Search

Background/aim Resistance to glioblastoma (GB) therapy is attributed to the presence of glioblastoma stem cells (GSC). Here, we defined the behavior of GSC as it pertains to proliferation, migration, and angiogenesis. Materials and methods Human-derived GSC were isolated and cultured from GB patient tumors. Xenograft GSC were extracted from the xenograft tumors, and spheroids were created and compared with human GSC spheroids by flow cytometry, migration, proliferation, and angiogenesis assays. Oct3/4 and Sox2, GFAP, and Ku80 expression was assessed by immunoanalysis. Results The xenograft model showed the formation of two different tumors with distinct characteristics. Tumors formed at 2 weeks were less aggressive with well-defined margins, whereas tumors formed in 5 months were diffuse and aggressive. Expression of Oct3/4 and Sox2 was positive in both human and xenograft GSC. Positive Ku80 expression in xenograft GSC confirmed their human origin. Human and xenograft GSC migrated vigorously in collagen and Matrigel, respectively. Xenograft GSC displayed a higher rate of migration and invasion than human GSC. Conclusion Human GSC were more aggressive in growth and proliferation than xenograft GSC, while xenograft GSC had increased invasion and migration compared to human GSC. A simple in vitro spheroid system for GSC provides a superior platform for the development of precision medicine in the treatment of GB.

Purpose: Primary cell lines are a valuable tool for evaluation of tumor behavior or sensitivity to anticancer treatment and appropriate dissociation of cells could preserve genomic profile of the original tissue. The main aim of our study was to compare the influence of two methods of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) cell derivation (mechanic&mdash, MD, enzymatic&mdash, ED) on basic biological properties of thus derived cells and correlate them to the ones obtained from stabilized GBM cell line A-172. Methods: Cell proliferation and migration (xCELLigence Real-Time Cell Analysis), expression of microRNAs and protein markers (RT-PCR and Western blotting), morphology (phase contrast and fluorescent microscopy), and accumulation of temozolomide (TMZ) and its metabolite 5-aminoimidazole-4-carboxamide (AIC) inside the cells (LC-MS analysis) were carried out in five different samples of GBM (GBM1, GBM2, GBM32, GBM33, GBM34), with each of them processed by MD and ED types of isolations. The same analyses were done in the A-172 cell line too. Results: Primary GBM cells obtained by ED or MD approaches significantly differ in biological behavior and properties of these cells. Unlike in primary MD GBM cells, higher proliferation, as well as migration, was observed in primary ED GBM cells, which were also associated with the acquired mesenchymal phenotype and higher sensitivity to TMZ. Finally, the same analyses of stabilized GBM cell line A-172 revealed several important differences in measured parameters. Conclusions: GBM cells obtained by MD and ED dissociation show considerable heterogeneity, but based on our results, MD approach should be the preferred method of primary GBM cell isolation