Article

Low-Dose Radiation-Induced Senescent Stromal Fibroblasts Render Nearby Breast Cancer Cells Radioresistant

Department of Genetics & Complex Diseases, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA.
Radiation Research (Impact Factor: 2.45). 10/2009; 172(3):306-13. DOI: 10.1667/RR1764.1
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In addition to cell cycle arrest, DNA repair or/and apoptosis, ionizing radiation can also induce premature senescence, which could lead to very different biological consequences depending on the cell type. We show in this report that low-dose radiation-induced senescent stromal fibroblasts stimulate proliferation of cocultured breast carcinoma cells. Such effects of senescent fibroblasts appear to result from their ability to induce the expression in carcinoma cells of mitotic genes and subsequent mitotic division. The elevated proliferation of breast carcinoma cells correlates with resistance to radiation as well as to adriamycin. Of interest is the observation that exposure to lower doses (<20 cGy) augments the ability of senescent fibroblasts to promote the survival of cocultured breast carcinoma cells. The resistance appears to be mediated partially by the Akt pathway, because expression of a dominant negative Akt mutant in breast carcinoma cells results in a partial reversal of the radioresistance. The ability of fibroblasts to modulate the radiosensitivity of nearby carcinoma cells implicates the importance of targeting the stroma during therapy.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Kelvin K. Tsai, Sep 02, 2015
2 Followers
 · 
152 Views
 · 
72 Downloads
  • Source
    • "Thus there may be a bystander effect exerted by the senescent cells in this population on the androgen-refractory SB5 variants. This type of bystander effect has been previously reported and can be either growth-suppressive [71], [72] or growth-promoting [73]–[75] to varying degrees. Our co-mix experiments in this study (Figs. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Androgen deprivation (AD) is an effective method for initially suppressing prostate cancer (PC) progression. However, androgen-refractory PC cells inevitably emerge from the androgen-responsive tumor, leading to incurable disease. Recent studies have shown AD induces cellular senescence, a phenomenon that is cell-autonomously tumor-suppressive but which confers tumor-promoting adaptations that can facilitate the advent of senescence-resistant malignant cell populations. Because androgen-refractory PC cells emerge clonally from the originally androgen-responsive tumor, we sought to investigate whether AD-induced senescence (ADIS) affects acquisition of androgen-refractory behavior in androgen-responsive LNCaP and LAPC4 prostate cancer cells. We find that repeated exposure of these androgen-responsive cells to senescence-inducing stimuli via cyclic AD leads to the rapid emergence of ADIS-resistant, androgen-refractory cells from the bulk senescent cell population. Our results show that the ADIS phenotype is associated with tumor-promoting traits, notably chemoresistance and enhanced pro-survival mechanisms such as inhibition of p53-mediated cell death, which encourage persistence of the senescent cells. We further find that pharmacologic enforcement of p53/Bax activation via Nutlin-3 prior to establishment of ADIS is required to overcome the associated pro-survival response and preferentially trigger pervasive cell death instead of senescence during AD. Thus our study demonstrates that ADIS promotes outgrowth of androgen-refractory PC cells and is consequently a suboptimal tumor-suppressor response to AD.
    PLoS ONE 06/2013; 8(6):e68003. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0068003 · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "The SASP constitutes a myriad of proinflammatory cytokines and growth factors that can either facilitate or impede cancer progression depending on the cellular and/or microenvironmental context. A number of studies have demonstrated that senescent fibroblasts secrete factors that promote the growth of tumor cells (Olumi et al., 1999; Bavik et al., 2006; Tsai et al., 2009; Capparelli et al., 2012 "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Autophagy and senescence have multiple and often overlapping and complementary functions in cancer, both in terms of influencing tumor development and in modulating the response to chemotherapy and/or radiation. However, while there is evidence that autophagy induction may accelerate the development of senescence, other studies suggest precisely the opposite, that autophagy inhibition is permissive for senescence. Furthermore, even in those cases where autophagy and senescence appear to occur in tandem, it is clear that the two responses are not interdependent. An additional attribute of senescent cells, both tumor cells and fibroblasts, is the secretion of factors that may influence the growth and/or survival of other cells through paracrine mechanisms. The nature of the secreted factors which apparently mediates these bystander effects remains to be conclusively determined, particularly since senescent fibroblasts and senescent tumor cells appear to exhibit different paracrine functions. Tumor cells tend to secrete factors that promote senescence in "bystander" tumor cells while, conversely, different species discharged from tumor associated fibroblasts can accelerate tumor growth and metastasis. An understanding of the relationship between autophagy induction and the senescence secretory phenotype in both tumor cells and fibroblasts is likely to be relevant to current clinical efforts to exploit autophagy inhibition as a therapeutic strategy for enhancing the response of malignancies to chemotherapy or radiotherapy. J. Cell. Physiol. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
    Journal of Cellular Physiology 06/2013; 229(1). DOI:10.1002/jcp.24420 · 3.87 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Whether the irradiated cells that contribute to this plethora of inflammatory signals remain within the proliferative pool upon repair of damage or whether they become senescent is unknown however it is clear that even low doses of radiation induce SIPS and these cells subsequently secrete inflammatory cytokines, including IL-6 and IL-8 [27] [110] [133] [149] [150] [151] [152] [153]. Interestingly Tsai et al (2009) showed that stromal fibroblasts that were induced to senesce after low dose radiation exposure stimulated the proliferation of breast-carcinoma cells when co-cultured in the same medium [125] [130] [132] [133]. This potential relationship between exposure to radiation , cellular age and deleterious inflammatory (NTE) responses is further demonstrated by human and animal studies which show a correlation exists between the immunological imbalances caused as a result of exposure to radiation and, those effects which are seen in normal aged immune cells, implying ionising radiation may accelerate immunological ageing [154]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: ABSTRACT: Cellular senescence is a normal biological process that is initiated in response to a range of intrinsic and extrinsic factors that functions to remove irreparable damage and therefore potentially harmful cells, from the proliferative pool. Senescence can therefore be thought of in beneficial terms as a tumour suppressor. In contrast to this, there is a growing body of evidence suggesting that senescence is also associated with the disruption of the tissue microenvironment and development of a pro-oncogenic environment, principally via the secretion of senescence-associated pro-inflammatory factors. The fraction of cells in a senescent state is known to increase with cellular age and from exposure to various stressors including ionising radiation therefore, the implications of the detrimental effects of the senescent phenotype are important to understand within the context of the increasing human exposure to ionising radiation. This review will discuss what is currently understood about senescence, highlighting possible associations between senescence and cancer and, how exposure to ionising radiation may modify this.
    Genome Integrity 08/2011; 2(1):7. DOI:10.1186/2041-9414-2-7
Show more