Skip to main content
PMC home page
British Journal of Cancer logoLink to British Journal of Cancer
. 1999 Nov;81(6):925–933. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6690789

Effect of ploidy, recruitment, environmental factors, and tamoxifen treatment on the expression of sigma-2 receptors in proliferating and quiescent tumour cells

I Al-Nabulsi 1, R H Mach 2,3, L-M Wang 2, C A Wallen 2, P C Keng 4, K Sten 2, S R Childers 3, K T Wheeler 1,2
PMCID: PMC2362949  PMID: 10576647

Abstract

Recently, we demonstrated that sigma-2 receptors may have the potential to be a biomarker of tumour cell proliferation (Mach et al (1997) Cancer Res57: 156–161). If sigma-2 receptors were a biomarker of tumour cell proliferation, they would be amenable to detection by non-invasive imaging procedures, thus eliminating many of the problems associated with the flow cytometric measures of tumour cell proliferation presently used in the clinic. To be a good biomarker of tumour cell proliferation, the expression of sigma-2 receptors must be essentially independent of many of the biological, physiological, and/or environmental properties that are found in solid tumours. In the investigation reported here, the mouse mammary adenocarcinoma lines, 66 (diploid) and 67 (aneuploid), 9L rat brain tumour cells, and MCF-7 human breast tumour cells were used to study the extent and kinetics of expression of sigma-2 receptors in proliferative (P) and quiescent (Q) tumour cells as a function of species, cell type, ploidy, pH, nutrient depletion, metabolic state, recruitment from the Q-cell compartment to the P-cell compartment, and treatment with tamoxifen. In these experiments, the expression of sigma-2 receptors solely reflected the proliferative status of the tumour cells. None of the biological, physiological, or environmental properties that were investigated had a measurable effect on the expression of sigma-2 receptors in these model systems. Consequently, these data suggest that the proliferative status of tumours and normal tissues can be non-invasively assessed using radiolabelled ligands that selectively bind sigma-2 receptors. © 1999 Cancer Research Campaign

Keywords: sigma-2 receptors, proliferative tumour cells, quiescent tumour cells, biological factors, physiological factors

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (141.3 KB).

Selected References

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

  1. Begg A. C. The clinical status of Tpot as a predictor? Or why no tempest in the Tpot! Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995 Jul 30;32(5):1539–1541. doi: 10.1016/0360-3016(95)00261-V. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bem W. T., Thomas G. E., Mamone J. Y., Homan S. M., Levy B. K., Johnson F. E., Coscia C. J. Overexpression of sigma receptors in nonneural human tumors. Cancer Res. 1991 Dec 15;51(24):6558–6562. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Berthois Y., Katzenellenbogen J. A., Katzenellenbogen B. S. Phenol red in tissue culture media is a weak estrogen: implications concerning the study of estrogen-responsive cells in culture. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1986 Apr;83(8):2496–2500. doi: 10.1073/pnas.83.8.2496. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bradford M. M. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem. 1976 May 7;72:248–254. doi: 10.1006/abio.1976.9999. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Chauvel P., Courdi A., Gioanni J., Vallicioni J., Santini J., Demard F. The labelling index: a prognostic factor in head and neck carcinoma. Radiother Oncol. 1989 Mar;14(3):231–237. doi: 10.1016/0167-8140(89)90171-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Corvò R., Giaretti W., Sanguineti G., Geido E., Orecchia R., Guenzi M., Margarino G., Bacigalupo A., Garaventa G., Barbieri M. In vivo cell kinetics in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas predicts local control and helps guide radiotherapy regimen. J Clin Oncol. 1995 Aug;13(8):1843–1850. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1995.13.8.1843. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Dong H., Bertler C., Schneider E., Ritter M. A. Assessment of cell proliferation by AgNOR scores and Ki-67 labeling indices and a comparison with potential doubling times. Cytometry. 1997 Aug 1;28(4):280–288. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0320(19970801)28:4<280::aid-cyto2>3.0.co;2-g. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Dressler L. G. DNA flow cytometry measurements and their clinical relevance in node-negative breast cancer patients. Recent Results Cancer Res. 1993;127:61–69. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-84745-5_9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Eckert R. L., Katzenellenbogen B. S. Effects of estrogens and antiestrogens on estrogen receptor dynamics and the induction of progesterone receptor in MCF-7 human breast cancer cells. Cancer Res. 1982 Jan;42(1):139–144. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Grogan T. M., Lippman S. M., Spier C. M., Slymen D. J., Rybski J. A., Rangel C. S., Richter L. C., Miller T. P. Independent prognostic significance of a nuclear proliferation antigen in diffuse large cell lymphomas as determined by the monoclonal antibody Ki-67. Blood. 1988 Apr;71(4):1157–1160. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Haustermans K., Hofland I., Pottie G., Ramaekers M., Begg A. C. Can measurements of potential doubling time (Tpot) be compared between laboratories? A quality control study. Cytometry. 1995 Feb 1;19(2):154–163. doi: 10.1002/cyto.990190210. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Hedley D. W., Clark G. M., Cornelisse C. J., Killander D., Kute T., Merkel D. Consensus review of the clinical utility of DNA cytometry in carcinoma of the breast. Report of the DNA Cytometry Consensus Conference. Cytometry. 1993;14(5):482–485. doi: 10.1002/cyto.990140505. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Hedley D. W., Shankey T. V., Wheeless L. L. DNA cytometry consensus conference. Cytometry. 1993;14(5):471–471. doi: 10.1002/cyto.990140502. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Hellewell S. B., Bruce A., Feinstein G., Orringer J., Williams W., Bowen W. D. Rat liver and kidney contain high densities of sigma 1 and sigma 2 receptors: characterization by ligand binding and photoaffinity labeling. Eur J Pharmacol. 1994 Jun 15;268(1):9–18. doi: 10.1016/0922-4106(94)90115-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Katzenellenbogen B. S., Norman M. J., Eckert R. L., Peltz S. W., Mangel W. F. Bioactivities, estrogen receptor interactions, and plasminogen activator-inducing activities of tamoxifen and hydroxy-tamoxifen isomers in MCF-7 human breast cancer cells. Cancer Res. 1984 Jan;44(1):112–119. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Li C. K. The glucose distribution in 9L rat brain multicell tumor spheroids and its effect on cell necrosis. Cancer. 1982 Nov 15;50(10):2066–2073. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19821115)50:10<2066::aid-cncr2820501017>3.0.co;2-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Li C. K. The role of glucose in the growth of 9L multicell tumor spheroids. Cancer. 1982 Nov 15;50(10):2074–2078. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19821115)50:10<2074::aid-cncr2820501018>3.0.co;2-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Mach R. H., Smith C. R., al-Nabulsi I., Whirrett B. R., Childers S. R., Wheeler K. T. Sigma 2 receptors as potential biomarkers of proliferation in breast cancer. Cancer Res. 1997 Jan 1;57(1):156–161. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. McGuire W. L., Dressler L. G. Emerging impact of flow cytometry in predicting recurrence and survival in breast cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1985 Sep;75(3):405–410. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Sarkaria J. N., Fowler J. F., Lindstrom M. J., Jordan V. C., Mulcahy R. T. The decreased influence of overall treatment time on the response of human breast tumor xenografts following prolongation of the potential doubling time (Tpot). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995 Feb 15;31(4):833–840. doi: 10.1016/0360-3016(94)00540-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Shackney S. E., McCormack G. W., Cuchural G. J., Jr Growth rate patterns of solid tumors and their relation to responsiveness to therapy: an analytical review. Ann Intern Med. 1978 Jul;89(1):107–121. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-89-1-107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Thames H. D., Jr, Peters L. J., Withers H. R., Fletcher G. H. Accelerated fractionation vs hyperfractionation: rationales for several treatments per day. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1983 Feb;9(2):127–138. doi: 10.1016/0360-3016(83)90089-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Tsang R. W., Fyles A. W., Kirkbride P., Levin W., Manchul L. A., Milosevic M. F., Rawlings G. A., Banerjee D., Pintilie M., Wilson G. D. Proliferation measurements with flow cytometry Tpot in cancer of the uterine cervix: correlation between two laboratories and preliminary clinical results. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995 Jul 30;32(5):1319–1329. doi: 10.1016/0360-3016(95)00201-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Vilner B. J., John C. S., Bowen W. D. Sigma-1 and sigma-2 receptors are expressed in a wide variety of human and rodent tumor cell lines. Cancer Res. 1995 Jan 15;55(2):408–413. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Walker J. M., Bowen W. D., Walker F. O., Matsumoto R. R., De Costa B., Rice K. C. Sigma receptors: biology and function. Pharmacol Rev. 1990 Dec;42(4):355–402. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Wallen C. A., Higashikubo R., Dethlefsen L. A. Murine mammary tumour cells in vitro. I. The development of a quiescent state. Cell Tissue Kinet. 1984 Jan;17(1):65–77. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2184.1984.tb00569.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Wallen C. A., Higashikubo R., Dethlefsen L. A. Murine mammary tumour cells in vitro. II. Recruitment of quiescent cells. Cell Tissue Kinet. 1984 Jan;17(1):79–89. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2184.1984.tb00570.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Wallen C. A., Michaelson S. M., Wheeler K. T. Evidence for an unconventional radiosensitivity of rat 9L subcutaneous tumors. Radiat Res. 1980 Dec;84(3):529–541. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Wheeler K. T., Hickman R., Nelson G. B., Moore S. K., Wallen C. A. Relationship between DNA damage, DNA repair, metabolic state and cell lethality. Radiat Environ Biophys. 1992;31(2):101–115. doi: 10.1007/BF01211208. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Wheeler K. T., Wallen C. A. Is cell survival a determinant of the in situ response of 9L tumours? Br J Cancer Suppl. 1980 Apr;4:299–303. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Zhang H., Wheeler K. T. Radiation-induced DNA damage in tumors and normal tissues. II. Influence of dose, residual DNA damage and physiological factors in oxygenated cells. Radiat Res. 1994 Dec;140(3):321–326. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES