Cancer Research Infection and Cancer: Biology, Therapeutics, and Prevention  Tumor Immunology: New Perspectives
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online

[Cancer Research 49, 3747-3753, July 15, 1989]
© 1989 American Association for Cancer Research

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Miller, B. E.
Right arrow Articles by Heppner, G. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Miller, B. E.
Right arrow Articles by Heppner, G. H.

Therapeutic Perturbation of the Tumor Ecosystem in Reconstructed Heterogeneous Mouse Mammary Tumors1

Bonnie E. Miller2, Fred R. Miller and Gloria H. Heppner

E. Walter Albachten Department of Immunology Michigan Cancer Foundation, Detroit, Michigan 48201

We have measured the response to methotrexate in vivo of paired mixtures of sister subpopulation lines from a mouse mammary tumor, as a model of drug response of a heterogeneous tumor. The subpopulation lines differed in intrinsic sensitivity to methotrexate. Response was measured both as growth delay and as a shift in tumor cell population distribution toward the more resistant cell line. We found differences between two pairs of cell lines in growth delay: line 66 plus 4T07 mixtures tended to be as responsive as was line 4T07 (the more sensitive line) alone, whereas line 168 plus 4T07 mixtures tended to be less responsive than line 4T07 alone. With both paired mixtures, the tumors arising after treatment tended to contain more line 66 or line 168 than did untreated tumors, but this shift was extremely variable among individual tumors. Within most treatment groups, there was no correlation between the growth rate of individual mixed tumors and the final tumor cell distribution. Likewise, between experiments, there was no correlation between the amount of growth delay in mixed tumors and the final tumor cell distribution. Thus, the cellular composition of treated tumors did not directly reflect the response to therapy.

1 Supported by USPHS Grant CA-27419 awarded by the National Cancer Institute, Department of Health and Human Services. Presented in part at the Conference on Prediction of Tumor Treatment Response, Banff, Alberta, Canada, on April 21–24, 1987.

2 To whom requests for reprints should be addressed, at Michigan Cancer Foundation, 110 East Warren Avenue, Detroit, MI 48201.

Received 7/29/88. Revised 3/13/89. Accepted 4/17/89.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
C. C. Maley, B. J. Reid, and S. Forrest
Cancer Prevention Strategies That Address the Evolutionary Dynamics of Neoplastic Cells: Simulating Benign Cell Boosters and Selection for Chemosensitivity
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., August 1, 2004; 13(8): 1375 - 1384.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online
Copyright © 1989 by the American Association for Cancer Research.