Microparticles (MPs) play a vital role in cell communication by facilitating the horizontal transfer of cargo between cells. Recently, we described a novel “non-genetic” mechanism for the acquisition of multidrug resistance (MDR) in cancer cells by intercellular transfer of functional P-gp, via MPs. MDR is caused by the overexpression of the efflux transporters P-glycoprotein (P-gp) and Multidrug Resistance-Associated Protein 1 (MRP1). These transporters efflux anticancer drugs from resistant cancer cells and maintain sublethal intracellular drug concentrations. By conducting MP transfer experiments, we show that MPs derived from DX breast cancer cells selectively transfer P-gp to malignant MCF-7 breast cells only, in contrast to VLB100 leukaemic cell-derived MPs that transfer P-gp and MRP1 to both malignant and non-malignant cells. The observed transfer selectivity is not the result of membrane restrictions for intercellular exchange, limitations in MP binding to recipient cells or the differential expression of the cytoskeletal protein, Ezrin. CD44 (isoform 10) was found to be selectively present on the breast cancer-derived MPs and not on leukaemic MPs and may contribute to the observed selective transfer of P-gp to malignant breast cells observed. Using the MCF-7 murine tumour xenograft model we demonstrated the stable transfer of P-gp by MPs in vivo, which was found to localize to the tumour core as early as 24 hours post MP exposure and to remain stable for at least 2 weeks. These findings demonstrate a remarkable capacity by MPs to disseminate a stable resistant trait in the absence of any selective pressure.
Once thought of as inert remnants of cellular processes, the significance of membrane vesicles is now expanding as their capacity to package and transfer bioactive molecules during intercellular communication is established. This ability to serve as vectors in the trafficking of cellular cargo is of mounting interest in the context of cancer, particularly in the dissemination of deleterious cancer traits from parent cells to recipient cells. Although microparticles (MPs) contribute to the pathogenesis of cancer, their unique characteristics can also be also exploited in the context of cancer treatment. The detection of MPs in body fluids has the potential to provide an effective means for the diagnosis, prognosis and surveillance of cancer patients. The use of such easily accessible systemic biomarkers that reflect the characteristics of the parent cells circumvents the need for invasive biopsy procedures. In addition, the autologous nature of MPs may allow them to be used as novel therapeutic drug carriers. Thus the modulation of MP vesiculation, the detection of MPs in disease monitoring, and the application of MPs as therapeutic delivery vehicles present prospective clinical interventions in the treatment of cancer. Revision Notes1. The authors overviewed the contribution of microparticles (MPs) to the pathogenesis of cancer and the potential for clinical application of MPs. In contrast to the title of the manuscript "Microparticles in Cancer: A Review of Recent Developments and the Potential for Clinical Application.", a large part of the content of this manuscript occupied the refer and discussed on the publications of the authors' group. The authors should discuss more generally on state-of-the-art for clinical application of MPs or some other extracellular vesicles (EVs). The authors have now included an extra section on Page 10 discussing the clinical applications of extracellular vesicles in cancer.2. The authors should refer to sufficient publications in general, especially in cancer-derived extracellular vesicles.Other references relevant to this study have now been added.3. The term "microparticles" mainly used in this manuscript is not well documented. Is there any specific differences between MPs and EVs? If so please describe those appropriately in the text. An explanation has now been added on Page 3 to describe the different membrane vesicles.4. The authors described "exosomes" in the text in the section 4. However, there is no mentioned the differ from MPs. This is a very confusing. An explanation of the different membrane vesicles has now been included on Page 3.5. The content of the figure is a very limited information. Modify the figure more generously including more other findings on tumor metastasis and drug resistance. Additional figures have now been included. Revision NotesAbbreviations: Matrix metalloproteinases, MMPs; mesenchymal stem cells, MSC; MPs, microparticles; miRNA, microRNA; microvesicles, MVs; MDR, multidrug resistance; non-small cell lung carcinoma, NSCLC; P-gp, P...
The accurate quantification of changes in the abundance of proteins is one of the main applications of proteomics. The maintenance of accuracy can be affected by bias and error that can occur at many points in the experimental process, and normalization strategies are crucial to attempt to overcome this bias and return the sample to its regular biological condition, or normal state. Much work has been published on performing normalization on data post-acquisition with many algorithms and statistical processes available. However, there are many other sources of bias that can occur during experimental design and sample handling that are currently unaddressed. This article aims to cast light on the potential sources of bias and where normalization could be applied to return the sample to its normal state. Throughout we suggest solutions where possible but, in some cases, solutions are not available. Thus, we see this article as a starting point for discussion of the definition of and the issues surrounding the concept of normalization as it applies to the proteomic analysis of biological samples. Specifically, we discuss a wide range of different normalization techniques that can occur at each stage of the sample preparation and analysis process.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.