Abstract
Lung cancer is the common and leading cause of cancer death worldwide. The tumor microenvironment has been recognized to be instrumental in tumorigenesis. To have a deep understanding of the molecular mechanism of nonsmall cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC), cancer‐associated fibroblasts (CAFs) have gained increasing research interests. CAFs belong to the crucial and dominant cell population in the tumor microenvironment to support the cancer cells. The interplay and partnership between cancer cells and CAFs contribute to each stage of tumorigenesis. CAFs exhibit prominent heterogeneity and secrete different kinds of cytokines and chemokines, growth factors and extracellular matrix proteins involved in cancer cell proliferation, invasion, metastasis and chemoresistance. Many studies focused on the protumorigenic functions of CAFs, yet many challenges about the heterogeneity of CAFS remain unresolved. This review comprehensively summarized the tumor‐promoting role and molecular mechanisms of CAFs in NSCLC, including their origin, phenotypic changes and heterogeneity and their functional roles in carcinogenesis. Meanwhile, we also highlighted the updated molecular classifications based on the molecular features and functional roles of CAFs. With the development of cutting‐edge platforms and further investigations of CAFs, novel therapeutic strategies for accurately targeting CAFs in NSCLC may be developed based on the increased understanding of the relevant molecular mechanisms.
Keywords: cancer‐associated fibroblast, heterogeneity, nonsmall‐cell lung cancer, tumor microenvironment

Abbreviations
- ATF6
activating transcription factor 6
- C3a
CAF‐secreted complement 3a
- CAFs
cancer‐associated fibroblasts
- CCL
C‐C chemokine ligand
- CF
core fucosylation
- CLCF1
ardiotrophin‐like cytokine factor
- CRBPD
CCAAT/enhancer‐binding protein delta
- CSF1
colony‐stimulating factor 1
- CXCL
CXC motif chemokine ligand
- ECM
extracellular matrix
- ECs
endothelial cells
- ECs
epithelial cells
- EGFR‐TKIs
EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors
- EndET
endothelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition
- FAP‐1
Fas‐associated phosphatase 1
- FGF
fibroblast growth factors
- FSP1
fibroblast specific protein 1
- Fut8
fucosyltransferase 8
- GFs
growth factors
- GGT5
gamma‐glutamyl transferase 5
- HA
hyaluronic acid
- HD‐CAF
high desmoplastic CAFs
- HGF
hepatocyte growth factor
- Hh
hedgehog
- HIF‐1α
hypoxia‐inducible factor‐1α
- HMGB1
high mobility group box 1
- HOTAIR
HOX transcript antisense RNA
- HSCs
hepatic stellate cells
- IGF‐1
insulin‐like growth factor
- IL
interleukin
- LD‐CAF
low desmoplastic CAFs
- LIF
leukemia inhibitory factor
- lncRNA
long noncoding RNA
- LOXL1
lysyl oxidase‐like 1
- LUAD
lung adenocarcinoma cells
- MDSCs
myeloid‐derived suppressor cells
- miRNAs/miRNA
microRNAs
- MMP‐2
matrix metalloproteinase‐2
- MRTF
myocardin‐related transcription factors
- MSCs
mesenchymal stem cells
- MSCs
mesenchymal stromal cells
- MT
epithelial to mesenchymal transition
- NFs
normal fibroblasts
- NK
natural killer
- Nrf2
nuclear factor erythroid 2‐related factor 2
- NSCLC
nonsmall cell lung carcinoma
- PDGF
platelet‐derived growth factor
- PDPN
podoplanin
- PSCs
pancreatic stellate cells
- ROS
reactive oxygen species
- SDF‐1
stromal cell‐derived factor‐1
- SHh
sonic hedgehog
- SMO
7‐transmembrane protein smoothened
- SRGN
sulfate proteoglycan serglycin
- STC‐1
stanniocalcin‐1
- TAMs
tumor‐associated macrophages
- TANs
tumor‐associated neutrophils
- TGF‐β
transforming growth factor‐beta
- TGF‐βR
transforming growth factor‐β receptor
- TIAM2
T‐cell lymphoma invasion and metastasis 2
- TIME
tumor immune microenvironment
- TME
tumor microenvironment
- TNF‐α
tumor necrosis factor‐α
- VCAM1
vascular cell adhesion molecule‐1
- VEGF
vascular endothelial growth factor
- αSMA
alpha‐smooth muscle actin
1. INTRODUCTION
Lung cancer is one of the most common malignancies worldwide, particularly in men. 1 The American Cancer Society reported approximately 2.2 million new cases of lung cancer and approximately 1.8 million new deaths in 2020. 1 Lung cancer is histologically classified as small‐cell lung carcinoma (SCLC) and nonsmall‐cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). NSCLC represents approximately 80% of all lung cancer 2 and is mainly divided into squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma and large cell carcinoma. These subtypes have unique histological and biological features. 3 , 4 Enhancing insight into the genome alterations revealed various oncogenic driver mutations in NSCLC. 5 , 6
To understand the biological perspectives of lung cancer, researchers have mainly focused on malignant cells, such as various signaling pathways. 7 However, these just represent one of the hallmarks of cancer. Cancers are not simply composed of cells with deranged signaling pathways but include a complex tumor microenvironment (TME). 8 , 9 , 10 Like the theory of “Seed and Soil” 11 which was proposed by Dr Stephen Paget, cancers cells seed in congenial soil, the TME, where they grow and expand. The TME is an ecosystem composed of multicellular and noncellular components. 12 , 13 Four major components of the TME are: (1) the tumor immune microenvironment (TIME) consists of immune cells such as natural killer (NK) and T cells; (2) vascular components include lymphatic endothelial cells (LECs) and pericytes; (3) the extracellular matrix (ECM) is comprised of diverse collagen, glycoproteins and proteoglycans; (4) stromal components consist of mesenchymal STEM cells (MSCs) and cancer‐associated fibroblasts (CAFs). 14 These cells in the TME interact with the malignant cells closely, which promote the whole tumorigenesis process, from tumor initiation to progression.
CAFs are one of the well‐known and critical components in the tumor stroma. CAFs are worthy of mention since they are conducive to all aspects of tumorigenesis in different stages and many cancer types, including tumor proliferation, tumor invasion and metastasis and interfacing with the immune system. 14 , 15 Given the multifaceted functions of CAFs, many studies attempted to “switch off” the function of CAFs to target tumors more effectively. Controversially, some investigations have demonstrated that some CAFs have an antitumorigenic role. 16 , 17 More importantly, how can CAFs transit from a tumor defender into a tumor supporter? For example, tumor‐associated exosomes have been identified recently as an essential cellular interchange mechanism between tumor cells and CAFs. 18 , 19 Isolated exosomes from tumor cells and CAFs are implicated in multiple steps of CAFs evolution, such as normal fibroblasts (NFs) differentiation into CAFs, CAF‐like state maintenance and promotion of CAFs' oncogenic properties. 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 Extracellular vesicles produced by tumor cells can activate normal fibroblasts to a CAF‐like state, which in turn produces a secretome to modulate the tumor microenvironment. 24 , 25 In this review, we summarized recent studies on the roles of CAFs and, particularly in NSCLC, where scar formation and fibrosis are common phenomena.
2. THE DEFINITION AND BIOLOGICAL PROPERTIES OF CAFs
2.1. Fibroblasts
Fibroblasts were first identified in the 1850s as connective tissue cells responsible for synthesizing collagen. 26 Fibroblasts in normal tissue are generally considered quiescent, that is, in a resting state. Fibroblasts can be challenging to define because of a lack of unique markers expressed exclusively and by all fibroblasts. 27 Some markers such as vimentin, platelet‐derived growth factor receptor‐α (PDGFR‐α) and fibroblast specific protein 1 (FSP1) can be used as markers for quiescent fibroblasts. 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 However, these markers are not only expressed in fibroblasts. Thus, the tissue location and morphology are always required for their identification.
Quiescent fibroblasts are the major component of ECM under physiological conditions. They are activated by tissue repair and regeneration in response to tissue damage. As observed in wound healing, 32 fibroblasts accumulate at the damaged site and transform into myofibroblasts, and subsequently promote angiogenesis and deposition of ECM. Myofibroblasts produce many kinds of cytokines and chemokines. 15 , 33 They are also a significant source of ECM‐degrading proteases, maintaining ECM homeostasis by regulation of ECM turnover, 34 and promoting angiogenesis with increased production of vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGFA). 35 Myofibroblasts secrete transforming growth factor‐beta (TGF‐β) and express α‐smooth muscle actin (α‐SMA) at closing wounds, 36 and are critical for maintaining the homeostasis of adjacent epithelial cells by growth factors (GFs) secretions and by direct mesenchymal‐epithelial cell interactions. 37 When the wound is healed, myofibroblasts are restored to their quiescent status or are removed by apoptosis. 38 Such reversibility is a hallmark feature of fibroblasts associated with tissue repair.
2.2. Activation of fibroblasts into CAFs
Tumors may be considered as “wounds that do not heal.” 26 In a normal situation, fibroblasts have an antitumorigenic activity that suppresses tumor growth. For example, fibroblasts in lymph nodes transport potential antigens and contribute to leukocytes' migration, resulting in effective immune responses. 17 However, cancer is an advancing and unabated injurious stimulus which initiates fibroblast activation. Fibroblasts are then transformed into irreversible cancer‐associated fibroblasts (CAFs), which behave like myofibroblasts in some aspects. 39 They are not removed by apoptosis. This process is called cancer fibrosis.
To acquire tumor‐promoting phenotypes, the quiescent fibroblasts are activated via diverse mechanisms (Figure 1A). First, epithelial cancer cells secrete growth factors into the surrounding microenvironment, stimulating the recruitment and activation of fibroblasts. Among these factors, transforming growth factor‐beta (TGF‐β), platelet‐derived growth factor (PDGF) and fibroblast growth factor (FGF) are critical regulators. In lung cancer, TGF‐β facilitates invasion of cancer cells through tumor‐stromal interactions. 40 , 41 TGF‐β orchestrates tumor stroma development and promotes angiogenesis, immune evasion and remodeling of the ECM. 42 , 43 In microarray gene expression analysis, the gene signatures related to TGF‐β signaling are enriched in CAFs isolated from NSCLC tissues compared to the normal tissue. 44 PDGF is one of the profibrotic growth factors secreted by cancer and stromal cells, inducing CAFs activation. 45 , 46 Cancer cells secrete PDGF to act on the stromal cells, especially endothelial cells and fibroblasts in vivo. 47 In contrast to TGF‐β, the primary functions of PDGF are enhancing fibroblasts' growth and proliferation through MAPK downstream signaling pathways 48 , 49 , 50 without causing their differentiation into myofibroblasts. 51 PDGF is also a crucial factor in neo‐angiogenesis and establishing protumorigenic stroma. 45 , 52 FGF, an angiogenic endothelial cell mitogen, is a pleiotropic molecule that functions on epithelial and mesenchymal cells in an intracrine, autocrine and paracrine manner. 53 , 54 Most studies focused on FGF‐2, which describes how it changes the phenotype of fibroblasts, leading to cell activation. 53
FIGURE 1.

The origin, activating factors and subpopulations of cancer‐associated fibroblasts (CAFs) in nonsmall‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are diverse and heterogeneous. (A) Multiple activating factors promote the transition from normal fibroblasts to CAFs in the tumor microenvironment. (B) The diversity of CAF sources. CAFs are not only derived from resident fibroblasts, but also from other cell types, including stellate cell, mesenchymal stem cell, epithelial cell, pericyte and even adipocyte. (C) Various classification systems for lung cancer CAFs to define subpopulations based on molecular features and functional roles (created with BioRender.com) [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Besides growth factors, lung cancer cells produce different inflammatory modulators such as the interleukin family (IL‐6, IL‐8, IL‐17, IL‐22), tumor necrosis factor‐α (TNF‐α) and VEGF to promote their progression, invasion and angiogenesis. 55 Many studies found that these inflammatory cytokines are related to fibroblast activation in lung cancer. Leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF), an IL‐6 class proinflammatory cytokine, is an example. It mediates ECM remodeling and TGF‐β‐dependent actomyosin‐contractility via crosstalk between the JAK1/STAT3 and RhoA/ROCK/MLC2 signaling pathways, which results in carcinoma cell invasion in vitro and in vivo. 56 Actomyosin contractility generates mechanical force to remodel the ECM for cell migration, which is caused by CAFs. 57 The roles of STAT3 and SMAD are also implicated in lung fibrosis. 58
In NSCLC, the oxygen level is deficient (0.7‐46 mm Hg), 59 thus hypoxia is a characteristic of the lung cancer microenvironment. This remodels the composition of TME, and induces the expression of HIF‐1α in fibroblasts. 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 The expression of HIF‐1α in fibroblasts also induces the conversion of normal fibroblasts into CAFs, and CAFs activation can be inhibited effectively by HIF‐1α‐specific inhibitors or HIF‐1α knockout. 64 Moreover, p62, an autophagy regulator, is highly expressed in NSCLC under hypoxia. 65 This induces autophagy, the nuclear factor erythroid 2‐related factor 2 (Nrf2)‐related antioxidant signaling, and the activating transcription factor 6 (ATF6)‐related ER‐stress response, causing CAFs activation. Autophagy inhibitors such as 3MA and HCQ can block CAF activation and tumor progression, supporting the critical role of p62‐dependent autophagy in CAFs activation. 66 While Nrf2 is persistently elevated, fibroblasts are induced into a state of increased activity and acquire the CAF phenotype, leading to tumor growth. 67
MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small endogenous noncoding RNAs that mainly downregulate target gene expression 68 , 69 , 70 and are potential biomarkers in cancer patients. 71 , 72 , 73 miRNAs also contribute to the activation of CAFs during cancer progression. Previous studies demonstrated that some miRNAs are highly expressed in lung adenocarcinoma and promote CAFs activation, such as miR‐196a, 74 miR‐210 75 and miR‐21. 76 Moreover, some miRNAs are highly expressed in NF in lung fibrosis and alter the phenotype of primary fibroblasts, such as miRNA‐155 77 and Let‐7d miRNAs. 78 These findings suggest that miRNAs can have a regulatory role in transforming NFs to CAFs in lung adenocarcinoma.
Besides posttranscriptional control, epigenetic mechanisms are also implicated in CAF activation. 68 , 69 , 79 , 80 A study showed that the proinflammatory cytokine leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF) enhanced the invasive potential of CAFs, by mediating the acetylation of STAT3 by histone acetyltransferase p300, and subsequently the activation of JAK1 by promoter methylation of SHP1. 79 Recently, an interesting study highlighted that CAFs transactivated the lncRNA HOX transcript antisense RNA (HOTAIR) expression in breast cancer cell via the secretion of TGF‐β1, and also histone H3K27 trimethylation to activate the CDK5 pathway, contributing to cancer metastasis and EMT. 80 More epigenetic control nodes in CAFs activation are expected to be unraveled.
Many studies reported exosomes as the messengers participating in the crosstalk between cancer cells and fibroblasts in promoting CAFs activation. 24 , 81 Exosomes are lipid‐bilayer extracellular nanovesicles carrying microRNAs, 25 , 75 , 82 lncRNAs, 83 proteins, 21 , 84 metabolites and other substances. 85 , 86 Zhang et al determined the protein secretome of fibroblasts treated with or without cancer cell‐derived exosomes. They found that cancer cells and fibroblasts have a bidirectional interaction; Cancer cell‐derived exosomes activate fibroblasts into CAFs while CAFs secreted proteins enhances proliferation and migration of NSCLC cells. 87
3. THE HETEROGENEITY OF CAFs
3.1. The origin of CAFs
Emerging evidence suggests that CAFs are a highly heterogeneous population of cells. 16 Such heterogeneity might be due to the numerous potential cellular sources and precursors of CAFs (Figure 1B). 88 , 89 NFs can be activated by the TME stimuli, such as local hypoxia, oxidative stress and GFs released from the neighboring tumor cells and infiltrating immune cells. This theory suggests that CAFs can be derived from resident fibroblasts activated by adjacent tumor cells and are the primary source of CAFs. 90 TGF‐β, secreted by the stromal and cancer cells, promotes the migration of resident fibroblasts and their transformation into CAFs. In some organs, such as the pancreas and liver, the resident fibroblasts are known as quiescent pancreatic stellate cells (PSCs) and hepatic stellate cells (HSCs), respectively. 91 , 92 They can acquire a myofibroblast‐like phenotype such as α‐smooth muscle actin (α‐SMA) expression upon TGF‐β and PDGF activation. Furthermore, some CAFs can transdifferentiate from mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). 93 , 94 CXCL‐12 and TGF‐β, which are secreted by tumor cells, stimulate the recruitment of MSCs and their activation into CAFs. 16 , 95 , 96 Bone marrow derived (BM)‐MSCs show upregulation in Calponin 1, a‐SMA and collagens by myocardin‐related transcription factors (MRTF) to induce differentiation into CAFs. 88 , 97 , 98
Studies also suggested that pericytes, 99 , 100 smooth muscle cells surrounding small border vessels can transdifferentiate into CAFs. Pericytes have been considered an essential source of myofibroblasts. 101 , 102 The process starts with pericyte detachment from endothelial cells, followed by migration into the lung interstitium and then activation to become myofibroblast via TGF‐β/Smad2/3 and PDGFβ/Erk signaling pathways. 103 , 104 , 105 Here, the transforming growth factor‐β receptor (TGF‐βR) and platelet‐derived growth factor‐β receptor (PDGF‐βR) are modified by core fucosylation (CF). α1,6‐fucosyltransferase (FUT8) is the only known enzyme that catalyzes CF. 106 , 107 In FUT8 knockdown cells, CF is out of function, and this inhibits TGF‐β/Smad2/3 and PDGFβ/Erk signaling pathways. 108 Some studies suggested that Sonic Hedgehog (SHh) is also involved in CAFs activation. 109 , 110 SHh contributes to branching morphogenesis lung specification in the developing lung. 111 In normal conditions, Hedgehog (Hh) activity is low. In the context of bleomycin injury, lung damage induces Hh pathway activity, and SHh overexpression increases fibrotic collagen deposition. 112 In idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, Hh activity can promote multiple profibrotic processes, including enhanced sensitivity to TGFβ and PDGF, leading to increased migration, contractility and survival in human lung fibroblasts. 113 , 114
CAFs can also derive from epithelial cells (ECs). 115 ECs differentiate into functional CAFs, which express FSP‐1 and αFAP via TGF‐β‐mediated epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT). 116 , 117 Endothelial cells contribute to the pool of CAFs through endothelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition (EndMT) in cancer, mainly via TGF‐β and SMAD signaling. 118 , 119 Several groups have also reported adipocyte conversion into CAFs. Mature adipocytes can activate the Wnt/β‐catenin pathway, leading to adipocyte “dedifferentiation” to acquire a fibroblast‐like morphology. 99 , 120 , 121 , 122 It is suggested that using lineage tracing method with single cell spatial analysis can find out the main role and function of each cell type in tumor development, thus accounting for CAFs heterogeneity. 123
3.2. Subpopulation of CAFs in NSCLC and other cancers
Determination of subtypes of CAFs has met significant obstacles due to the heterogeneity of their origin, phenotype and function among different individuals in different tumor types. Based on different classification methods, there are different names for different subtypes of CAFs, as shown in Table 1 and Figure 1C. Different classifications have been proposed in relation to the different analysis approaches, for example the immunophenotype, RNA expression profile and histologic findings. In breast cancer, based on spatial distribution, CAFs can be classified as vascular CAFs, matrix CAFs, cycling CAFs and developmental CAFs. These subtypes of CAFs have discrete gene expression profiles. The gene sets detected for vascular CAFs were related to vascular development and angiogenesis, while matrix‐related genes dominated in matrix CAFs. Cycling CAFs are the proliferating section of vascular CAFs and are enriched for gene sets of the cell cycle. Lastly, differentiation‐related genes were hallmarks of developmental CAFs. 124
TABLE 1.
The proposed classification of CAFs in breast, pancreatic and lung cancer
| Classification methods | Cancer type | Origin or function | Proposed CAF subtype | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spatial distributions | Breast cancer | Originate from peripheral blood vessels | Vascular CAFs | 124 |
| Originate from resident fibroblasts in local tissues | Matrix CAFs | |||
| Proliferating section of vascular CAFs | Cycling CAFs | |||
| Similar in phenotype to tumor epithelial cells | Developmental CAFs | |||
| Biomarkers | Breast cancer | Highly express basement membrane protein, | CD146+ CAFs | 125 |
| Highly express products that promote tumor invasiveness | CD146− CAFs | |||
| Phenotypes | Pancreatic cancer | Myofibroblastic phenotypes | myCAFs | 126 |
| Inflammatory phenotypes | iCAFs | |||
| Functions | Pancreatic cancer | Epithelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition (EMT) | EMT‐CAFs | 127 |
| Proliferation | PRO‐CAFs | |||
| Histological features | Lung cancer | High desmoplastic CAFs | HD‐CAFs | 128 |
| Low desmoplastic CAFs | LD‐CAFs | |||
| Single‐cell RNA sequencing technique | Lung cancer | A strong signature of EMT and clustering with tumor cells | Cluster 1 | 129 |
| A high level of α‐SMA and cocluster with pericytes | Cluster 2 | |||
| Enriched in the leading edge of the tumor | Cluster 4 | |||
| Lower myogenesis and high mTOR expression signature | Clusters 5 and 7 | |||
| Cell‐surface markers | Lung cancer | Chemoresistance and poor survival | CD10+GPR77+ CAFs | 130 |
| Therapeutic profiling | Lung cancer | HGFHigh and FGF7High/Low | Subtype 1 | 131 |
| HGFLow and FGF7High | Subtype 2 | |||
| HGFLow and FGF7Low | Subtype 3 |
Note: Based on the characteristic and functional studies of CAFs, CAFs are divided into different subtypes and exert diverse phenotypes and functions. Importantly, the previous studies identified four main categories of lung CAFs which are characterized by microarray technology, single‐cell RNA sequencing technique, cell‐surface markers and therapeutic profiling.
In breast cancer, CAFs subtypes can also be defined by their biomarkers, such as CD146+ CAFs and CD146− CAFs. Compared to CD146+ CAFs, CD146− CAFs have higher metastasis and invasion ability and lead to a poorer prognosis. 125 In pancreatic cancer, the subtypes of CAFs can be characterized by their phenotypes, namely the myofibroblastic phenotype (myCAFs) and inflammatory phenotype (iCAFs). 126 MyCAFs are highly expressed in αSMA and located adjacent to cancer cells, while iCAFs secrete inflammatory mediators such as interleukin‐6 (IL‐6) and are located far away from cancer cells. 126 , 132 Based on the heterogeneity features of CAFs, CAFs can also be divided into EMT(epithelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition)‐CAFs and PRO (proliferative)‐CAFs. These subtypes are correlated with activation of MAPK pathway and STAT3 pathway. 127
Meanwhile, there is no standard naming for lung CAFs and the above naming in different cancer types are not translatable to lung CAFs. In lung cancer, according to histological features, Hao et al discovered two CAF subtypes from 28 NSCLC patients characterized by proliferating CAFs, namely high desmoplastic CAFs (HD‐CAF) and low desmoplastic CAFs (LD‐CAF). 128 HD‐CAF showed a sharp rate of collagen matrix remodeling, invasion and tumor growth compared to LD‐CAFs. 128 LD‐CAFs are associated with tumor areas with lower cellularity and less desmoplastic stromal reaction, and its predominance appears to portend a better prognosis than HDCAFs cases. Moreover, Lambrechts' group used single‐cell RNA sequencing technique to divide lung CAFs into Clusters 1, 2, 4, 5 and 7. 129 For example, Clusters 1 and 4 were similar, but Cluster 1 showed a strong signature of EMT, an extensive repertoire of extracellular matrix proteins, and TGF‐β‐associated genes. Also, Cluster 1 was enriched within the tumor cells while Cluster 4 was enriched in the leading edge of the tumor. Cluster 2 exhibited a high level of α‐SMA and coclustered with pericytes. 129 Clusters 5 and 7 were highly similar because of lower myogenesis and high mTOR expression signature. The differences between them were predominantly related to the expression of glycolysis genes, demonstrating metabolic differences between various CAF subsets. Su et al searched for cell‐surface markers to identify clinically‐important subtypes and found CD10+GPR77+ lung CAFs. They are related to chemoresistance and poor survival in breast and lung cancer patients. 130 Hu et al also found three functional subtypes identified by lung cancer therapeutic profiling. 131 Subtypes 1 and 2 CAFs have high HFG and FGF7 expression, protecting lung cancer cells by chemoresistance. HGF is a MET ligand that mediates EGFR‐inhibitor resistance via AKT and MAPK signaling. 133 , 134 , 135 Subtype 3 CAFs have low HGF and FGF7 but express chemokines with chemoattractant properties for T lymphocytes and monocytes. Thus, Subtype 3 CAFs are associated with better clinical responses.
3.3. The main molecular markers of CAFs
Due to the heterogeneity of CAFs, no marker can be used as a universal and specific marker for all CAFs in different types of cancers. 136 In addition, there are different subsets of CAFs in the tumor, increasing the difficulty in defining the appropriate markers for CAFs. 137 In lung cancer, the most used CAF markers include, but are not limited to, alpha‐smooth muscle actin (α‐SMA) and fibroblast activation protein‐1 (FAP‐1). The reported markers are summarized in Table 2, although none of these markers are CAF‐specific, and can be expressed in other cells. Some highly expressed markers have been demonstrated to associate with advanced stages and unfavorable survival outcomes, such as FGFR1, FGF2, FAP, FSCN1 and LOXL1 (Figure 2).
TABLE 2.
The potential biomarkers of CAFs in lung cancer
| Potential biomarker | Biological functions | Promoting roles in tumors | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| αSMA | Cell contractility, structure and integrity | Tumor proliferation, immunosuppressive and impeding drug delivery | 138, 139, 140 |
| FAP‐1 | ECM remodeling, fibrogenesis, serine protease activity | Tumor progression and metastasis and shaping the immunosuppressive TME | 141, 142 |
| FGFs/FGFRs | Cell proliferation, migration, differentiation and angiogenesis | Tumorigenesis | 143 |
| PDGFRβ | Receptor tyrosine kinase activity | Immunomodulation, M2 polarization and angiogenesis | 142 |
| LOXL1 | Elastin, homeostasis and matrix remodeling during injury, fibrosis and cancer development | Tumorigenesis | 144 |
| VCAM1 | Endothelial cell adhesion, leukocytes and mediates adhesion, signal transduction and immune responses | Growth and invasion | 145 |
| Podoplanin | Cell migration and adhesion, a specific marker of lymphatic endothelium and lymph angiogenesis | Resistance to EGFR‐TKIs, invasion, tumorigenesis and metastasis | 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152 |
| Vimentin | Cell motility, structure and integrity | Metastasis and invasion | 140, 153 |
| GFPT2 | Controls the flux of glucose into the hexosamine pathway | Metabolic reprogramming | 154 |
| MMP‐2 | Degradation of ECM proteins and glycoprotein | Angiogenesis, tumor invasion and cell mobility | 155, 156 |
| CD99 | Cell adhesion, migration, death, differentiation and inflammation | Migration, invasion and metastasis | 157 |
| CD34 | Cell‐cell adhesion factor | Tumor vascularization | 158 |
| CD10+GPR77+ | Inflammatory and enzymatic functions | Tumor formation and tumor chemosensitivity (https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/biochemistry‐genetics‐and‐molecular‐biology/chemosensitivity) | 130 |
| CD200 | Promote the protection of neurons | Promoting cancer formation and chemoresistance | 159 |
| Fascin | Regulators of the cytoskeleton | Epithelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition and cellular invasion | 160 |
Note: The CAF markers in lung cancer are divided into growth factors, cytokines, ligands of immune cells, components in the extracellular matrix and other soluble factors. Each CAF marker exerts its biological and protumorigenic functions.
Abbreviations: FAP‐1, Fas‐associated phosphatase 1; FGF, fibroblast growth factors; GFPT2, GFPT2; LOXL1, lysyl oxidase‐like 1; MMP‐2, matrix metalloproteinase‐2; VCAM1, vascular cell adhesion molecule‐1; αSMA, alpha‐smooth muscle actin.
FIGURE 2.

The expression and clinical significance of cancer‐associated fibroblasts (CAFs)‐related biomarkers in lung cancer. The expression level of multiple CAF biomarkers is based on (A) AJCC stages, (B) T stages and (C) M stages. The high expression of related CAF markers is associated with advanced AJCC stage, tumor invasion and distant metastasis. (D) High expression of several CAF markers is associated with unfavorable clinical outcomes in nonsmall‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (TCGA cohort), suggesting the promoting role of CAFs in lung cancer progression [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
α‐SMA is widely considered as the most frequently used CAF marker. 138 , 141 , 161 , 162 , 163 , 164 , 165 , 166 CAFs which show α‐SMA expression have high collagen gel contractility (a measure of matrix remodeling capacity) and migration capacity compared to NFs. 138 , 167 They are associated with a high tumor Ki‐67 labeling index, lymph node metastasis, the poor 5‐year overall survival rate of the patients, and aggressive biological behavior in NSCLC. 162 , 164
Fibroblast‐activation protein (FAP), a cell‐surface serine protease, is a promising drug target to inhibit CAFs. 141 , 142 , 168 FAP‐1 is selectively expressed by stromal mesenchymal cells and functions in wound healing, fibrotic reactions, inflammatory conditions and tumor development. 136 Several studies reported that FAP‐1 positive CAFs exerts immunoadjuvant roles in NSCLC and FAP‐1 is considered as a molecular target in anti‐CAFs therapy. For example, a phase I dose‐escalation study with sibrotuzumab, an antibody to human FAP, in patients with advanced NSCLC, showed that sibrotuzumab explicitly binds to the tumor sites without apparent side effects. 142 , 169
4. THE PROMOTING ROLE OF CAFs ON CANCER CELLS
CAFs play a pivotal role in tumorigenesis and are involved in different oncogenic pathways (Figure 3). Increasing evidence has supported the protumorigenic roles of CAFs, which are summarized in Table 3.
FIGURE 3.

The protumorigenic roles of cancer‐associated fibroblasts (CAFs) in nonsmall‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC). CAFs secrete multiple cytokines, chemokines and growth factors to directly stimulate (A) cancer cell proliferation, (B) invasion and metastasis, (C) angiogenesis, (D) immune evasion and (E) resistance to treatment. Meanwhile, the CAFs also shape the tumor microenvironment through remodeling the extracellular matrix (ECM) to provide a chemoresistance mechanism (created with BioRender.com) [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
TABLE 3.
Multiple signaling pathways implicated in the protumorigenic functions of lung CAFs
| Proteins involved in CAFs | Associated pathways in cancer cells | Coculture model/drug used | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proliferation, survival | |||
| IL‐6 | JAK2/STAT3 |
CAFs/NFs: NSCLC clinical samples Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) and SK‐MES‐1 (RRID:CVCL_0630) In vivo |
168, 170 |
| IL‐22 | PI3K‐Akt‐mTOR, IL‐6‐IL‐6R |
CAFs/NFs: NSCLC clinical samples Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) and NCI‐H1650 (RRID:CVCL_1483) |
171 |
| CXCL12 | ERK |
CAFs/NFs: NSCLC clinical samples Cell line: NSCLC‐derived neoplastic cell lines and A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) In vivo |
172 |
| CLCF1 | Proposed: JAK‐STAT and MAPK pathway |
CAFs/NFs: Mouse fibroblast and lung adenocarcinomas clinical samples Cell line: LKR10 and LKR13 cells from KrasLA1 mouse, LSZ2 cells were derived through xenograft passages from KrasLSLG12D mice, A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) and NCI‐H1299 (RRID:CVCL_0060) In vivo |
170 |
| VCAM‐1 | AKT and MAPK pathway |
CAFs/NFs: Lung cancer clinical samples Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) and NCI‐H358 (RRID:CVCL_1559) |
145 |
| GGT5 | N.A. |
CAFs/NFs: LUAD clinical tissue Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) and ACC212102 (RRID:CVCL_D074) |
173 |
| TGF‐β | TGF‐β pathway |
CAFs/NFs: Human fetal lung fibroblast 1 (HFL1) (RRID:CVCL_0298) Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) |
174 |
| HIF‐1α | NF‐kB signaling |
CAFs/NFs: Mouse spontaneous LC model (TetO‐EGFRL858R; CCSP‐rtTA) and lung adenocarcinoma clinical tissues Cell line: LL/2 (LLC1) (RRID:CVCL_4358), MRC‐5 (RRID:CVCL_0440), Mouse embryonic fibroblast (MEF) cells were isolated from C57BL/6J wild‐type mice embryonic and A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) In vivo |
64 |
| FGF2 | FGF/FGFR pathway |
CAFs/NFs: WT and Fgf9‐DT mice Cell line: TAMs and endothelial cells from Fgf9‐DT mice |
143 |
| SDF‐1 | CXCR4‐mediated signaling pathway which involved NF‐κ B and Bcl‐xL |
CAFs/NFs: Lung cancer clinical samples Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) and PLA‐801D (RRID:CVCL_7110) |
175 |
| Fut8 | EGFR signaling |
CAFs/NFs: Lung adenocarcinoma clinical sample Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023), NCI‐H322 (RRID:CVCL_1556), human lung fibroblast (HLF) cells, MRC‐5 (RRID:CVCL_0440) and HFL1 (RRID:CVCL_0298) In vivo |
176 |
| miR224 | Inhibiting SIRT3/AMPK and activating mTOR/HIF‐1α |
CAFs/NFs: NSCLC clinical samples Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023), NCI‐H1299 (RRID:CVCL_0060) and HUVEC‐C (RRID:CVCL_2959) In vivo |
|
| p53 | N.A. |
CAFs/NFs: Lung cancer clinical samples Cell line: Calu‐1 (RRID:CVCL_0608), NCI‐H460 (RRID:CVCL_0459), NCI‐H1299 (RRID:CVCL_0060) In vivo |
178 |
| FoxF1 | Hedgehog signaling |
Cell line: Swiss 3 T3 (NIH 3 T3) (RRID:CVCL_0594), C3H/10 T1/2 clone 8 (RRID:CVCL_0190), A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023), IMR‐90 (RRID:CVCL_0347) and primary murine lung fibroblasts (MLFs) were isolated from the explant out‐growth of lungs derived from wild‐type or Foxf1 heterozygous mice. In vivo Conditioned medium collected from NIH 3 T3 (RRID:CVCL_0594) and Institute for Medical Research‐90 (IMR‐90) (RRID:CVCL_0347) |
179 |
| Migration, invasion, metastasis | |||
| Stimulation of EMT | |||
| IL‐6 | JAK2/STAT3 pathway, TGF‐β pathway |
CAFs/NFs: NSCLC clinical samples, normal human lung fibroblasts (NHLF) Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023), NCI‐H661 (RRID:CVCL_1577), SK‐MES‐1 (RRID:CVCL_0630) and NCI‐H358 (RRID:CVCL_1559) In vivo |
168, 180 |
| IL‐22 | PI3K‐AKTmTOR pathway |
CAFs/NFs: NSCLC clinical samples Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) and NCI‐H1650 (RRID:CVCL_1483) |
171 |
| Snail1 (transcription factor) | N.A. |
CAFs/NFs: Lung cancer clinical samples Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023), NCI‐H1299 (RRID:CVCL_0060), SPC‐A1 (HeLa derivative [endocervical adenocarcinoma], RRID:CVCL_6955) and LTEP‐a2 (HeLa derivative [endocervical adenocarcinoma], RRID:CVCL_6929) |
181 |
| HGF | HGF/IGF‐1/ANXA2 signaling |
CAFs/NFs: Lung adenocarcinomas clinical samples Cell line: PC‐9 (RRID:CVCL_B260) (del E746_A750) and HCC827 (RRID:CVCL_2063) (del E746_A750) |
182 |
| IGF‐1 | HGF/IGF‐1/ANXA2 signaling |
CAFs/NFs: Lung adenocarcinomas clinical samples Cell line: PC‐9 (RRID:CVCL_B260) (del E746_A750) and HCC827 (RRID:CVCL_2063) (del E746_A750) |
182 |
| SRGN (a CD44‐interacting factor) | CD44/NF‐κB/claudin‐1 (CLDN1) axis |
Cell line: NCI‐H1299 (RRID:CVCL_0060), NCI‐H322 (RRID:CVCL_1556), NCI‐H358 (RRID:CVCL_1559), NCI‐H23 (RRID:CVCL_1547), NCI‐H460 (RRID:CVCL_0459) and A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) In vivo |
183 |
| PDGFBB | Inhibition of the PDGF‐PDGFR signaling pathway |
CAFs/NFs: Lung adenocarcinomas clinical samples Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) and PC‐9 (RRID:CVCL_B260) and NCI‐H1975 (RRID:CVCL_1511) |
184 |
| PDPN | Rho‐ROCK pathway |
CAFs/NFs: Lung adenocarcinomas clinical samples Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) and PC‐9 (RRID:CVCL_B260) |
185 |
| TIAM2 | N.D. |
CAFs/NFs: NSCLC clinical samples Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) and Medical Research Council cell strain‐5 (MRC‐5) (RRID:CVCL_0440) |
186 |
| Fascin | N.D. | CAFs/NFs: Lung adenocarcinomas clinical samples | 160 |
| HMGB1 | TLR4/NF‐κB pathway |
CAFs/NFs: NSCLC clinical samples Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) and NCI‐H661 (RRID:CVCL_1577) |
187 |
| Gli1 (zinc finger transcription factor) | Hedgehog signaling |
CAFs/NFs: NSCLC clinical samples Cell line: NCI‐H358 (RRID:CVCL_1559) |
188 |
| SMAD3 | N.A. |
CAFs/NFs: NSCLC clinical samples Cell line: NCI‐H358 (RRID:CVCL_1559) |
188 |
| miR210 | PTEN/PI3K/AKT pathway |
CAFs/NFs: Lung adenocarcinomas clinical samples Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023), NCI‐H1975 (RRID:CVCL_1511) and Bronchial Epithelium transformed with Ad12‐SV40 2B (BEAS‐2B) (RRID:CVCL_0168) |
189 |
| miR224 | SIRT3/AMPK/mTOR/HIF‐1α axis |
CAFs/NFs: NSCLC clinical samples Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) and NCI‐H1299 (RRID:CVCL_0060) |
177 |
| TGF‐β | TGF‐β pathway |
CAFs/NFs: Normal human lung fibroblasts (NHLF) Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) and NCI‐NCI‐H358 (RRID:CVCL_1559) In vivo |
180 |
| ECM remodeling | |||
| Vimentin | N.A. |
CAFs/NFs: Lung adenocarcinomas clinical samples Transgenic mouse model |
190 |
| p53 | N.A. |
CAFs/NFs: Lung cancer clinical samples Cell line: Calu‐1 (RRID:CVCL_0608), NCI‐H460 (RRID:CVCL_0459) and NCI‐H1299 (RRID:CVCL_0060) In vivo |
178 |
| MMP1, 3, 10 | N.A. |
CAFs/NFs: Lung cancer clinical samples Cell line: NCI‐H460 (RRID:CVCL_0459) |
178 |
| Integrin α11 β 1 | N.A. |
CAFs/NFs: NSCLC clinical samples Cell line: NCI‐H460SM, A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) and primary human lung cancer cells In vivo |
191 |
| ST8SIA2 gene | N.A. |
CAFs/NFs: NSCLC clinical samples Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) |
128 |
| Angiogenesis | |||
| CCL2/VEGFA | N.A. |
CAFs/NFs: adenocarcinomas, squamous cell carcinomas and larger cell carcinomas clinical samples Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) NCI‐H460 (RRID:CVCL_0459) in vivo |
192 |
| ↓miR‐1/↓miR‐206/↑miR‐31 | FOXO3a/VEGF/CCL2 |
CAFs/NFs: adenocarcinomas, squamous cell carcinomas and larger cell carcinomas clinical samples Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) and NCI‐H460 (RRID:CVCL_0459) in vivo |
192 |
| VEGF | JAK2/STAT3 pathway |
CAFs/NFs: NSCLC clinical samples Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) and NCI‐H661 (RRID:CVCL_1577) and SK‐MES‐1 (RRID:CVCL_0630) |
168 |
| bFGF | JAK2/STAT3 pathway | Cell line: A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023) and NCI‐H292 (RRID:CVCL_0455) | 193 |
| SDF4 | ERK1/2 and p38 pathways |
CAFs/NFs: HFL1 (RRID:CVCL_0298) Cell line: HUVEC‐C (RRID:CVCL_2959) |
194 |
| miR210 | JAK2/STAT3 pathway |
Cell line: NCI‐H1975 (RRID:CVCL_1511), A‐549 (RRID:CVCL_0023), Swiss‐3 T3 (NIH 3 T3) (RRID:CVCL_0594) and Ms‐1 (RRID:CVCL_IQ55) In vivo |
75 |
| Immunosuppression/chemoresistance | |||
| CCL2 | N.A. |
CAFs/NFs: lung squamous cell carcinoma clinical samples Cell line: SW900 (RRID:CVCL_1731), NCI‐H2170 (RRID:CVCL_1535) and NCI‐H520 (RRID:CVCL_1566) and monocytes isolated from independent PBMC donors |
195 |
| ↓STC‐1 | N.A. | G12DKRAS‐ and V600EBRAF‐driven mouse lung models | 196 |
| TGF‐β1 | N.A. | CAFs/NFs: Lung squamous cell carcinoma clinical samples | 197 |
| IL‐6 | TGF‐β‐IL‐6 Axis (Induction of the EMT and acquisition of stemness) | Cisplatin | 57 |
| SMO | Hedgehog signaling pathway (Induction of the EMT) | EGFR‐TKIs | 198 |
| SDF‐1 | CXCR4‐mediated signaling pathway (Inhibition of tumor cell apoptosis) | Cisplatin | 175 |
| CCL5 | Caspase‐3/BCL‐2 signaling pathway (Inhibition of tumor cell apoptosis) | Cisplatin | 199 |
| IL‐11 | IL‐11R/STAT3 signaling (Inhibition of tumor cell apoptosis) | Cisplatin | 199 |
| Podoplanin | MAPK pathway and the PI3K pathway (Proposed: Induction of the EMT) | EGFR‐TKIs | 200 |
| HGF | Met/PI3K/AKT activation (Inhibition of tumor cell apoptosis) | Paclitaxel | 201 |
| IGF2 | AKT/Sox2/P‐GP signals (Decrease drug retention and increase drug efflux) | Cisplatin, etoposide, vinorelbine detartrate and doxorubicin | 202 |
| IGF2 | IGF‐II/IGF1R/Nanog (Acquisition of stemness) | Etoposide, docetaxel, vinorelbine detartrate and cisplatin | 203 |
| CD44 | (Acquisition of stemness) | Bevacizumab and 5‐FU | 204 |
Note: CAFs secrete or express proteins to promote multiple protumorigenic roles in lung cancer. The protumorigenic function is divided into four categories: proliferation and survival; migration, invasion and metastasis; angiogenesis; chemoresistance. In each category, the table highlights the signaling pathways that are involved in primary lung cancer or the coculture system of CAFs with cell lines. In the chemoresistance part, the drugs, related proteins and possible signaling pathways are also detailed summarized.
Abbreviations: CCL, C‐C chemokine ligand; CLCF1, ardiotrophin‐like cytokine factor; CXCL, CXC motif chemokine ligand; FGF, fibroblast growth factors; Fut8, fucosyltransferase 8; GGT5, gamma‐glutamyl transferase 5; HGF, hepatocyte growth factor; HIF‐1α, hypoxia‐inducible factor‐1α; HMGB1, high mobility group box 1; IGF‐1, insulin‐like growth factor; IL, interleukin; PDGF, platelet‐derived growth factor; PDPN, podoplanin; SDF‐1, stromal cell‐derived factor‐1; SMO, 7‐transmembrane protein smoothened; SRGN, sulfate proteoglycan serglycin; STC‐1, stanniocalcin‐1; TGF‐β, transforming growth factor‐beta; TIAM2, T‐cell lymphoma invasion and metastasis 2; VEGF, vascular endothelial growth factor.
4.1. Proliferation and growth
In two‐dimensional and three‐dimensional (3D) coculture models with lung CAFs, cancer cells grow faster than without coculture. 138 , 161 , 163 , 205 CAFs produce cytokines and growth factors that promote tumor proliferation in lung cancer cells in autocrine and paracrine manners, 206 , 207 , 208 , 209 such as C‐X‐C motif chemokine ligands including CXCL8, CXCL2, 210 CXCL12 172 ; TGF‐β, 174 and PDGF (Figure 3A). 211 , 212 In addition, lung CAFs secrete Cardiotrophin‐like cytokine factor 1 (CLCF1) and IL6, which stimulate the growth of cancer cells via the JAK/STAT signaling pathway. 170
Lung CAF‐secreted VCAM‐1 activates the AKT, JNK and P38 pathway via binding of the integrin VLA‐4 in cancer cells, thus inducing tumor growth in vivo. 145 Various studies reported that interleukin‐22 (IL‐22) promotes the survival and tumorigenesis of cancer cells. 213 Li et al demonstrated that CAF‐secreted IL‐22 significantly enhanced the proliferation, migration and invasion of lung cancer cells via the activation of PI3K‐Akt‐mTOR signaling. 171 These findings suggested that the role of CAFs in activating the AKT signaling pathway is crucial for cancer cell proliferation.
Some studies have highlighted the involvement of Hh signaling involved in the activation, proliferation and invasion of CAFs and cancer cells. The biological function of Hh signaling and the associated Gli transcription factors (Gli 1‐3) promote organogenesis and lung branching morphogenesis. 214 Olga et al reported that inhibition of Hh signaling induced a significant decrease in the proliferation of NSCLC cells by modulating cyclin D expression. In addition, NSCLC cells secreted Shh and activated Hedgehog signaling in CAFs. Lung CAFs remodel the ECM and deposit collagen, promoting cancer cells invasion and proliferation. 215
In lung adenocarcinoma cells (LUAD), high expression of GGT5 in CAFs contributed to tumor cell proliferation and drug resistance by increasing intracellular glutathione and reducing the intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) level. 173 For other cancers, increasing evidence also suggested that elevated serum gamma‐glutamyltransferase (GGT) participated in tumorigenesis and progression, such as breast cancer, 216 gastric cancer 217 and colorectal cancer. 218
4.2. Invasion and metastasis
CAFs are a vital component in the TME and can act as a bridge between the TME and cancer cells. CAFs facilitate cancer cell crosstalk within the TME. 219 CAFs stimulate invasion and metastasis through two main aspects, which include EMT 220 and ECM remodeling (Figure 3B). 221
CAFs induce EMT by secreting soluble factors. 222 , 223 In lung cancer, CAF‐secreted IL‐6 induces EMT programming and modulate metastasis‐related genes through the JAK2/STAT3 signaling pathway in vitro and in vivo. 168 In our study, IL‐6 induces overexpression of EMT‐related genes and proteins, including vimentin, N‐cadherin, MMP2, MMP9 and VEGF. CAF‐secreted hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) and insulin‐like growth factor‐1 (IGF‐1) induce annexin A2 (ANXA2) expression and phosphorylation through the c‐Met pathway, resulting in EMT and EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR‐TKIs) resistance in NSCLC. 182 Also, CAF‐secreted complement 3a (C3a), a prominent tumor‐promoting factor in TME, 224 , 225 activates PI3K/Akt signaling. In breast cancer, The secretion of TGF‐β, HGF and PDGF by cancer cells ultimately results in EMT remodeling, invasion and metastasis. 226
Recent studies reported that miRNAs secreted from CAFs are involved in metastasis, such as the exosomal miR‐210. It promotes EMT through targeting UPF1 to activate the PTEN/PI3K/AKT pathway in NSCLC. 189 Besides the above signaling pathways, CAFs secrete high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) to promote EMT through NF‐κB signaling. 187 HMGB participates in multiple cellular processes such as invasion and angiogenesis. 227
CAFs facilitate local invasion and metastasis of the cancer cells by biomechanically remodeling the ECM. Thus, it may be said that cancer cells invade the matrix by following the footpath of the CAFs. 228 , 229 CAFs synthesize structural proteins like collagen type I and IV, heparan sulfate proteoglycans, tenascin‐C, secrete connective tissue growth factors and produce digestive factors such as MMPs and plasminogen activators. 230 , 231 In particular, MMPs are ECM‐degrading proteases, participate in tumorigenesis and activate the inflammatory cytokines. 232 , 233 They are categorized into different functional subtypes and have multiple functions in the tumor stroma, including tissue invasion and intravasation, angiogenesis, regulation of inflammation and preparation of the metastatic niche. 233 In collagen invasion assay, podoplanin (PDPN)‐expressing CAFs invade the collagen matrix, and then cancer cells invade within the footpaths created by CAFs. PDPN‐positive CAFs can be commonly found in clinical samples of lung adenocarcinoma and are also related to poor survival. 146 , 147 , 148 , 149 , 185
4.3. Angiogenesis
Angiogenesis plays an important role in tumor growth and metastasis. 234 , 235 , 236 , 237 The process requires several regulatory molecules such as VEGF receptors (VEGFR), 238 bFGF, 239 type I collagen 240 and fibronectin. 241 , 242 CAFs express these regulatory molecules to initiate angiogenesis (Figure 3C). There is also evidence that in NSCLC, when nonsmall‐cell lung cancer tumor cells are cocultured with fibroblasts, gene expressions related to tumor angiogenesis, ECM degradation, cell growth and survival are enhanced in the tumor cells. 243
Other studies have shown that myofibroblast transformation can be induced by cisplatin and 5‐fluorouracil treatment through CCAAT/enhancer‐binding protein delta (CEBPD), thereby promoting proliferation, migration in vascular endothelial cells and angiogenesis in NSCLC cells. CEBPD elevates SDF4 (a C‐X‐C chemokine) expression in CAFs in response to cisplatin and 5‐fluorouracil treatment in HFL1 cells. SDF4 is secreted and directly interacts with CXCR4 to induce vascular endothelial growth factor D (VEGF‐D) expression for angiogenesis via ERK1/2 and p38 pathways in endothelial cells. 194
4.4. Immune escaping
To achieve immune evasion, CAFs are involved in shaping the immunosuppressive TME (Figure 3D). 244 However, the mechanism and crosstalk between the CAFs and immune cells are still to be fully elucidated. Using The Cancer Genome Atlas Lung Squamous Cell Carcinoma database, several genes are highly expressed in cases with PDPN‐expressing CAFs, including interleukin (IL)‐1A, IL‐1B, IL‐6, IL‐10, CCL2, colony‐stimulating factor 1 (CSF1), FGF2, galectin 1, PDGFA, PDGFB and TGF‐β1. Among them, TGF‐β1 is a well‐known cytokine that participated in M2 macrophage polarization and immunosuppression. 245 , 246 In addition, PDPN‐expressing CAFs are associated with a high number of CD204+ TAMs, and a low ratio of CD8+ T cells and FOX3+ T cells in immunohistochemical staining of lung adenocarcinoma specimens, suggesting that PDPN‐expressing CAFs help cancer cells escape host immunosurveillance. 197 CAFs secrete monocyte‐ and neutrophil‐attracting chemokines and cytokines such as CCL2, CCL7, CXCL1, CXCL5, CXCL8, MIF, IL6 and VEGF in a 3D‐transwell system. 195 MIF, IL6 and VEGF have been suggested to promote MDSC differentiation. 247 , 248 Significantly, CAF‐secreted CCL2 induces CCR2+CD14+ monocyte migration in chemotaxis assay and thus promotes monocyte differentiation into monocytic MDSCs. 195 CAF‐induced MDSCs inhibit the IFNγ production of CD8+ T cells, thus suppressing the proliferation of CD8+ T cells. At the same time, they express NADPH oxidase‐2 (NOX2), which generates ROS to promote immunosuppression in lung cancer cells. 195
To promote an immunosuppressive environment, CAFs diminish the antitumorigenic activity of natural killer cells (NK cells) 249 To escape the attack from the immune cell, CAFs also modulate the immune checkpoints such as the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD‐1) and its ligand, programmed death‐ligand 1 (PD‐L1). PD‐1/PD‐L1 pathway suppresses the antitumor immune activity of T cells. 250 CAF secreted cytokines such as IL‐8, osteoprotegerin (OPG) and CXCL2 can increase the expression of PD‐L1 in lung adenocarcinoma cells. 210 More interestingly, CAFs express inhibitory ligands, including PD‐L1, 139 PD‐L2 139 , 251 and FASL, 251 which inhibit the CD8+ T cells in NSCLC. Apart from that, CD39+ T cells highly colocalized with FAP+ CAFs in NSCLC. These T cells and CAFs may cooperate in mediating immune escape: Activated T cells upregulate the expression of MHC, coinhibitory ligands PD‐L1 and PD‐L2, and CD73 on CAFs, increase production of IL‐6 and initiate production of IL‐27. On the other hand, CAFs enhance the level of coinhibitory receptors PD‐1, Tim3, LAG‐3 and CD39 on T cells, resulting in their transformation into tumor infiltrating T cells, and leading T‐cell apoptosis in NSCLC. 252 The above studies suggested that CAFs play a critical role in immune checkpoint biology. However, the interplay between CAFs and cancer cells remains elusive and insufficiently delineated.
5. THE ROLE OF CAFs IN CHEMORESISTANCE
The two primary mechanisms used by CAFs to help cancer cells evade therapy have been demonstrated, including the physical barrier method and interplay of CAFs and lung cancer (Figure 3E).
5.1. The physical barrier formed by CAFs
ECM can become rigid and acts as a barrier to protect the tumor cell from chemotherapy. 253 ECM stiffness is characterized by an aggregation of ECM proteins with hyaluronic acid (HA) at the core. CAFs enhance the expression of ECM proteins such as collagen, HA and fibronectin. Collagen and fibronectin provide resistance to tensile stress in the periphery of tumor cells. 254 , 255 , 256 On the one hand, CAF‐expressed integrins α11β1 is a collagen‐binding receptor and increases ECM stiffness in NSCLC. 191 A semisolid Matrigel‐embedded cell culture system provides a clear picture of how ECM stiffness induces chemoresistance. Lung cancer cells line A549 cells within the semisolid Matrigel matrix are arrested in the G0/G1 cell cycle, with decreased cell proliferation and invasion. 257
5.2. The ligand‐receptor pathways between CAFs and cancer cells
CAF‐secreted stromal cell‐derived factor 1 (SDF‐1) enhances the chemoresistance of lung cancer cells to cisplatin by suppressing CXCR4 expression, suggesting CAFs facilitate drug resistance via the CXCR4‐mediated signaling pathway. 175 Notably, the increased SDF‐1 was caused by a downregulation of miR‐1 which is a tumor‐suppressor microRNA and is required for transforming NFs to CAFs. 258 On the other hand, CAFs express C‐C motif chemokine ligand 5 (CCL5) and inhibit the cisplatin‐induced apoptosis in NSCLC cells. CCL5 enhances the expression level of long noncoding RNA (lncRNA) HOX transcript antisense RNA (HOTAIR), which inhibits tumor cell apoptosis 259 , 260 via the caspase‐3/BCL‐2 signaling pathway. 199
Activating EGFR mutations are common in lung cancers and can be treated by EGFR‐TKIs such as erlotinib and gefitinib. Unfortunately, most patients develop drug resistance to EGFR‐TKI. One possible explanation is that CAFs can induce EGFR‐TKI resistance. Choe et al demonstrated that coculture with CAFs induces erlotinib resistance in lung cancer cells via 7‐transmembrane protein smoothened (SMO) mediated Hh signaling. Besides, CAF‐secreted IL‐6 induces drug resistance by promoting EMT and acquiring stemness of lung cancer cells. Using a cancer tissue‐originated spheroid experiment, CAF‐secreted IL‐6 and TGF‐β contribute to tumor progression, the acquisition of stemness and drug resistance. 57
6. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES
The research about CAFs remains going on. Recently, tumor organoid studies have become popular since it is described as “cancer surrogates” that mimic the tumor's biological characteristic. 261 An organoid derived from the patients' tumor tissue seed within the Matrigel culture system of 3D cell culture technique in vitro. 126 , 262 , 263 , 264 , 265 , 266 , 267 , 268 The Matrigel combinational culture system can simulate the ECM environment, yet it still has some limitations. The Matrigel was different from the composition of the ECM. Thus, it may not exert the entire functions and properties of fibroblasts. Moreover, the system does not contain all cell populations, such as immune cells. Thus, it is hard to investigate the crosstalk of CAFs with immune cells. Different culture systems will be developed for the deep investigation of CAFs.
Due to the heterogeneity of CAFs from the molecular aspect, several scientific and technical concerns about CAFs remain to be addressed. First, the relationship and function between CAFs at the metastatic and primary sites remains unresolved. It is unclear if primary CAFs may migrate to the metastatic site or NFs at the metastatic site are transformed to CAFs by similar cytokines produced at the primary site. Second, the classification and subtypes of CAFs are not well‐defined clearly in different cancer types. Third, it is well documented that CAFs promote tumorigenesis by remodeling the cancer cells, while how CAFs communicate with other microenvironmental components has not been clearly elucidated. Further investigations will be performed to unravel the cell‐cell chat between CAFs and endothelial, myeloid, T, B cells based on ligand‐receptor pathways. Fourth, it is urgent to develop novel research platforms for the investigation of CAFs. Apart from single‐cell RNA sequencing for the expression profiling analysis of each CAF, it also needs to develop the DNA sequencing technique in single‐cell resolution to investigate the copy number changes and mutation spectrum in CAFs.
CAFs provide a tumor‐friendly microenvironment for cancer cells and reshape their biological behaviors by cytokine secretion, ECM modification and EMT reprogramming. In this review, we summarized the molecular mechanisms and clinical significance of CAFs in NSCLC. Hopefully, the future work will shed light on developing novel therapeutic approaches by accurately targeting CAFs based on the recognized molecular mechanisms.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
Ka Fai To conceived the project, provided direction and guidance on the whole project. Kit Yee Wong and Alvin Ho‐Kwan Cheung drafted the manuscript. Bonan Chen and Wai Nok Chan analyzed the data and interpreted the results. Ka Fai To, Wei Kang, Kwok Wai Lo and Jun Yu reviewed the manuscript and made significant revisions. The final manuscript has been approved by all authors. The work reported in the paper has been performed by the authors, unless clearly specified in the text.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The figures in the manuscript were partly generated from BioRender (https://biorender.com/). We acknowledge the TCGA Research Network (http://cancergenome.nih.gov/) for providing the datasets and analysis. We also acknowledge the technical support from Core Utilities of Cancer Genomics and Pathobiology of the Department of Anatomical and Cellular Pathology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
Wong KY, Cheung AH‐K, Chen B, et al. Cancer‐associated fibroblasts in nonsmall cell lung cancer: From molecular mechanisms to clinical implications. Int J Cancer. 2022;151(8):1195‐1215. doi: 10.1002/ijc.34127
Kit Yee Wong and Alvin Ho‐Kwan Cheung contributed equally to our study.
Funding information Chinese University of Hong Kong, Grant/Award Number: 2020.001; Research Grants Council, University Grants Committee, Grant/Award Numbers: CUHK 14100019, CUHK 14118518
Contributor Information
Wei Kang, Email: weikang@cuhk.edu.hk.
Ka Fai To, Email: kfto@cuhk.edu.hk.
REFERENCES
- 1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71:209‐249. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2021. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71:7‐33. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Inamura K. Lung cancer: understanding its molecular pathology and the 2015 WHO classification. Front Oncol. 2017;7:193. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Stünzi H, Head K, Nielsen S. Tumours of the lung. Bull World Health Organ. 1974;50:9‐19. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Tsoulos N, Papadopoulou E, Metaxa‐Mariatou V, et al. Tumor molecular profiling of NSCLC patients using next generation sequencing. Oncol Rep. 2017;38:3419‐3429. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Rotow J, Bivona TG. Understanding and targeting resistance mechanisms in NSCLC. Nat Rev Cancer. 2017;17:637‐658. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Sanchez‐Vega F, Mina M, Armenia J, et al. Oncogenic signaling pathways in the cancer genome atlas. Cell. 2018;173:321‐327.e10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Hanahan D, Coussens LM. Accessories to the crime: functions of cells recruited to the tumor microenvironment. Cancer Cell. 2012;21:309‐322. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell. 2011;144:646‐674. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Hui L, Chen Y. Tumor microenvironment: sanctuary of the devil. Cancer Lett. 2015;368:7‐13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Paget S. The distribution of secondary growths in cancer of the breast. Lancet. 1889;133:571‐573. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Chen F, Zhuang X, Lin L, et al. New horizons in tumor microenvironment biology: challenges and opportunities. BMC Med. 2015;13:1‐14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Wang M, Zhao J, Zhang L, et al. Role of tumor microenvironment in tumorigenesis. J Cancer. 2017;8:761‐773. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Kalluri R, Zeisberg M. Fibroblasts in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2006;6:392‐401. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Tomasek JJ, Gabbiani G, Hinz B, Chaponnier C, Brown RA. Myofibroblasts and mechano‐regulation of connective tissue remodelling. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2002;3:349‐363. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Kalluri R. The biology and function of fibroblasts in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2016;16:582‐598. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Öhlund D, Elyada E, Tuveson D. Fibroblast heterogeneity in the cancer wound. J Exp Med. 2014;211:1503‐1523. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Becker A, Thakur BK, Weiss JM, Kim HS, Peinado H, Lyden D. Extracellular vesicles in cancer: cell‐to‐cell mediators of metastasis. Cancer Cell. 2016;30:836‐848. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Maacha S, Bhat AA, Jimenez L, et al. Extracellular vesicles‐mediated intercellular communication: roles in the tumor microenvironment and anti‐cancer drug resistance. Mol Cancer. 2019;18:1‐16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Luga V, Zhang L, Viloria‐Petit AM, et al. Exosomes mediate stromal mobilization of autocrine Wnt‐PCP signaling in breast cancer cell migration. Cell. 2012;151:1542‐1556. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Webber JP, Spary LK, Sanders AJ, et al. Differentiation of tumour‐promoting stromal myofibroblasts by cancer exosomes. Oncogene. 2015;34:290‐302. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Richards KE, Zeleniak AE, Fishel ML, Wu J, Littlepage LE, Hill R. Cancer‐associated fibroblast exosomes regulate survival and proliferation of pancreatic cancer cells. Oncogene. 2017;36:1770‐1778. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Giusti I, Di Francesco M, D'Ascenzo S, et al. Ovarian cancer‐derived extracellular vesicles affect normal human fibroblast behavior. Cancer Biol Ther. 2018;19:722‐734. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Giusti I, Di Francesco M, Poppa G, Esposito L, D'Ascenzo S, Dolo V. Tumor‐derived extracellular vesicles activate normal human fibroblasts to a cancer‐associated fibroblast‐like phenotype, sustaining a pro‐tumorigenic microenvironment. Front Oncol. 2022;12:839880. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Fang T, Lv H, Lv G, et al. Tumor‐derived exosomal miR‐1247‐3p induces cancer‐associated fibroblast activation to foster lung metastasis of liver cancer. Nat Commun. 2018;9:1‐13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Dvorak HF. Tumors: wounds that do not heal. New Engl J Med. 1986;315:1650‐1659. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Sahai E, Astsaturov I, Cukierman E, et al. A framework for advancing our understanding of cancer‐associated fibroblasts. Nat Rev Cancer. 2020;20:174‐186. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Ping Q, Yan R, Cheng X, et al. Cancer‐associated fibroblasts: overview, progress, challenges, and directions. Cancer Gene Ther. 2021;28:1‐16. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Wang Z, Yang Q, Tan Y, et al. Cancer‐associated fibroblasts suppress cancer development: the other side of the coin. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2021;9:146. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Louault K, Li R‐R, DeClerck YA. Cancer‐associated fibroblasts: understanding their heterogeneity. Cancers. 2020;12:3108. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Gieniec KA, Butler LM, Worthley DL, Woods SL. Cancer‐associated fibroblasts—heroes or villains? Br J Cancer. 2019;121:293‐302. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Gabbiani G, Ryan G, Majno G. Presence of modified fibroblasts in granulation tissue and their possible role in wound contraction. Experientia. 1971;27:549‐550. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. Rodemann HP, Müller GA. Characterization of human renal fibroblasts in health and disease: II. In vitro growth, differentiation, and collagen synthesis of fibroblasts from kidneys with interstitial fibrosis. Am J Kidney Dis. 1991;17:684‐686. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Simian M, Hirai Y, Navre M, Werb Z, Lochter A, Bissell MJ. The interplay of matrix metalloproteinases, morphogens and growth factors is necessary for branching of mammary epithelial cells. Develpoment. 2001;128:3117‐3131. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Fukumura D, Xavier R, Sugiura T, et al. Tumor induction of VEGF promoter activity in stromal cells. Cell. 1998;94:715‐725. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36. Rockey DC, Weymouth N, Shi Z. Smooth muscle α Actin (Acta2) and myofibroblast function during hepatic wound healing. PLoS One. 2013;8:e77166. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. Wiseman BS, Werb Z. Stromal effects on mammary gland development and breast cancer. Science. 2002;296:1046‐1049. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Desmouliere A, Redard M, Darby I, Gabbiani G. Apoptosis mediates the decrease in cellularity during the transition between granulation tissue and scar. Am J Pathol. 1995;146:56‐66. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Eyden B, Banerjee SS, Shenjere P, Fisher C. The myofibroblast and its tumours. J Clin Pathol. 2009;62:236‐249. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Bierie B, Moses HL. TGFβ: the molecular Jekyll and Hyde of cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2006;6:506‐520. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Saito A, Horie M, Nagase T. TGF‐β signaling in lung health and disease. Int J Mol Sci. 2018;19:2460. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42. Liu S, Chen S, Zeng J. TGF‐β signaling: a complex role in tumorigenesis. Mol Med Rep. 2018;17:699‐704. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43. Pickup M, Novitskiy S, Moses HL. The roles of TGFβ in the tumour microenvironment. Nat Rev Cancer. 2013;13:788‐799. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44. Navab R, Strumpf D, Bandarchi B, et al. Prognostic gene‐expression signature of carcinoma‐associated fibroblasts in non‐small cell lung cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2011;108:7160‐7165. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45. Heldin C‐H, Westermark B. Mechanism of action and in vivo role of platelet‐derived growth factor. Physiol Rev. 1999;79:1283‐1316. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46. Elenbaas B, Weinberg RA. Heterotypic signaling between epithelial tumor cells and fibroblasts in carcinoma formation. Exp Cell Res. 2001;264:169‐184. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47. Bronzert D, Pantazis P, Antoniades H, et al. Synthesis and secretion of platelet‐derived growth factor by human breast cancer cell lines. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 1987;84:5763‐5767. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48. Dong J, Grunstein J, Tejada M, et al. VEGF‐null cells require PDGFR α signaling‐mediated stromal fibroblast recruitment for tumorigenesis. EMBO J. 2004;23:2800‐2810. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49. Cadamuro M, Nardo G, Indraccolo S, et al. Platelet‐derived growth factor‐D and Rho GTPases regulate recruitment of cancer‐associated fibroblasts in cholangiocarcinoma. Hepatology. 2013;58:1042‐1053. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50. Si H, Lv X, Guo A, Jiang H, Li J. Suppressive effect of leflunomide on rat hepatic stellate cell proliferation involves on PDGF‐BB‐elicited activation of three mitogen‐activated protein kinases. Cytokine. 2008;42:24‐31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51. Shao Z‐M, Nguyen M, Barsky SH. Human breast carcinoma desmoplasia is PDGF initiated. Oncogene. 2000;19:4337‐4345. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52. Auguste P, Lemiere S, Larrieu‐Lahargue F, Bikfalvi A. Molecular mechanisms of tumor vascularization. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2005;54:53‐61. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53. Strutz F, Zeisberg M, Hemmerlein B, et al. Basic fibroblast growth factor expression is increased in human renal fibrogenesis and may mediate autocrine fibroblast proliferation. Kidney Int. 2000;57:1521‐1538. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54. Burgess WH, Maciag T. The heparin‐binding (fibroblast) growth factor family of proteins. Annu Rev Biochem. 1989;58:575‐602. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55. Marrugal A, Ojeda L, Paz‐Ares L, Molina‐Pinelo S, Ferrer I. Proteomic‐based approaches for the study of cytokines in lung cancer. Dis Markers. 2016;2016:1‐12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56. Albrengues J, Bourget I, Pons C, et al. LIF mediates proinvasive activation of stromal fibroblasts in cancer. Cell Rep. 2014;7:1664‐1678. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57. Shintani Y, Fujiwara A, Kimura T, et al. IL‐6 secreted from cancer‐associated fibroblasts mediates chemoresistance in NSCLC by increasing epithelial‐mesenchymal transition signaling. J Thorac Oncol. 2016;11:1482‐1492. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58. O'Donoghue RJ, Knight DA, Richards CD, et al. Genetic partitioning of interleukin‐6 signalling in mice dissociates Stat3 from Smad3‐mediated lung fibrosis. EMBO Mol Med. 2012;4:939‐951. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59. Le Q‐T, Chen E, Salim A, et al. An evaluation of tumor oxygenation and gene expression in patients with early stage non‐small cell lung cancers. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12:1507‐1514. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60. Huang Y, Lin D, Taniguchi CM. Hypoxia inducible factor (HIF) in the tumor microenvironment: friend or foe? Sci China Life Sci. 2017;60:1114‐1124. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61. Kim J‐w, Evans C, Weidemann A, et al. Loss of fibroblast HIF‐1α accelerates tumorigenesis. Cancer Res. 2012;72:3187‐3195. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62. Doedens AL, Stockmann C, Rubinstein MP, et al. Macrophage expression of hypoxia‐inducible factor‐1α suppresses T‐cell function and promotes tumor progression. Cancer Res. 2010;70:7465‐7475. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63. Liu Y, Song X, Wang X, et al. Effect of chronic intermittent hypoxia on biological behavior and hypoxia‐associated gene expression in lung cancer cells. J Cell Biochem. 2010;111:554‐563. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64. Zhang Y, Bian Y, Wang Y, et al. HIF‐1α is necessary for activation and tumour‐promotion effect of cancer‐associated fibroblasts in lung cancer. J Cell Mol Med. 2021;25:5457‐5469. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65. Komatsu M, Kurokawa H, Waguri S, et al. The selective autophagy substrate p62 activates the stress responsive transcription factor Nrf2 through inactivation of Keap1. Nat Cell Biol. 2010;12:213‐223. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66. Kang JI, Kim DH, Sung KW, et al. P62‐induced cancer‐associated fibroblast activation via the Nrf2‐ATF6 pathway promotes lung tumorigenesis. Cancer. 2021;13:864. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67. Hiebert P, Wietecha MS, Cangkrama M, et al. Nrf2‐mediated fibroblast reprogramming drives cellular senescence by targeting the matrisome. Dev Cell. 2018;46:145‐161.e10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68. Rusek AM, Abba M, Eljaszewicz A, Moniuszko M, Niklinski J, Allgayer H. MicroRNA modulators of epigenetic regulation, the tumor microenvironment and the immune system in lung cancer. Mol Cancer. 2015;14:1‐10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69. Du H, Che G. Genetic alterations and epigenetic alterations of cancer‐associated fibroblasts. Oncol Lett. 2017;13:3‐12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70. Bartel DP. MicroRNAs: genomics, biogenesis, mechanism, and function. Cell. 2004;116:281‐297. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71. Reddy KB. MicroRNA (miRNA) in cancer. Cancer Cell Int. 2015;15:1‐6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72. Lin P, Yu S, Yang P. MicroRNA in lung cancer. Br J Cancer. 2010;103:1144‐1148. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73. Cummins J, Velculescu V. Implications of micro‐RNA profiling for cancer diagnosis. Oncogene. 2006;25:6220‐6227. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74. Lee S, Hong JH, Kim JS, et al. Cancer‐associated fibroblasts activated by miR‐196a promote the migration and invasion of lung cancer cells. Cancer Lett. 2021;508:92‐103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75. Fan J, Xu G, Chang Z, Zhu L, Yao J. miR‐210 transferred by lung cancer cell‐derived exosomes may act as proangiogenic factor in cancer‐associated fibroblasts by modulating JAK2/STAT3 pathway. Clin Sci. 2020;134:807‐825. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76. Kunita A, Morita S, Irisa TU, et al. MicroRNA‐21 in cancer‐associated fibroblasts supports lung adenocarcinoma progression. Sci Rep. 2018;8:1‐14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77. Pottier N, Maurin T, Chevalier B, et al. Identification of keratinocyte growth factor as a target of microRNA‐155 in lung fibroblasts: implication in epithelial‐mesenchymal interactions. PLoS One. 2009;4:e6718. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78. Huleihel L, Ben‐Yehudah A, Milosevic J, et al. Let‐7d microRNA affects mesenchymal phenotypic properties of lung fibroblasts. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2014;306:L534‐L542. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79. Albrengues J, Bertero T, Grasset E, et al. Epigenetic switch drives the conversion of fibroblasts into proinvasive cancer‐associated fibroblasts. Nat Commun. 2015;6:1‐15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80. Ren Y, H‐h J, Xu Y‐q, et al. Paracrine and epigenetic control of CAF‐induced metastasis: the role of HOTAIR stimulated by TGF‐ss1 secretion. Mol Cancer. 2018;17:1‐14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81. Yang X, Li Y, Zou L, Zhu Z. Role of exosomes in crosstalk between cancer‐associated fibroblasts and cancer cells. Front Oncol. 2019;9:356. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82. Yang F, Ning Z, Ma L, et al. Exosomal miRNAs and miRNA dysregulation in cancer‐associated fibroblasts. Mol Cancer. 2017;16:1‐10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83. Ding L, Ren J, Zhang D, et al. A novel stromal lncRNA signature reprograms fibroblasts to promote the growth of oral squamous cell carcinoma via LncRNA‐CAF/interleukin‐33. Carcinogenesis. 2018;39:397‐406. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84. Webber J, Steadman R, Mason MD, Tabi Z, Clayton A. Cancer exosomes trigger fibroblast to myofibroblast differentiation. Cancer Res. 2010;70:9621‐9630. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85. Skog J, Würdinger T, Van Rijn S, et al. Glioblastoma microvesicles transport RNA and proteins that promote tumour growth and provide diagnostic biomarkers. Nat Cell Biol. 2008;10:1470‐1476. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86. Subra C, Laulagnier K, Perret B, Record M. Exosome lipidomics unravels lipid sorting at the level of multivesicular bodies. Biochimie. 2007;89:205‐212. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87. Zhang J, Fu B, Li M, Mi S. Secretome of activated fibroblasts induced by exosomes for the discovery of biomarkers in non‐small cell lung cancer. Small. 2021;17:2004750. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88. Chen P‐Y, Wei W‐F, Wu H‐Z, Fan L‐S, Wang W. Cancer‐associated fibroblast heterogeneity: a factor that cannot be ignored in immune microenvironment remodeling. Front Immunol. 2021;12:2760. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89. Liu T, Han C, Wang S, et al. Cancer‐associated fibroblasts: an emerging target of anti‐cancer immunotherapy. J Hematol Oncol. 2019;12:1‐15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90. Arina A, Idel C, Hyjek EM, et al. Tumor‐associated fibroblasts predominantly come from local and not circulating precursors. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2016;113:7551‐7556. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91. Omary MB, Lugea A, Lowe AW, Pandol SJ. The pancreatic stellate cell: a star on the rise in pancreatic diseases. J Clin Invest. 2007;117:50‐59. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 92. Yin C, Evason KJ, Asahina K, Stainier DY. Hepatic stellate cells in liver development, regeneration, and cancer. J Clin Invest. 2013;123:1902‐1910. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93. Borriello L, Nakata R, Sheard MA, et al. Cancer‐associated fibroblasts share characteristics and protumorigenic activity with mesenchymal stromal cells. Cancer Res. 2017;77:5142‐5157. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 94. Mishra PJ, Mishra PJ, Humeniuk R, et al. Carcinoma‐associated fibroblast–like differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells. Cancer Res. 2008;68:4331‐4339. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95. Quante M, Tu SP, Tomita H, et al. Bone marrow‐derived myofibroblasts contribute to the mesenchymal stem cell niche and promote tumor growth. Cancer Cell. 2011;19:257‐272. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96. Barcellos‐de‐Souza P, Comito G, Pons‐Segura C, et al. Mesenchymal stem cells are recruited and activated into carcinoma‐associated fibroblasts by prostate cancer microenvironment‐derived TGF‐β1. Stem Cells. 2016;34:2536‐2547. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97. Raz Y, Cohen N, Shani O, et al. Bone marrow‐derived fibroblasts are a functionally distinct stromal cell population in breast cancer. J Exp Med. 2018;215:3075‐3093. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98. Direkze NC, Hodivala‐Dilke K, Jeffery R, et al. Bone marrow contribution to tumor‐associated myofibroblasts and fibroblasts. Cancer Res. 2004;64:8492‐8495. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 99. Zhang Y, Daquinag AC, Amaya‐Manzanares F, Sirin O, Tseng C, Kolonin MG. Stromal progenitor cells from endogenous adipose tissue contribute to pericytes and adipocytes that populate the tumor microenvironment. Cancer Res. 2012;72:5198‐5208. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 100. Hosaka K, Yang Y, Seki T, et al. Pericyte‐fibroblast transition promotes tumor growth and metastasis. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2016;113:E5618‐E5627. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 101. Bodnar RJ, Satish L, Yates CC, Wells A. Pericytes: a newly recognized player in wound healing. Wound Repair Regen. 2016;24:204‐214. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 102. Andersson‐Sjöland A, Karlsson JC, Rydell‐Törmänen K. ROS‐induced endothelial stress contributes to pulmonary fibrosis through pericytes and Wnt signaling. Lab Invest. 2016;96:206‐217. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 103. Bichsel CA, Hall SR, Schmid RA, Guenat OT, Geiser T. Primary human lung pericytes support and stabilize in vitro perfusable microvessels. Tissue Eng Part A. 2015;21:2166‐2176. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104. Wu C‐F, Chiang W‐C, Lai C‐F, et al. Transforming growth factor β‐1 stimulates profibrotic epithelial signaling to activate pericyte‐myofibroblast transition in obstructive kidney fibrosis. Am J Pathol. 2013;182:118‐131. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 105. Chen Y‐T, Chang F‐C, Wu C‐F, et al. Platelet‐derived growth factor receptor signaling activates pericyte‐myofibroblast transition in obstructive and post‐ischemic kidney fibrosis. Kidney Int. 2011;80:1170‐1181. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 106. Ihara H, Ikeda Y, Toma S, et al. Crystal structure of mammalian α1,6‐fucosyltransferase, FUT8. Glycobiology. 2007;17:455‐466. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 107. Sasaki H, Toda T, Furukawa T, et al. α‐1,6‐Fucosyltransferase (FUT8) inhibits hemoglobin production during differentiation of murine and K562 human erythroleukemia cells. J Biol Chem. 2013;288:16839‐16847. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 108. Sun W, Tang H, Gao L, et al. Mechanisms of pulmonary fibrosis induced by core fucosylation in pericytes. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2017;88:44‐54. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 109. Walter K, Omura N, Hong S‐M, et al. Overexpression of smoothened activates the sonic hedgehog signaling pathway in pancreatic cancer‐associated fibroblasts. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16:1781‐1789. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 110. Wei R, Lv M, Li F, et al. Human CAFs promote lymphangiogenesis in ovarian cancer via the Hh‐VEGF‐C signaling axis. Oncotarget. 2017;8:67315‐67328. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 111. Pepicelli CV, Lewis PM, McMahon AP. Sonic hedgehog regulates branching morphogenesis in the mammalian lung. Curr Biol. 1998;8:1083‐1086. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 112. Liu L, Kugler MC, Loomis CA, et al. Hedgehog signaling in neonatal and adult lung. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol. 2013;48:703‐710. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 113. Cigna N, Moshai EF, Brayer S, et al. The hedgehog system machinery controls transforming growth factor‐β–dependent myofibroblastic differentiation in humans: involvement in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Am J Pathol. 2012;181:2126‐2137. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 114. Bolaños AL, Milla CM, Lira JC, et al. Role of sonic hedgehog in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2012;303:L978‐L990. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 115. Krzysiek‐Maczka G, Targosz A, Szczyrk U, Strzalka M, Brzozowski T, Ptak‐Belowska A. Involvement of epithelial‐mesenchymal transition‐inducing transcription factors in the mechanism of Helicobacter pylori‐induced fibroblasts activation. J Physiol Pharmacol. 2019;70:727‐736. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 116. Iwano M, Plieth D, Danoff TM, Xue C, Okada H, Neilson EG. Evidence that fibroblasts derive from epithelium during tissue fibrosis. J Clin Invest. 2002;110:341‐350. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 117. Kahounová Z, Kurfürstová D, Bouchal J, et al. The fibroblast surface markers FAP, anti‐fibroblast, and FSP are expressed by cells of epithelial origin and may be altered during epithelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition. Cytometry A. 2018;93:941‐951. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 118. Yeon JH, Jeong HE, Seo H, et al. Cancer‐derived exosomes trigger endothelial to mesenchymal transition followed by the induction of cancer‐associated fibroblasts. Acta Biomater. 2018;76:146‐153. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 119. Piera‐Velazquez S, Jimenez SA. Endothelial to mesenchymal transition: role in physiology and in the pathogenesis of human diseases. Physiol Rev. 2019;99:1281‐1324. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 120. Jotzu C, Alt E, Welte G, et al. Adipose tissue derived stem cells differentiate into carcinoma‐associated fibroblast‐like cells under the influence of tumor derived factors. Cell Oncol. 2011;34:55‐67. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 121. Bochet L, Lehuédé C, Dauvillier S, et al. Adipocyte‐derived fibroblasts promote tumor progression and contribute to the desmoplastic reaction in breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2013;73:5657‐5668. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 122. Dirat B, Bochet L, Dabek M, et al. Cancer‐associated adipocytes exhibit an activated phenotype and contribute to breast cancer invasion. Cancer Res. 2011;71:2455‐2465. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 123. Ganguly D, Chandra R, Karalis J, et al. Cancer‐associated fibroblasts: versatile players in the tumor microenvironment. Cancer. 2020;12:2652. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 124. Bartoschek M, Oskolkov N, Bocci M, et al. Spatially and functionally distinct subclasses of breast cancer‐associated fibroblasts revealed by single cell RNA sequencing. Nat Commun. 2018;9:1‐13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 125. Brechbuhl HM, Barrett AS, Kopin E, et al. Fibroblast subtypes define a metastatic matrisome in breast cancer. JCI Insight. 2020;5: e130751. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 126. Öhlund D, Handly‐Santana A, Biffi G, et al. Distinct populations of inflammatory fibroblasts and myofibroblasts in pancreatic cancer. J Exp Med. 2017;214:579‐596. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 127. Ligorio M, Sil S, Malagon‐Lopez J, et al. Stromal microenvironment shapes the intratumoral architecture of pancreatic cancer. Cell. 2019;178:160‐175.e27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 128. Hao J, Zeltz C, Pintilie M, et al. Characterization of distinct populations of carcinoma‐associated fibroblasts from non–small cell lung carcinoma reveals a role for ST8SIA2 in cancer cell invasion. Neoplasia. 2019;21:482‐493. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 129. Lambrechts D, Wauters E, Boeckx B, et al. Phenotype molding of stromal cells in the lung tumor microenvironment. Nat Med. 2018;24:1277‐1289. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 130. Su S, Chen J, Yao H, et al. CD10+ GPR77+ cancer‐associated fibroblasts promote cancer formation and chemoresistance by sustaining cancer stemness. Cell. 2018;172:841‐856.e16. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 131. Hu H, Piotrowska Z, Hare PJ, et al. Three subtypes of lung cancer fibroblasts define distinct therapeutic paradigms. Cancer Cell. 2021;39:1531‐1547.e10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 132. Yu Y, Schuck K, Friess H, Kong B. Targeting aggressive fibroblasts to enhance the treatment of pancreatic cancer. Expert Opin Ther Targets. 2021;25:5‐13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 133. Engelman JA, Zejnullahu K, Mitsudomi T, et al. MET amplification leads to gefitinib resistance in lung cancer by activating ERBB3 signaling. Science. 2007;316:1039‐1043. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 134. Piotrowska Z, Isozaki H, Lennerz JK, et al. Landscape of acquired resistance to osimertinib in EGFR‐mutant NSCLC and clinical validation of combined EGFR and RET inhibition with osimertinib and BLU‐667 for acquired RET fusion. Cancer Discov. 2018;8:1529‐1539. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 135. Sequist LV, Waltman BA, Dias‐Santagata D, et al. Genotypic and histological evolution of lung cancers acquiring resistance to EGFR inhibitors. Sci Transl Med. 2011;3:75ra26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 136. Cortez E, Roswall P, Pietras K. Functional subsets of mesenchymal cell types in the tumor microenvironment. Semin Cancer Biol. 2014;25:3‐9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 137. Nurmik M, Ullmann P, Rodriguez F, Haan S, Letellier E. In search of definitions: cancer‐associated fibroblasts and their markers. Int J Cancer. 2020;146:895‐905. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 138. Horie M, Saito A, Mikami Y, et al. Characterization of human lung cancer‐associated fibroblasts in three‐dimensional in vitro co‐culture model. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2012;423:158‐163. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 139. Nazareth MR, Broderick L, Simpson‐Abelson MR, Kelleher RJ, Yokota SJ, Bankert RB. Characterization of human lung tumor‐associated fibroblasts and their ability to modulate the activation of tumor‐associated T cells. J Immunol. 2007;178:5552‐5562. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 140. Shu H, Li H. Prognostic effect of stromal myofibroblasts in lung adenocarcinoma. Neoplasma. 2012;59:658‐661. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 141. Kilvaer TK, Khanehkenari MR, Hellevik T, et al. Cancer associated fibroblasts in stage I‐IIIA NSCLC: prognostic impact and their correlations with tumor molecular markers. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0134965. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 142. Kilvaer TK, Rakaee M, Hellevik T, et al. Tissue analyses reveal a potential immune‐adjuvant function of FAP‐1 positive fibroblasts in non‐small cell lung cancer. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0192157. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 143. Hegab AE, Ozaki M, Kameyama N, et al. Effect of FGF/FGFR pathway blocking on lung adenocarcinoma and its cancer‐associated fibroblasts. J Pathol. 2019;249:193‐205. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 144. Zeltz C, Pasko E, Cox TR, Navab R, Tsao M‐S. LOXL1 is regulated by integrin α11 and promotes non‐small cell lung cancer tumorigenicity. Cancer. 2019;11:705. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 145. Zhou Z, Zhou Q, Wu X, et al. VCAM‐1 secreted from cancer‐associated fibroblasts enhances the growth and invasion of lung cancer cells through AKT and MAPK signaling. Cancer Lett. 2020;473:62‐73. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 146. Kawase A, Ishii G, Nagai K, et al. Podoplanin expression by cancer associated fibroblasts predicts poor prognosis of lung adenocarcinoma. Int J Cancer. 2008;123:1053‐1059. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 147. Ono S, Ishii G, Nagai K, et al. Podoplanin‐positive cancer‐associated fibroblasts could have prognostic value independent of cancer cell phenotype in stage I lung squamous cell carcinoma: usefulness of combining analysis of both cancer cell phenotype and cancer‐associated fibroblast phenotype. Chest. 2013;143:963‐970. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 148. Koriyama H, Ishii G, Yoh K, et al. Presence of podoplanin‐positive cancer‐associated fibroblasts in surgically resected primary lung adenocarcinoma predicts a shorter progression‐free survival period in patients with recurrences who received platinum‐based chemotherapy. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2015;141:1163‐1170. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 149. Neri S, Ishii G, Taira T, et al. Recruitment of podoplanin positive cancer‐associated fibroblasts in metastatic lymph nodes predicts poor prognosis in pathological N2 stage III lung adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:3953‐3962. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 150. Kitano H, Kageyama S‐I, Hewitt SM, et al. Podoplanin expression in cancerous stroma induces lymphangiogenesis and predicts lymphatic spread and patient survival. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134:1520‐1527. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 151. Takahashi A, Ishii G, Neri S, et al. Podoplanin‐expressing cancer‐associated fibroblasts inhibit small cell lung cancer growth. Oncotarget. 2015;6:9531‐9541. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 152. Ito M, Ishii G, Nagai K, Maeda R, Nakano Y, Ochiai A. Prognostic impact of cancer‐associated stromal cells in patients with stage I lung adenocarcinoma. Chest. 2012;142:151‐158. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 153. Al‐Saad S, Al‐Shibli K, Donnem T, Persson M, Bremnes R, Busund L. The prognostic impact of NF‐κ B p105, vimentin, E‐cadherin and Par6 expression in epithelial and stromal compartment in non‐small‐cell lung cancer. Br J Cancer. 2008;99:1476‐1483. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 154. Zhang W, Bouchard G, Yu A, et al. GFPT2‐expressing cancer‐associated fibroblasts mediate metabolic reprogramming in human lung adenocarcinoma. Cancer Res. 2018;78:3445‐3457. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 155. Leinonen T, Pirinen R, Böhm J, Johansson R, Kosma V‐M. Increased expression of matrix metalloproteinase‐2‐MMP‐2‐predicts tumour recurrence and unfavourable outcome in non‐small cell lung cancer. Histol Histopathol. 2008;23:693‐700. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 156. Ishikawa S, Takenaka K, Yanagihara K, et al. Matrix metalloproteinase‐2 status in stromal fibroblasts, not in tumor cells, is a significant prognostic factor in non–small‐cell lung cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10:6579‐6585. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 157. Edlund K, Lindskog C, Saito A, et al. CD99 is a novel prognostic stromal marker in non‐small cell lung cancer. Int J Cancer. 2012;131:2264‐2273. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 158. Schulze AB, Schmidt LH, Heitkötter B, et al. Prognostic impact of CD34 and SMA in cancer‐associated fibroblasts in stage I‐III NSCLC. Thoracic Cancer. 2020;11:120‐129. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 159. Ishibashi M, Neri S, Hashimoto H, et al. CD200‐positive cancer associated fibroblasts augment the sensitivity of epidermal growth factor receptor mutation‐positive lung adenocarcinomas to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Sci Rep. 2017;7:1‐13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 160. Yamada Y, Kurata A, Fujita K, Kuroda M. Fascin as a useful marker for cancer‐associated fibroblasts in invasive lung adenocarcinoma. Medicine. 2021;100:e27162. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 161. Kim S‐H, Choe C, Shin Y‐S, et al. Human lung cancer‐associated fibroblasts enhance motility of non‐small cell lung cancer cells in co‐culture. Anticancer Res. 2013;33:2001‐2009. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 162. Chen Y, Zou L, Zhang Y, et al. Transforming growth factor‐β1 and α‐smooth muscle Actin in stromal fibroblasts are associated with a poor prognosis in patients with clinical stage I–IIIA nonsmall cell lung cancer after curative resection. Tumor Biol. 2014;35:6707‐6713. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 163. Mahale J, Smagurauskaite G, Brown K, Thomas A, Howells LM. The role of stromal fibroblasts in lung carcinogenesis: a target for chemoprevention? Int J Cancer. 2016;138:30‐44. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 164. Inoue C, Tamatsuki D, Miki Y, Saito R, Okada Y, Sasano H. Prognostic significance of combining immunohistochemical markers for cancer‐associated fibroblasts in lung adenocarcinoma tissue. Virchows Arch. 2019;475:181‐189. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 165. Lee HW, Park YM, Lee SJ, et al. Alpha‐smooth muscle actin (ACTA2) is required for metastatic potential of human lung adenocarcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19:5879‐5889. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 166. Zhang HY, Gharaee‐Kermani M, Zhang K, Karmiol S, Phan SH. Lung fibroblast alpha‐smooth muscle actin expression and contractile phenotype in bleomycin‐induced pulmonary fibrosis. Am J Pathol. 1996;148:527‐537. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 167. Karvonen HM, Lehtonen ST, Sormunen RT, Lappi‐Blanco E, Sköld CM, Kaarteenaho RL. Lung cancer‐associated myofibroblasts reveal distinctive ultrastructure and function. J Thorac Oncol. 2014;9:664‐674. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 168. Wang L, Cao L, Wang H, et al. Cancer‐associated fibroblasts enhance metastatic potential of lung cancer cells through IL‐6/STAT3 signaling pathway. Oncotarget. 2017;8:76116‐76128. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 169. Scott AM, Wiseman G, Welt S, et al. A phase I dose‐escalation study of sibrotuzumab in patients with advanced or metastatic fibroblast activation protein‐positive cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2003;9:1639‐1647. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 170. Vicent S, Sayles LC, Vaka D, et al. Cross‐species functional analysis of cancer‐associated fibroblasts identifies a critical role for Clcf1 and Il‐6 in non‐small cell lung cancer in vivo. Cancer Res. 2012;72:5744‐5756. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 171. Li H, Zhang Q, Wu Q, et al. Interleukin‐22 secreted by cancer‐associated fibroblasts regulates the proliferation and metastasis of lung cancer cells via the PI3K‐Akt‐mTOR signaling pathway. Am J Transl Res. 2019;11:4077‐4088. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 172. Wald O, Izhar U, Amir G, et al. Interaction between neoplastic cells and cancer‐associated fibroblasts through the CXCL12/CXCR4 axis: role in non‐small cell lung cancer tumor proliferation. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2011;141:1503‐1512. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 173. Wei J‐R, Dong J, Li L. Cancer‐associated fibroblasts‐derived gamma‐glutamyltransferase 5 promotes tumor growth and drug resistance in lung adenocarcinoma. Aging (Albany NY). 2020;12:13220‐13233. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 174. Horie M, Saito A, Noguchi S, et al. Differential knockdown of TGF‐β ligands in a three‐dimensional co‐culture tumor‐stromal interaction model of lung cancer. BMC Cancer. 2014;14:1‐11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 175. Li J, Guan J, Long X, Wang Y, Xiang X. mir‐1‐mediated paracrine effect of cancer‐associated fibroblasts on lung cancer cell proliferation and chemoresistance. Oncol Rep. 2016;35:3523‐3531. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 176. Li F, Zhao S, Cui Y, et al. α1,6‐Fucosyltransferase (FUT8) regulates the cancer‐promoting capacity of cancer‐associated fibroblasts (CAFs) by modifying EGFR core fucosylation (CF) in non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Am J Cancer Res. 2020;10:816‐837. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 177. Zhang J, Han L, Yu J, Li H, Li Q. miR‐224 aggravates cancer‐associated fibroblast‐induced progression of non‐small cell lung cancer by modulating a positive loop of the SIRT3/AMPK/mTOR/HIF‐1α axis. Aging (Albany, NY). 2021;13:10431‐10449. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 178. Arandkar S, Furth N, Elisha Y, et al. Altered p53 functionality in cancer‐associated fibroblasts contributes to their cancer‐supporting features. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2018;115:6410‐6415. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 179. Saito R‐A, Micke P, Paulsson J, et al. Forkhead box F1 regulates tumor‐promoting properties of cancer‐associated fibroblasts in lung cancer. Cancer Res. 2010;70:2644‐2654. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 180. Abulaiti A, Shintani Y, Funaki S, et al. Interaction between non‐small‐cell lung cancer cells and fibroblasts via enhancement of TGF‐β signaling by IL‐6. Lung Cancer. 2013;82:204‐213. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 181. You J, Li M, Cao L, et al. Snail1‐dependent cancer‐associated fibroblasts induce epithelial‐mesenchymal transition in lung cancer cells via exosomes. QJM. 2019;112:581‐590. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 182. Yi Y, Zeng S, Wang Z, et al. Cancer‐associated fibroblasts promote epithelial‐mesenchymal transition and EGFR‐TKI resistance of non‐small cell lung cancers via HGF/IGF‐1/ANXA2 signaling. Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Basis Dis. 1864;2018:793‐803. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 183. Guo J, Hsu H, Tyan S, et al. Serglycin in tumor microenvironment promotes non‐small cell lung cancer aggressiveness in a CD44‐dependent manner. Oncogene. 2017;36:2457‐2471. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 184. Neri S, Miyashita T, Hashimoto H, et al. Fibroblast‐led cancer cell invasion is activated by epithelial‐mesenchymal transition through platelet‐derived growth factor BB secretion of lung adenocarcinoma. Cancer Lett. 2017;395:20‐30. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 185. Neri S, Ishii G, Hashimoto H, et al. Podoplanin‐expressing cancer‐associated fibroblasts lead and enhance the local invasion of cancer cells in lung adenocarcinoma. Int J Cancer. 2015;137:784‐796. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 186. Li S, Ou Y, Liu S, et al. The fibroblast TIAM2 promotes lung cancer cell invasion and metastasis. J Cancer. 2019;10:1879‐1889. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 187. Ren Y, Cao L, Wang L, et al. Autophagic secretion of HMGB1 from cancer‐associated fibroblasts promotes metastatic potential of non‐small cell lung cancer cells via NFκB signaling. Cell Death Dis. 2021;12:1‐13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 188. Choe C, Shin Y‐S, Kim S‐H, et al. Tumor‐stromal interactions with direct cell contacts enhance motility of non‐small cell lung cancer cells through the hedgehog signaling pathway. Anticancer Res. 2013;33:3715‐3723. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 189. Yang F, Yan Y, Yang Y, et al. MiR‐210 in exosomes derived from CAFs promotes non‐small cell lung cancer migration and invasion through PTEN/PI3K/AKT pathway. Cell Signal. 2020;73:109675. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 190. Richardson AM, Havel LS, Koyen AE, et al. Vimentin is required for lung adenocarcinoma metastasis via heterotypic tumor cell‐cancer‐associated fibroblast interactions during collective invasion. Clin Cancer Res. 2018;24:420‐432. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 191. Navab R, Strumpf D, To C, et al. Integrin α11β1 regulates cancer stromal stiffness and promotes tumorigenicity and metastasis in non‐small cell lung cancer. Oncogene. 2016;35:1899‐1908. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 192. Shen H, Yu X, Yang F, et al. Reprogramming of normal fibroblasts into cancer‐associated fibroblasts by miRNAs‐mediated CCL2/VEGFA signaling. PLoS Genet. 2016;12:e1006244. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 193. Zhao M, Gao F‐H, Wang J‐Y, et al. JAK2/STAT3 signaling pathway activation mediates tumor angiogenesis by upregulation of VEGF and bFGF in non‐small‐cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer. 2011;73:366‐374. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 194. Chi J‐Y, Hsiao Y‐W, Liu H‐L, et al. Fibroblast CEBPD/SDF4 axis in response to chemotherapy‐induced angiogenesis through CXCR4. Cell Death Discov. 2021;7:1‐16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 195. Xiang H, Ramil CP, Hai J, et al. Cancer‐associated fibroblasts promote immunosuppression by inducing ROS‐generating monocytic MDSCs in lung squamous cell carcinoma. Cancer Immunol Res. 2020;8:436‐450. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 196. Kamata T, So TY, Ahmed Q, et al. Fibroblast‐derived STC‐1 modulates tumor‐associated macrophages and lung adenocarcinoma development. Cell Rep. 2020;31:107802. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 197. Suzuki J, Aokage K, Neri S, et al. Relationship between podoplanin‐expressing cancer‐associated fibroblasts and the immune microenvironment of early lung squamous cell carcinoma. Lung Cancer. 2021;153:1‐10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 198. Choe C, Shin Y‐S, Kim C, et al. Crosstalk with cancer‐associated fibroblasts induces resistance of non‐small cell lung cancer cells to epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibition. Onco Targets Ther. 2015;8:3665. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 199. Sun X, Chen Z. Cancer‐associated fibroblast‐derived CCL5 contributes to cisplatin resistance in A549 NSCLC cells partially through upregulation of lncRNA HOTAIR expression. Oncol Lett. 2021;22:1‐11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 200. Yoshida T, Ishii G, Goto K, et al. Podoplanin‐positive cancer‐associated fibroblasts in the tumor microenvironment induce primary resistance to EGFR‐TKIs in lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutation. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21:642‐651. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 201. Ying L, Zhu Z, Xu Z, et al. Cancer associated fibroblast‐derived hepatocyte growth factor inhibits the paclitaxel‐induced apoptosis of lung cancer A549 cells by up‐regulating the PI3K/Akt and GRP78 signaling on a microfluidic platform. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0129593. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 202. Zhang Q, Yang J, Bai J, Ren J. Reverse of non‐small cell lung cancer drug resistance induced by cancer‐associated fibroblasts via a paracrine pathway. Cancer Sci. 2018;109:944‐955. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 203. Chen W‐J, Ho C‐C, Chang Y‐L, et al. Cancer‐associated fibroblasts regulate the plasticity of lung cancer stemness via paracrine signalling. Nat Commun. 2014;5:1‐17. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 204. Kinugasa Y, Matsui T, Takakura N. CD44 expressed on cancer‐associated fibroblasts is a functional molecule supporting the stemness and drug resistance of malignant cancer cells in the tumor microenvironment. Stem Cells. 2014;32:145‐156. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 205. Majety M, Pradel LP, Gies M, Ries CH. Fibroblasts influence survival and therapeutic response in a 3D co‐culture model. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0127948. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 206. Mukaida N. Sasaki S‐i, Baba T. chemokines in cancer development and progression and their potential as targeting molecules for cancer treatment. Mediators Inflamm. 2014;2014:1‐15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 207. Räsänen K, Vaheri A. Activation of fibroblasts in cancer stroma. Exp Cell Res. 2010;316:2713‐2722. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 208. Mishra P, Banerjee D, Ben‐Baruch A. Chemokines at the crossroads of tumor‐fibroblast interactions that promote malignancy. J Leukoc Biol. 2011;89:31‐39. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 209. Ramachandran S, Verma AK, Dev K, et al. Role of cytokines and chemokines in NSCLC immune navigation and proliferation. Oxid Med Cell Longev. 2021;2021:1‐20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 210. Inoue C, Miki Y, Saito R, et al. PD‐L1 induction by cancer‐associated fibroblast‐derived factors in lung adenocarcinoma cells. Cancer. 2019;11:1257. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 211. Kinoshita K, Nakagawa K, Hamada J‐I, et al. Imatinib mesylate inhibits the proliferation‐stimulating effect of human lung cancer‐associated stromal fibroblasts on lung cancer cells. Int J Oncol. 2010;37:869‐877. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 212. Zhang Z, Ren X, Lu X, et al. GZD856, a novel potent PDGFRα/β inhibitor, suppresses the growth and migration of lung cancer cells in vitro and in vivo. Cancer Lett. 2016;375:172‐178. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 213. Lim C, Savan R. The role of the IL‐22/IL‐22R1 axis in cancer. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev. 2014;25:257‐271. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 214. Hogan B, Grindley J, Bellusci S, Dunn N, Emoto H, Itoh N. Branching morphogenesis of the lung: new models for a classical problem. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 1997;62:249‐256. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 215. Bermudez O, Hennen E, Koch I, Lindner M, Eickelberg O. Gli1 mediates lung cancer cell proliferation and sonic hedgehog‐dependent mesenchymal cell activation. PLoS One. 2013;8:e63226. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 216. Staudigl C, Concin N, Grimm C, et al. Prognostic relevance of pretherapeutic gamma‐glutamyltransferase in patients with primary metastatic breast cancer. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0125317. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 217. Wang Q, Shu X, Dong Y, et al. Tumor and serum gamma‐glutamyl transpeptidase, new prognostic and molecular interpretation of an old biomarker in gastric cancer. Oncotarget. 2017;8:36171‐36184. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 218. He W, Guo G, Cx Y, et al. Gamma‐glutamyl transpeptidase level is a novel adverse prognostic indicator in human metastatic colorectal cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15:e443‐e452. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 219. Mezawa Y, Orimo A. The roles of tumor‐and metastasis‐promoting carcinoma‐associated fibroblasts in human carcinomas. Cell Tissue Res. 2016;365:675‐689. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 220. Lee JM, Dedhar S, Kalluri R, Thompson EW. The epithelial‐mesenchymal transition: new insights in signaling, development, and disease. J Cell Biol. 2006;172:973‐981. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 221. Gaggioli C, Hooper S, Hidalgo‐Carcedo C, et al. Fibroblast‐led collective invasion of carcinoma cells with differing roles for RhoGTPases in leading and following cells. Nat Cell Biol. 2007;9:1392‐1400. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 222. Sato R, Semba T, Saya H, Arima Y. Concise review: stem cells and epithelial‐mesenchymal transition in cancer: biological implications and therapeutic targets. Stem Cells. 2016;34:1997‐2007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 223. Sun B, Zhang D, Zhao N, Zhao X. Epithelial‐to‐endothelial transition and cancer stem cells: two cornerstones of vasculogenic mimicry in malignant tumors. Oncotarget. 2017;8:30502‐30510. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 224. Zha H, Wang X, Zhu Y, et al. Intracellular activation of complement C3 leads to PD‐L1 antibody treatment resistance by modulating tumor‐associated macrophages. Cancer Immunol Res. 2019;7:193‐207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 225. Cho MS, Vasquez HG, Rupaimoole R, et al. Autocrine effects of tumor‐derived complement. Cell Rep. 2014;6:1085‐1095. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 226. Shu C, Zha H, Long H, et al. C3a‐C3aR signaling promotes breast cancer lung metastasis via modulating carcinoma associated fibroblasts. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2020;39:1‐14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 227. He S‐J, Cheng J, Feng X, Yu Y, Tian L, Huang Q. The dual role and therapeutic potential of high‐mobility group box 1 in cancer. Oncotarget. 2017;8:64534‐64550. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 228. Neri S, Hashimoto H, Kii H, et al. Cancer cell invasion driven by extracellular matrix remodeling is dependent on the properties of cancer‐associated fibroblasts. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2016;142:437‐446. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 229. Friedl P, Locker J, Sahai E, Segall JE. Classifying collective cancer cell invasion. Nat Cell Biol. 2012;14:777‐783. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 230. De Wever O, Demetter P, Mareel M, Bracke M. Stromal myofibroblasts are drivers of invasive cancer growth. Int J Cancer. 2008;123:2229‐2238. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 231. Miles FL, Sikes RA. Insidious changes in stromal matrix fuel cancer progression. Mol Cancer Res. 2014;12:297‐312. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 232. Mueller MM, Fusenig NE. Friends or foes—bipolar effects of the tumour stroma in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2004;4:839‐849. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 233. Kessenbrock K, Plaks V, Werb Z. Matrix metalloproteinases: regulators of the tumor microenvironment. Cell. 2010;141:52‐67. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 234. Folkman J. Angiogenesis. Annu Rev Med. 2006;57:1‐18. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 235. Folkman J. Angiogenesis. In: Jaffe. EA eds. Biology of Endothelial Cells. Developments in Cardiovascular Medicine, Vol. 27. Boston, MA: Springer. 10.1007/978-1-4613-2825-4_42 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 236. Risau W. Mechanisms of angiogenesis. Nature. 1997;386:671‐674. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 237. Folkman J. Tumor angiogenesis. Adv Cancer Res. 1985;43:175‐203. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 238. Leung DW, Cachianes G, Kuang W‐J, Goeddel DV, Ferrara N. Vascular endothelial growth factor is a secreted angiogenic mitogen. Science. 1989;246:1306‐1309. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 239. Mizia‐Malarz A, Sobol G, Woś H. Proangiogenic factors: vascular‐endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and basic fibroblast growth factor—the characteristics and function. Przeglad Lekarski. 2008;65:353‐357. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 240. Marneros AG, Olsen BR. The role of collagen‐derived proteolytic fragments in angiogenesis. Matrix Biol. 2001;20:337‐345. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 241. Kim S, Bell K, Mousa SA, Varner JA. Regulation of angiogenesis in vivo by ligation of integrin α5β1 with the central cell‐binding domain of fibronectin. Am J Pathol. 2000;156:1345‐1362. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 242. Nicosia RF, Bonanno E, Smith M. Fibronectin promotes the elongation of microvessels during angiogenesis in vitro. J Cell Physiol. 1993;154:654‐661. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 243. Fromigue O, Louis K, Dayem M, et al. Gene expression profiling of normal human pulmonary fibroblasts following coculture with non‐small‐cell lung cancer cells reveals alterations related to matrix degradation, angiogenesis, cell growth and survival. Oncogene. 2003;22:8487‐8497. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 244. Harper J, Sainson RC. Regulation of the anti‐tumour immune response by cancer‐associated fibroblasts. Semin Cancer Biol. 2014;25:69‐77. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 245. Rőszer T. Understanding the mysterious M2 macrophage through activation markers and effector mechanisms. Mediators Inflamm. 2015;2015:1‐16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 246. Zhang F, Wang H, Wang X, et al. TGF‐β induces M2‐like macrophage polarization via SNAIL‐mediated suppression of a pro‐inflammatory phenotype. Oncotarget. 2016;7:52294‐52306. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 247. Lechner MG, Megiel C, Russell SM, et al. Functional characterization of human Cd33+ and Cd11b+ myeloid‐derived suppressor cell subsets induced from peripheral blood mononuclear cells co‐cultured with a diverse set of human tumor cell lines. J Transl Med. 2011;9:1‐20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 248. Simpson KD, Cross JV. MIF: metastasis/MDSC‐inducing factor? Onco Targets Ther. 2013;2:e23337. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 249. Yang N, Lode K, Berzaghi R, Islam A, Martinez‐Zubiaurre I, Hellevik T. Irradiated tumor fibroblasts avoid immune recognition and retain immunosuppressive functions over natural killer cells. Front Immunol. 2021;11:3567. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 250. Liang SC, Latchman YE, Buhlmann JE, et al. Regulation of PD‐1, PD‐L1, and PD‐L2 expression during normal and autoimmune responses. Eur J Immunol. 2003;33:2706‐2716. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 251. Lakins MA, Ghorani E, Munir H, Martins CP, Shields JD. Cancer‐associated fibroblasts induce antigen‐specific deletion of CD8+ T cells to protect tumour cells. Nat Commun. 2018;9:1‐9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 252. O'Connor RA, Chauhan V, Mathieson L, et al. T cells drive negative feedback mechanisms in cancer associated fibroblasts, promoting expression of co‐inhibitory ligands, CD73 and IL‐27 in non‐small cell lung cancer. Onco Targets Ther. 2021;10:1940675. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 253. Najafi M, Farhood B, Mortezaee K. Extracellular matrix (ECM) stiffness and degradation as cancer drivers. J Cell Biochem. 2019;120:2782‐2790. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 254. Gkretsi V, Stylianopoulos T. Cell adhesion and matrix stiffness: coordinating cancer cell invasion and metastasis. Front Oncol. 2018;8:145. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 255. Liu Y, Lv J, Liang X, et al. Fibrin stiffness mediates dormancy of tumor‐repopulating cells via a Cdc42‐driven Tet2 epigenetic program. Cancer Res. 2018;78:3926‐3937. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 256. Ishii G, Ochiai A, Neri S. Phenotypic and functional heterogeneity of cancer‐associated fibroblast within the tumor microenvironment. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2016;99:186‐196. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 257. Keeratichamroen S, Lirdprapamongkol K, Svasti J. Mechanism of ECM‐induced dormancy and chemoresistance in A549 human lung carcinoma cells. Oncol Rep. 2018;39:1765‐1774. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 258. Li J, Dong X, Wang Z, Wu J. MicroRNA‐1 in cardiac diseases and cancers. Korean J Physiol Pharmacol. 2014;18:359‐363. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 259. Liu M‐Y, Li X‐Q, Gao T‐H, et al. Elevated HOTAIR expression associated with cisplatin resistance in non‐small cell lung cancer patients. J Thorac Dis. 2016;8:3314‐3322. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 260. Zhang Y, Ai H, Fan X, Chen S, Wang Y, Liu L. Knockdown of long non‐coding RNA HOTAIR reverses cisplatin resistance of ovarian cancer cells through inhibiting miR‐138‐5p‐regulated EZH2 and SIRT1. Biol Res. 2020;53:1‐10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 261. Qu J, Kalyani FS, Liu L, Cheng T, Chen L. Tumor organoids: synergistic applications, current challenges, and future prospects in cancer therapy. Cancer Commun. 2021;41:1331‐1353. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 262. Yan Q, Dong H, Su J, et al. A review of 3D printing technology for medical applications. Engineering. 2018;4:729‐742. [Google Scholar]
- 263. Drost J, Clevers H. Organoids in cancer research. Nat Rev Cancer. 2018;18:407‐418. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 264. Xue B, Chuang C‐H, Prosser HM, et al. miR‐200 deficiency promotes lung cancer metastasis by activating Notch signaling in cancer‐associated fibroblasts. Genes Dev. 2021;35:1109‐1122. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 265. Barcus CE, Hwang PY, Morikis V, et al. Tyrosine kinase‐independent actions of DDR2 in tumor cells and cancer‐associated fibroblasts influence tumor invasion, migration and metastasis. J Cell Sci. 2021;134:jcs258431. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 266. Huo K‐G, D'Arcangelo E, Tsao M‐S. Patient‐derived cell line, xenograft and organoid models in lung cancer therapy. Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2020;9:2214‐2232. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 267. Vellinga T, Den Uil S, Rinkes I, et al. Collagen‐rich stroma in aggressive colon tumors induces mesenchymal gene expression and tumor cell invasion. Oncogene. 2016;35:5263‐5271. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 268. Nakamura H, Sugano M, Miyashita T, et al. Organoid culture containing cancer cells and stromal cells reveals that podoplanin‐positive cancer‐associated fibroblasts enhance proliferation of lung cancer cells. Lung Cancer. 2019;134:100‐107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
