitivity of mouse mammary tumor lines in collagen gel cultures. Cancer Res. 1985 Sep;45(9):4200–4205. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Miller B. E., Miller F. R., Heppner G. H. Interactions between tumor subpopulations affecting their sensitivity to the antineoplastic agents cyclophosphamide and methotrexate. Cancer Res. 1981 Nov;41(11 Pt 1):4378–4381. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Miller B. E., Miller F. R., Leith J., Heppner G. H. Growth interaction in vivo between tumor subpopulations derived from a single mouse mammary tumor. Cancer Res. 1980 Nov;40(11):3977–3981. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Miller B. E., Roi L. D., Howard L. M., Miller F. R. Quantitative selectivity of contact-mediated intercellular communication in a metastatic mouse mammary tumor line. Cancer Res. 1983 Sep;43(9):4102–4107. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Miller F. R., Medina D., Heppner G. H. Preferential growth of mammary tumors in intact mammary fatpads. Cancer Res. 1981 Oct;41(10):3863–3867. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Miller F. R., Miller B. E., Heppner G. H. Characterization of metastatic heterogeneity among subpopulations of a single mouse mammary tumor: heterogeneity in phenotypic stability. Invasion Metastasis. 1983;3(1):22–31. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Miller F. R. Tumor subpopulation interactions in metastasis. Invasion Metastasis. 1983;3(4):234–242. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Newcomb E. W., Silverstein S. C., Silagi S. Malignant mouse melanoma cells do not form tumors when mixed with cells of a non-malignant subclone: relationships between plasminogen activator expression by the tumor cells and the host's immune response. J Cell Physiol. 1978 May;95(2):169–177. doi: 10.1002/jcp.1040950206. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Poste G., Greig R. On the genesis and regulation of cellular heterogeneity in malignant tumors. Invasion Metastasis. 1982;2(3):137–176. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Rios A. M., Miller F. R., Heppner G. H. Characterization of tumor-associated lymphocytes in a series of mouse mammary tumor lines with differing biological properties. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 1983;15(2):87–91. doi: 10.1007/BF00199696. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Tofilon P. J., Buckley N., Deen D. F. Effect of cell-cell interactions on drug sensitivity and growth of drug-sensitive and -resistant tumor cells in spheroids. Science. 1984 Nov 16;226(4676):862–864. doi: 10.1126/science.6494917. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from British Journal of Cancer are provided here courtesy of Cancer Research UK

RESOURCES