Advertisement

Imbalances in cellular immunological parameters in blood predetermine tumor onset in a natural mouse model of breast cancer

  • Dmitry A. AronovEmail author
  • Viacheslav V. Zhukov
  • Svetlana G. Semushina
  • Ekaterina V. Moiseeva
Original Article

Abstract

The development of new approaches to breast cancer (BC) early diagnosis is an important objective of modern oncology. Although the role of the immune system in cancer initiation process was experimentally well established, the prognostic value of cellular blood immunological parameters (CBIPs) for BC onset prediction was not demonstrated either in clinics or in mouse models. In this study, we focused on revealing informative CBIPs for mammary cancer (MC) onset prediction in the BLRB/BYRB mouse model with a high incidence of natural MC development. Blood samples were collected from 80 aging females of these original mouse strains, 12 basic CBIPs were estimated by flow cytometry. Then mice were followed up for 28 weeks, and the outcome of females (MC diagnosis, death without MC or MC-free survival) was registered. We estimated the patterns of changes in CBIPs with age and in accordance with the outcome. An increasing imbalance in 11 CBIPs during natural aging of females clearly resembled human immunosenescence phenomenon and several patterns corresponded to the results obtained on cancer-free members of BC-affected families. We stratified heterogeneous female population into middle-aged and old subgroups. Low NK-cell levels in middle-aged mice and low B-cell along with high T-helper levels in old mice distinguished females with developed MC from the other groups. We found a reliable correlation of several CBIPs with age at MC diagnosis and survival of cancer-bearing females. Thus, we demonstrated the predictive potential of CBIPs as a basis for the development of prognostic models for BC onset in clinics.

Keywords

Breast cancer Mouse model Immune system Cellular blood immunological parameters 

Abbreviations

Act.

Activated

BC

Breast cancer (in humans)

CBIPs

Cellular blood immunological parameters

MC

Mammary cancer (in mice)

SPF

Specific-pathogen-free

Notes

Author contributions

DAA contributed in study design, flow cytometry, in vivo studies, data analysis, interpretation of results, and manuscript preparation. VVZ contributed in data analysis, interpretation of results, and manuscript drafting. SGS contributed in study design, histopathological analysis of mammary tumors, and manuscript drafting. EVM contributed in study design, in vivo studies, histopathological analysis to confirm or reject mammary cancer diagnosis, data analysis, interpretation of results, and manuscript preparation. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript.

Funding

No relevant funding.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All the animal experiments were conducted in accordance with the “Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals” (US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Health Publication No 93–23, revised 1985) and were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (http://www.ibch.ru/downloads/documents/553/Institutional_Policy_on_the_Use_of_Laboratory_Animals.pdf). Animal research approval number: 155/2014.

Animal source

Original mouse strains BLRB-Rb(8.17)1Iem and BYRB-Rb(8.17)1Iem were developed by Ekaterina Moiseeva [22] and have been bred and maintained at Shemyakin–Ovchinnikov Institute of Bioorganic Chemistry, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia since 1993.

Supplementary material

262_2019_2312_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (465 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 466 KB)

References

  1. 1.
    Walters S, Maringe C, Butler J et al (2013) Breast cancer survival and stage at diagnosis in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK, 2000–2007: a population-based study. Br J Cancer 108:1195–1208.  https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2013.6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Løberg M, Lousdal ML, Bretthauer M, Kalager M (2015) Benefits and harms of mammography screening. Breast Cancer Res 17:63.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13058-015-0525-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gøtzsche PC, Nielsen M (2011) Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001877.pub4 Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Den Otter W, Merchant TE, Beijerinck D, Koten JW (1996) Breast cancer induction due to mammographic screening in hereditarily affected women. Anticancer Res 16:3173–3175Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jansen-van der Weide MC, Greuter MJW, Jansen L et al (2010) Exposure to low-dose radiation and the risk of breast cancer among women with a familial or genetic predisposition: a meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 20:2547–2556.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-010-1839-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP et al (1989) Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst 81:1879–1886.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/81.24.1879 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gail MH (2015) Twenty-five years of breast cancer risk models and their applications. J Natl Cancer Inst 107.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djv042
  8. 8.
    Moiseeva E (2009) Anti-breast cancer drug testing. Original approaches. novel set of mouse models. Lambert Academic Publishing, SaarbrückenGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Moiseeva EV, Aronov DA, Semushina SG, Bozhenko VK (2014) Advantages of a new paradigm of experimental oncology: individual prognosis of immunotherapy outcome based on surrogate marker analysis. Mol Med (2):47–50Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Okuturlar Y, Gunaldi M, Tiken EE et al (2015) Utility of peripheral blood parameters in predicting breast cancer risk. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 16:2409–2412.  https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2015.16.6.2409 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Choudhari A, Desai P, Indumati V, Kadi S (2013) Activities of serum Ada, GGT and alp in carcinoma breast-a case control study for diagnostic and prognostic significance. Indian J Med Sci 67:123–129.  https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5359.122740 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dezayee ZMI, Al-Nimer MSM (2016) The clinical importance of measurement of hematological indices in the breast cancer survivals: a comparison between premenopausal and postmenopausal women. World J Oncol 7:1–4.  https://doi.org/10.14740/wjon956e CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Standish LJ, Sweet ES, Novack J et al (2008) Breast cancer and the immune system. J Soc Integr Oncol 6:158–168Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Verronèse E, Delgado A, Valladeau-Guilemond J et al (2016) Immune cell dysfunctions in breast cancer patients detected through whole blood multi-parametric flow cytometry assay. Oncoimmunology.  https://doi.org/10.1080/2162402X.2015.1100791 Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Song G, Wang X, Jia J et al (2013) Elevated level of peripheral CD8 + CD28—T lymphocytes are an independent predictor of progression-free survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer during the course of chemotherapy. Cancer Immunol Immunother 62:1123–1130.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00262-013-1424-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shao B, Li HP, DI LJ et al (2016) Predictive and prognostic value of monitoring lymphocyte subsets in peripheral blood before and after chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao 48:304–309Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Murphy WJ (2016) Being “penny-wise but pound foolish” in cancer immunotherapy research: the urgent need for mouse cancer models to reflect human modifying factors. J Immunother Cancer 4:88.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s40425-016-0195-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Beura LK, Hamilton SE, Bi K et al (2016) Normalizing the environment recapitulates adult human immune traits in laboratory mice. Nature 532:512–516.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17655 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Masopust D, Sivula CP, Jameson SC (2017) Of mice, dirty mice, and men: using mice to understand human immunology. J Immunol 199:383–388.  https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1700453 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Semushina SG, Aronov DA, Moiseeva EV (2018) Local interleukin-2 immunotherapy of breast cancer: benefit and risk in a spontaneous mouse model. Pathol Oncol Res.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12253-018-0396-6 Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mao Y, Qu Q, Chen X et al (2016) The prognostic value of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 11:e0152500.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0152500 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Festing M (1998) Inbred strains of mice: BLRB. In: Mouse genome informatics. http://www.informatics.jax.org/external/festing/mouse/docs/BLRB.shtml. Accessed 16 Jul 2018
  23. 23.
    Flurkey K, Currer JM, Harrison DE (2007) Mouse models in aging research. In: The mouse in biomedical research, 2nd edn, pp 637–672Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M et al (2016) SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2014, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD, based on November 2016 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER web site, April 2017. https://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2014/
  25. 25.
    Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer (2001) Familial breast cancer: collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 52 epidemiological studies including 58,209 women with breast cancer and 101,986 women without the disease. Lancet 358:1389–1399.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06524-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Brandt A, Bermejo JL, Sundquist J, Hemminki K (2010) Age of onset in familial breast cancer as background data for medical surveillance. Br J Cancer 102:42–47.  https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6605421 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dutta S, Sengupta P (2016) Men and mice: relating their ages. Life Sci 152:244–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Poschke I, De Boniface J, Mao Y, Kiessling R (2012) Tumor-induced changes in the phenotype of blood-derived and tumor-associated T cells of early stage breast cancer patients. Int J Cancer.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.27410 Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sansoni P, Vescovini R, Fagnoni F et al (2008) The immune system in extreme longevity. Exp Gerontol 43:61–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Shevde LA, Joshi NN, Shinde SR, Nadkarni JJ (1998) Studies on functional status of circulating lymphocytes in unaffected members from cancer families. Hum Immunol 59:373–381.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0198-8859(98)00027-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tsuda B, Miyamoto A, Yokoyama K et al (2018) B-cell populations are expanded in breast cancer patients compared with healthy controls. Breast Cancer 25:284–291.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-017-0824-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Moiseeva E (2011) Towards personalized paradigm of experimental anticancer research with “3S” concept. EPMA J 2:114–115.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13167-011-0119-5 Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Shevde LA, Rao NM, Joshi NN et al (1998) Natural killer cell function and genetic instability in unaffected individuals from breast cancer families. Eur J Cancer Prev 7:141–148Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Muraro E, Comaro E, Talamini R et al (2015) Improved Natural Killer cell activity and retained anti-tumor CD8 + T cell responses contribute to the induction of a pathological complete response in HER2-positive breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Transl Med 13:204.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-015-0567-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Fremd C, Schuetz F, Sohn C et al (2013) B cell-regulated immune responses in tumor models and cancer patients. Oncoimmunology 2:e25443.  https://doi.org/10.4161/onci.25443 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Syeda MM, Upadhyay K, Loke J et al (2017) Prediction of breast cancer risk based on flow-variant analysis of circulating peripheral blood B cells. Genet Med.  https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2016.222 Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Strayer DR, Carter W, Brodsky I (1986) Familial occurrence of breast cancer is associated with reduced natural killer cytotoxicity. Breast Cancer Res Treat 7:187–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Johnstone PA, Norton MS, Riffenburgh RH (2000) Survival of patients with untreated breast cancer. J Surg Oncol 73:273–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Galmarini CM, Tredan O, Galmarini FC (2015) Survivorship in untreated breast cancer patients. Med Oncol 32:466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bodai BI, Tuso P (2015) Breast cancer survivorship: a comprehensive review of long-term medical issues and lifestyle recommendations. Perm J 19:48–79.  https://doi.org/10.7812/TPP/14-241 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Cedolini C, Bertozzi S, Londero AP et al (2014) Type of breast cancer diagnosis, screening, and survival. Clin Breast Cancer 14:235–240.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2014.02.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Mahmoud SMA, Lee AHS, Paish EC et al (2012) The prognostic significance of B lymphocytes in invasive carcinoma of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat 132:545–553.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-011-1620-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Matkowski R, Gisterek I, Halon A et al (2009) The prognostic role of tumor-infiltrating CD4 and CD8 T lymphocytes in breast cancer. Anticancer Res 29:2445–2451Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Shemyakin-Ovchinnikov Institute of Bioorganic ChemistryRussian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia
  2. 2.Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)MoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations