Modeling chemical effects on breast cancer: the importance of the microenvironment in vitro

Identifying recurrences and metastasis after ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast is a non-invasive tumour that has the potential to progress to invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). Thus, it represents a treatment dilemma: alone it does not present a risk to life, however, left untreated it may progress to a life-threatening condition. Current clinico-pathological features cannot accurately predict which patients with DCIS have invasive potential, and therefore clinicians are unable to quantify the risk of progression for an individual patient. This leads to many women being over-treated, while others may not receive sufficient treatment to prevent invasive recurrence. A better understanding of the molecular features of DCIS, both tumour-intrinsic and the microenvironment, could offer the ability to better predict which women need aggressive treatment, and which can avoid therapies carrying significant side-effects and such as radiotherapy. In this review, we summarise the current knowledge of DCIS, and consider future research directions.

The biomimetic extracellular matrix: a therapeutic tool for breast cancer research

A deeper knowledge of the functional versatility and dynamic nature of the ECM has improved the understanding of cancer biology. Translational Significance: This work provides an in-depth view of the importance of the ECM to develop more mimetic breast cancer models, which aim to recreate the components and architecture of tumor microenvironment. Special focus is placed on decellularized matrices derived from tissue and cell culture, both in procurement and applications, as they have achieved great success in cancer research and pharmaceutical sector. The extracellular matrix (ECM) is increasingly recognized as a master regulator of cell behavior and response to breast cancer (BC) treatment. During BC progression, the mammary gland ECM is remodeled and altered in the composition and organization. Accumulated evidence suggests that changes in the composition and mechanics of ECM, orchestrated by tumor-stromal interactions along with ECM remodeling enzymes, are actively involved in BC progression and metastasis. Understanding how specific ECM components modulate the tumorigenic process has led to an increased interest in the development of biomaterial-based biomimetic ECM models to recapitulate key tumor characteristics. The decellularized ECMs (dECMs) have emerged as a promising in vitro 3D tumor model, whose recent advances in the processing and application could become the biomaterial by excellence for BC research and the pharmaceutical industry. This review offers a detailed view of the contribution of ECM in BC progression, and highlights the application of dECM-based biomaterials as promising personalized tumor models that more accurately mimic the tumorigenic mechanisms of BC and the response to treatment. This will allow the design of targeted therapeutic approaches adapted to the specific characteristics of each tumor that will have a great impact on the precision medicine applied to BC patients.

Engineering complexity in human tissue models of cancer

Major progress in the understanding and treatment of cancer have tremendously improved our knowledge of this complex disease and improved the length and quality of patients' lives. Still, major challenges remain, in particular with respect to cancer metastasis which still escapes effective treatment and remains responsible for 90% of cancer related deaths. In recent years, the advances in cancer cell biology, oncology and tissue engineering converged into the engineered human tissue models of cancer that are increasingly recapitulating many aspects of cancer progression and response to drugs, in a patient-specific context. The complexity and biological fidelity of these models, as well as the specific questions they aim to investigate, vary in a very broad range. When selecting and designing these experimental models, the fundamental question is "how simple is complex enough" to accomplish a specific goal of cancer research. Here we review the state of the art in developing and using the human tissue models in cancer research and developmental drug screening. We describe the main classes of models providing different levels of biological fidelity and complexity, discuss their advantages and limitations, and propose a framework for designing an appropriate model for a given study. We close by outlining some of the current needs, opportunities and challenges in this rapidly evolving field.

A bioengineered lymphatic vessel model for studying lymphatic endothelial cell-cell junction and barrier function

OBJECTIVE

Lymphatic vessels (LVs) maintain fluid homeostasis by draining interstitial fluid. A failure in lymphatic drainage triggers lymphatic diseases such as lymphedema. Since lymphatic drainage is regulated by lymphatic barrier function, developing experimental models that assess lymphatic barrier function is critical for better understanding of lymphatic physiology and disease.

METHODS

We built a lymphatic vessel-on-chip (LV-on-chip) by fabricating a microfluidic device that includes a hollow microchannel embedded in three-dimensional (3D) hydrogel. Employing luminal flow in the microchannel, human lymphatic endothelial cells (LECs) seeded in the microchannel formed an engineered LV exhibiting 3D conduit structure.

RESULTS

Lymphatic endothelial cells formed relatively permeable junctions in 3D collagen 1. However, adding fibronectin to the collagen 1 apparently tightened LEC junctions. We tested lymphatic barrier function by introducing dextran into LV lumens. While LECs in collagen 1 showed permeable barriers, LECs in fibronectin/collagen 1 showed reduced permeability, which was reversed by integrin α5 inhibition. Mechanistically, LECs expressed inactivated integrin α5 in collagen 1. However, integrin α5 is activated in fibronectin and enhances barrier function. Integrin α5 activation itself also tightened LEC junctions in the absence of fibronectin.

CONCLUSIONS

Lymphatic vessel-on-chip reveals integrin α5 as a regulator of lymphatic barrier function and provides a platform for studying lymphatic barrier function in various conditions.

Tumor-on-chip modeling of organ-specific cancer and metastasis

Every year, cancer claims millions of lives around the globe. Unfortunately, model systems that accurately mimic human oncology - a requirement for the development of more effective therapies for these patients - remain elusive. Tumor development is an organ-specific process that involves modification of existing tissue features, recruitment of other cell types, and eventual metastasis to distant organs. Recently, tissue engineered microfluidic devices have emerged as a powerful in vitro tool to model human physiology and pathology with organ-specificity. These organ-on-chip platforms consist of cells cultured in 3D hydrogels and offer precise control over geometry, biological components, and physiochemical properties. Here, we review progress towards organ-specific microfluidic models of the primary and metastatic tumor microenvironments. Despite the field's infancy, these tumor-on-chip models have enabled discoveries about cancer immunobiology and response to therapy. Future work should focus on the development of autologous or multi-organ systems and inclusion of the immune system.

A bioengineered organotypic prostate model for the study of tumor microenvironment-induced immune cell activation

The prostate tumor microenvironment (TME) is strongly immunosuppressive; it is largely driven by alteration in cell phenotypes (i.e. tumor-associated macrophages and exhausted cytotoxic T cells) that result in pro-tumorigenic conditions and tumor growth. A greater understanding into how these altered immune cell phenotypes are developed and could potentially be reversed would provide important insights into improved treatment efficacy for prostate cancer. Here, we report a microfluidic model of the prostate TME that mimics prostate ducts across various stages of prostate cancer progression, with associated stroma and immune cells. Using this platform, we exposed immune cells to a benign prostate TME or a metastatic prostate TME and investigated their metabolism, gene and cytokine expression. Immune cells exposed to the metastatic TME showed metabolic differences with a higher redox ratio indicating a switch to a more glycolytic metabolic profile. These cells also increased expression of pro-tumor response cytokines that have been shown to increase cell migration and angiogenesis such as Interleukin-1 (IL-1) a and Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF). Lastly, we observed decreased TLR, STAT signaling and TRAIL expression, suggesting that phenotypes derived from exposure to the metastatic TME could have an impaired anti-tumor response. This platform could provide a valuable tool for studying immune cell phenotypes in in vitro tumor microenvironments.

Studying Adipose Tissue in the Breast Tumor Microenvironment In Vitro: Progress and Opportunities

BACKGROUND

The breast cancer microenvironment contains a variety of stromal cells that are widely implicated in worse patient outcomes. While many in vitro models of the breast tumor microenvironment have been published, only a small fraction of these feature adipocytes. Adipocytes are a cell type increasingly recognized to have complex functions in breast cancer.

METHODS

In this review, we examine findings from recent examples of in vitro experiments modeling adipocytes within the local breast tumor microenvironment.

RESULTS

Both two-dimensional and three-dimensional models of adipocytes in the breast tumor microenvironment are covered in this review and both have uncovered interesting phenomena related to breast tumor progression.

CONCLUSION

Certain aspects of breast cancer and associated adipocyte biology: extracellular matrix effects, cell-cell contact, and physiological mass transport can only be examined with a three-dimensional culture platform. Opportunities remain for innovative improvements to be made to in vitro models that further increase what is known about adipocytes during breast cancer progression.

Adverse outcome pathways for ionizing radiation and breast cancer involve direct and indirect DNA damage, oxidative stress, inflammation, genomic instability, and interaction with hormonal regulation of the breast

Knowledge about established breast carcinogens can support improved and modernized toxicological testing methods by identifying key mechanistic events. Ionizing radiation (IR) increases the risk of breast cancer, especially for women and for exposure at younger ages, and evidence overall supports a linear dose-response relationship. We used the Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) framework to outline and evaluate the evidence linking ionizing radiation with breast cancer from molecular initiating events to the adverse outcome through intermediate key events, creating a qualitative AOP. We identified key events based on review articles, searched PubMed for recent literature on key events and IR, and identified additional papers using references. We manually curated publications and evaluated data quality. Ionizing radiation directly and indirectly causes DNA damage and increases production of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species (RONS). RONS lead to DNA damage and epigenetic changes leading to mutations and genomic instability (GI). Proliferation amplifies the effects of DNA damage and mutations leading to the AO of breast cancer. Separately, RONS and DNA damage also increase inflammation. Inflammation contributes to direct and indirect effects (effects in cells not directly reached by IR) via positive feedback to RONS and DNA damage, and separately increases proliferation and breast cancer through pro-carcinogenic effects on cells and tissue. For example, gene expression changes alter inflammatory mediators, resulting in improved survival and growth of cancer cells and a more hospitable tissue environment. All of these events overlap at multiple points with events characteristic of "background" induction of breast carcinogenesis, including hormone-responsive proliferation, oxidative activity, and DNA damage. These overlaps make the breast particularly susceptible to ionizing radiation and reinforce that these biological activities are important characteristics of carcinogens. Agents that increase these biological processes should be considered potential breast carcinogens, and predictive methods are needed to identify chemicals that increase these processes. Techniques are available to measure RONS, DNA damage and mutation, cell proliferation, and some inflammatory proteins or processes. Improved assays are needed to measure GI and chronic inflammation, as well as the interaction with hormonally driven development and proliferation. Several methods measure diverse epigenetic changes, but it is not clear which changes are relevant to breast cancer. In addition, most toxicological assays are not conducted in mammary tissue, and so it is a priority to evaluate if results from other tissues are generalizable to breast, or to conduct assays in breast tissue. Developing and applying these assays to identify exposures of concern will facilitate efforts to reduce subsequent breast cancer risk.

Adverse outcome pathways for ionizing radiation and breast cancer involve direct and indirect DNA damage, oxidative stress, inflammation, genomic instability, and interaction with hormonal regulation of the breast

Knowledge about established breast carcinogens can support improved and modernized toxicological testing methods by identifying key mechanistic events. Ionizing radiation (IR) increases the risk of breast cancer, especially for women and for exposure at younger ages, and evidence overall supports a linear dose-response relationship. We used the Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) framework to outline and evaluate the evidence linking ionizing radiation with breast cancer from molecular initiating events to the adverse outcome through intermediate key events, creating a qualitative AOP. We identified key events based on review articles, searched PubMed for recent literature on key events and IR, and identified additional papers using references. We manually curated publications and evaluated data quality. Ionizing radiation directly and indirectly causes DNA damage and increases production of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species (RONS). RONS lead to DNA damage and epigenetic changes leading to mutations and genomic instability (GI). Proliferation amplifies the effects of DNA damage and mutations leading to the AO of breast cancer. Separately, RONS and DNA damage also increase inflammation. Inflammation contributes to direct and indirect effects (effects in cells not directly reached by IR) via positive feedback to RONS and DNA damage, and separately increases proliferation and breast cancer through pro-carcinogenic effects on cells and tissue. For example, gene expression changes alter inflammatory mediators, resulting in improved survival and growth of cancer cells and a more hospitable tissue environment. All of these events overlap at multiple points with events characteristic of "background" induction of breast carcinogenesis, including hormone-responsive proliferation, oxidative activity, and DNA damage. These overlaps make the breast particularly susceptible to ionizing radiation and reinforce that these biological activities are important characteristics of carcinogens. Agents that increase these biological processes should be considered potential breast carcinogens, and predictive methods are needed to identify chemicals that increase these processes. Techniques are available to measure RONS, DNA damage and mutation, cell proliferation, and some inflammatory proteins or processes. Improved assays are needed to measure GI and chronic inflammation, as well as the interaction with hormonally driven development and proliferation. Several methods measure diverse epigenetic changes, but it is not clear which changes are relevant to breast cancer. In addition, most toxicological assays are not conducted in mammary tissue, and so it is a priority to evaluate if results from other tissues are generalizable to breast, or to conduct assays in breast tissue. Developing and applying these assays to identify exposures of concern will facilitate efforts to reduce subsequent breast cancer risk.