$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
Breast cancer cells metastasize to the bone marrow before the disease is detectable1, as soon as small tumors develop blood vessels2,3. The metastatic process is rapid but inefficient. Cells enter the new blood vessels rapidly, at millions per day4 but few survive the trip to distant organs5. Nevertheless, some micrometastases survive in the bone and can be found as single cells or small cell clumps in bone marrow aspirates from newly diagnosed patients1. These cells resist adjuvant chemotherapy, which is administered for the very purpose of eliminating them6. This resistance is endowed, substantially, by survival signaling initiated by interactions with the bone marrow microenvironment7,8. Micrometastases can be found in about one third of women with localized breast cancer and represent an independent indicator of survival when analyzed by univariate analysis9. Some micrometastases are growth initiated, but recurrence patterns depend on cell type. Patients with triple negative breast cancer tend to recur between 1 to 4 years, suggesting poor control over the dormant state. Other cell types, including ER/PR+ cells, can remain dormant for up to 20 years, with a steady, continuous rate of recurrence10. While differences in dormancy gene expression signatures between ER+ and ER- breast cell lines and tumors reflect different dormancy potentials11, interactions with bone marrow stroma likely represent a significant contribution to dormancy.
The study of dormancy in vivo is exceptionally difficult because micrometastases are rare and are outnumbered by hematopoietic cells by more than 106-fold. Hence, relevant models must be generated that provide in vitro data that can suggest mechanisms and generate testable hypotheses in vivo. A number of dormancy models, including mathematical models12,13, in vitro models7,8,14,15, in vivo xenograft models16, combinations of in vitro and xenograft models17,18 and spontaneous tumor and metastasis models19, have yielded some insight into cancer cell dormancy20. Each of these models have their own limitations and are of themselves primarily useful for generating hypotheses regarding molecular signaling and interactions that govern dormancy to be tested in more biologically relevant models.
With the overall goal of defining the molecular mechanisms of dormancy, the interactions with the microenvironment that results in cycle arrest, redifferentiation and therapeutic resistance and mechanisms that result in recurrence in ER+ cells, we developed an in vitro model that provides selected relevant elements of the stromal microenvironment7. This model, while relatively sparse in its components, is sufficiently robust to permit investigators to derive specific molecular mechanisms that affect significant functions of dormancy. These experiments generate hypotheses that can be directly tested in vivo. The model relies on a few key elements that we demonstrated to be relevant in dormancy. They include the use of estrogen-dependent breast cancer cells, culture of cells at a clonogenic density where their interaction is primarily with the substratum and soluble components of the medium, a fibronectin substratum and the presence of basic fibroblast growth factor (FGF-2) in the medium.
We characterized mechanisms that govern the system in vitro, including the induction of cell cycle arrest by FGF-221, mediated through TGFβ22, survival signaling through PI3 Kinase7,8 and ERK8 and morphogenic differentiation to an epithelial phenotype, which depended on RhoA inactivation, integrin α5β1 upregulation and ligation of stromal fibronectin for survival7,15 (Figure 1). The in vitro cell cycle effects of FGF-2 on MCF-7 cells begin at concentrations at least one log below 10 ng/ml21,23. The rationale was based on the temporal control of FGF-2 expression governing mammary ductal morphogenesis, cyclic expansion and recession in a number of mammalian systems24-27. We demonstrated that FGF-2 induces differentiation, including ductal morphogenesis in 3D culture28, and that FGF-2 expression are generally lost with malignant transformation of human tumors29. The expression of FGR1 remained intact in breast carcinomas surveyed29 and MCF-7 cells continue to express all 4 FGF receptors30. In the context of dormancy, FGF-2 is exported by and heavily deposited on bone marrow stroma31,32 where it functions in the preservation of hematopoietic stem cells33. We demonstrated that FGF-2 induces a dormant state in ER+ breast cancer cells cultured on fibronectin substrata, also abundant in the marrow, where it induces morphogenic differentiation7. In the model, breast cancer cells are growth inhibited, inactivate Rho A through the RhoGap GRAF, redifferentiate to an epithelial phenotype and re-express integrins α5β1 lost with malignant progression. They bind fibronectin through integrin α5β1 and activate survival signaling that render them resistant to cytotoxic therapy7,8,15 (Figure 1). Inhibition of Rho class GTPases has been demonstrated previously to induce a dormant phenotype34.
Here we will outline the specific procedures that will permit investigators to establish the model and study specific molecular and cellular mechanisms governing dormancy of ER+ breast cancer cells. In the experiments presented here to illustrate the use of the model, we targeted the PI3K pathway (Figure 1B) with an Akt inhibitor and a PI3K inhibitor and all members of the Rho family (Figure 1B) with a pan-Rho inhibitor and a Rho Kinase (ROCK) inhibitor.