| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Regular Articles |




From the Departments of Immunology,*
Pathology,
and
Biochemistry,
Roswell Park Cancer Institute,
Buffalo, New York
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Grøndahl-Hansen et al12 in a study on the immunohistochemical localization of urokinase in colon adenocarcinomas using monoclonal antibodies showed a positive reaction only in fibroblast-like and endothelial cells in the stroma, but none in the cancer cells. In situ hybridization studies by the same group also failed to detect specific mRNA in the cancer cells.13 These results formed the basis of the theory that in colon cancer urokinase is expressed by stromal cells from which the activator is recruited to the receptors of the cancer cells in a paracrine fashion. While subsequently several studies were published documenting the presence of uPA in the colon cancer cells, none of them presented evidence as to the site of origin of the activator.
We have now extended our investigations using three monoclonal antibodies directed against different domains of uPA, and with one directed against the uPA receptor. Our results again show abundant presence of urokinase in the cancer cells. In situ hybridization studies establish that these cells are indeed the site of synthesis of the enzyme. The present results cast doubt on the general applicability of the paracrine theory mentioned above.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Of the 12 specimens analyzed 8 were from the rectosigmoid segment of the colon, 2 from the sigmoid colon, 1 from the rectum, and 1 from the transverse colon. All tumors were invasive well- to moderately differentiated adenocarcinomas.
Antibodies
Monoclonal antibodies (MAb) to uPA B chain 3689 (Ab1) and 394 (Ab2) and antibody to the A chain of uPA 3921 (Ab3), and antibody to domain II of the uPA receptor 3932 (Abr) were obtained from American Diagnostica (Greenwich, CT). The specificities of these antibodies were reported earlier by others14-16 : for Ab1,17 for Ab2,16 for Ab3, and18 for Abr. The Ab1 is strictly active site-specific, whereas Ab2 encompasses a larger domain than just the active site region.
Other Reagents
A DAB detection kit which includes the biotinylated universal secondary antibody was obtained from Ventana Medical Systems (Tucson, AZ). Super Block blocking buffer in Tris-buffered saline was purchased from Pierce (Rockford, IL). Trypsin was from GIBCO (Grand Island, NY), Triton X-100 from Sigma (St. Louis, MO), pretreatment reagent kit for paraffin-embedded sections used for in situ hybridization and fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-labeled MAb was from Vysis (Downers Grove, IL). Digoxigenin-11-dUTP was purchased from Boehringer Mannheim (Indianapolis, IN). The plasmid containing the uPA construct (pHUK-8, ATCC 57328) was purchased from American Tissue Culture Type Collection (Rockville, MD). Wizard plus SV mini preps DNA purification system was from Promega (Madison, WI), QIAquick gel extraction kit was from QIAGEN (Valencia, CA).
Immunohistochemistry
A Ventana ES automated immunohistochemical stainer (Ventana Medical Systems) programmed for a three step immunoperoxidase technique (ABC) was used for the detection of uPA and its receptor. The instrument was programmed for a 20-minute treatment with 0.05% trypsin containing 0.01% Triton X-100 at 37°C and a blocking step for 10 minutes at 37°C with Super Block. The primary antibody was allowed to react at 37°C for 32 minutes, followed by incubation with biotinylated secondary antibody for 8 minutes. Subsequent to this the slides were incubated with avidin-horseradish peroxidase and the DAB substrate, followed by a 4 minutes copper enhancement. The slides were then stained with hematoxylin and photographed using an Olympus model BX 40 microscope equipped with a Hitachi model HV-C 20 video camera and an Image Pro 3.0 software (Media Cybernetics LP, Spectrum Services Inc., Webster, NY). The primary antibodies were used at the following concentrations of the IgG: MAb1, MAb2, and irrelevant mouse IgG at 40 µg/ml; MAb3 and MAb-uPAr at 25 µg/ml.
Purification of uPA cDNA
The plasmid containing the uPA cDNA was purified using Promega's Wizard Plus Minipreps DNA purification system. The purified DNA was then digested with BamHI and BglII restriction enzymes and the insert was gel purified using a QIAquick gel extraction kit.
Fluorescence in Situ Hybridization (FISH)
Paraffin-embedded tissue sections 4 µm thick were pretreated for FISH using a paraffin pretreatment kit (Vysis) according to the manufacturer's instructions. The probe, uPA-cDNA, was labeled with digoxigenin-11-dUTP by random priming19 and detected with MAb to digoxigenin labeled with FITC.20 Sections were counterstained with the nuclear stain DAPI (4'-6-diamidino-2-phenylindole) for better visualization. Signals were analyzed using appropriate filters on a Nikon Optiphot fluorescence microscope. Images were captured and analyzed using a monochrome CCD camera (Cohu Inc., San Diego, CA) and image analysis software (MacProbe, PSI, Inc., League City, TX).
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
Figure 2A
shows that uPA receptor is localized in the cancer cells, as
has been reported by others,21,25,26
and it shows a
predominantly cytoplasmic presence, with no apparent concentration on
the cell membranes.
The localization of uPA is similar in another colorectal tumor shown in
Figure 2C
. In both tumors shown here, 1346 and 6765 (Figures 1A, 1D, and 2C)
, there is only an occasional presence of uPA-containing
stromal elements. This is not the case, however, with tumor 290 (Figure 2, D and E)
where uPA is evident in the cytoplasms of various stromal
elements, including fibroblasts, macrophages, and polymorphonuclear
neutrophiles. However, even in these cases the strongest staining is
still observed in the cancer cells. In tumor 1617 (Figure 2F)
in
situ hybridization shows the presence of uPA mRNA in a number of
stromal elements, but also at both poles of the cancer cells.
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
As mentioned above, Grøndahl-Hansen et al published in 1991 an immunohistochemical study in which they used a monoclonal antibody to demonstrate the presence of uPA in human colon cancer.12 They found no staining in the cancer cells but did observe reactions in stromal elements, such as fibroblasts, endothelial and inflammatory cells in the vicinity of the cancer tissue, while staining for tPA was restricted to endothelial cells. In a subsequent report from the same laboratory, Pyke et al13 published the results of in situ hybridization using an 35S-labeled antisense RNA probe for the detection of uPA mRNA in colon cancer tissue. Sporadic spots confined to isolated cells were observed in the stroma, but not in the cancer cells. Endothelial cells, found to be positive in the immunohistochemical study, however, were negative in this study. On the basis of these findings they theorized that in colon cancer uPA is produced by stromal elements and may subsequently be recruited to the receptors at the invasive areas of the cancer cells. uPA receptors were indeed identified by this group in the invasive regions of the cancer cells.22 These authors' view of the general significance of this type of stroma-to-tumor transfer was extended to other proteases, and was summarized in a recent review article.23 To resolve the discrepancy between their results and those from our laboratory10,11 which showed very strong staining for uPA in the colon cancer cells, Grøndahl-Hansen et al12 proposed that the polyclonal antibody used in the studies quoted contained a contaminant antibody directed toward some substance present in the cancer cells, which was not urokinase.
In subsequent years several reports appeared documenting the presence of uPA in the cancer cells of colon tumor sections, as detected by immunohistochemical means. Sier et al in 199114 using a monoclonal antibody directed to the B-chain of uPA (same as our mAb1), found strong diffuse staining in the columnar epithelial cells of colon cancer and of adenomas as well. They also observed strong staining in the lamina propria of adenomas which they interpreted to be due to eosinophilic granulocytes. Buo et al24,25 found strong staining at the invasive regions of the carcinomas which involved the cytoplasm of the cancer cells as well as some cells of the adjoining matrix. Tan et al,26 using a monoclonal antibody obtained from Grøndahl-Hansen, found intense staining at the invasive front of carcinomas, which also involved the cancer cells, as well as connective tissue elements. While all these studies indeed documented the presence of uPA in the cancer cells, they did not prove that they were the site of origin of the activator. The present results establish the presence of uPA, as well as the site of its expression in the cancer cells.
The argument put forward by Grøndahl-Hansen et al13 that the polyclonal antibody used in our previous studies10,11 lacked uPA specificity appears to be invalid, since 1) the polyclonal antibody was rendered monospecific by absorption with urinary proteins from various sources from which uPA had been completely removed by benzamidine affinity chromatography; and 2) when the polyclonal antibody was completely absorbed with uPA, all staining was abolished. It has also been repeatedly demonstrated by others that colon cancer cells in culture do secrete urokinase.27,28 The present results obtained with the monoclonal antibodies support the same conclusion as that of Kohga et al.10,11
It is important to emphasize, however, that the expression of urokinase
by the cancer cells is, in itself, insufficient for the promotion of
invasive behavior: the presence of the receptor for this enzyme is
equally important, as has been shown in several
studies.29,30
The coincident localization of enzyme and
receptor in the present study suggests that most of uPA may be bound to
its receptor. Its intracellular localization (Figure 2A)
suggests that
the uPA-receptor complex was internalized.
The reason for the inability of Grøndahl-Hansen et al to demonstrate
uPA in the cancer cells is not clear. The three monoclonal antibodies
that have been used in their work were characterized earlier, were
strongly inhibitory, and gave positive results with sections of
psoriatic skin.31
The fact that they found positive
reactions only in some stromal elements suggests that treatment of the
sections with the antibodies may not have been sufficiently intense. We
have found in our earlier work that colon cancer cells did not give a
strong signal with the polyclonal antibody unless the sections had been
pretreated either with 0.1% trypsin or 0.1% Triton
X-100.11
It should also be noted that if the paracrine
theory were right, and the interstitial cells indeed transferred uPA to
the receptors of the cancer cells, the authors should have observed
staining in the cancer cells, which they did not. The positive results
shown with endothelial cells in Figure 1, A and C
in the paper by
Grøndahl-Hansen et al12
is also unexpected. In none of
the published studies on colon cancer, with the exception of that by
Tan et al,26
who used Grondahl-Hansen's antibody, was
such staining observed. In fact, the same group in an earlier
paper32
clearly demonstrated in veins and small vessels of
human skin, that the endothelium reacted only with an antibody against
tPA, and not with one against uPA, a result identical to the one
obtained earlier by Kohga et al10
in examining stromal
vessels of colorectal carcinoma.
The negative results of the in situ hybridization study of Pyke et al13 are also difficult to interpret in view of the evidence for strong transcriptional activity shown in the cancer cells in the present study. It is now known that the results obtained using the fluorescence in situ hybridization technique is more sensitive than the autoradiographic technique.20
While there is no longer any reason to assume that the localization of uPA in the cancer cells as described by Kohga et al was artifactual, the positive reaction obtained with some goblet cells of the normal glands, reported in that study, was not observed in the present one, or in any of the other studies quoted. It may have been due to cross-reaction by the polyclonal antibody with a mucinous component present in the goblet cells. Finally, the predominant localization of uPA in the cancer cells, as well as the abundance of mRNA for the same in these cells, coupled with the relative paucity of the same in the surrounding stroma, speaks against the general applicability of the theory which proposes that uPA is generated in the stromal cells, and is then transferred by them to the receptors located on the surface of the cancer cells.23 In fact, it is well known that carcinomas elicit a desmoplastic reaction in the stroma. Thus it is more likely that uPA present in the stromal elements in the vicinity of the invasive front had been released from the cancer cells, and subsequently taken up by inflammatory cells, ie, macrophages, polymorphonuclear neutrophils, and other stromal elements. Tumor cells have also been known to release urokinase into their environment.8,9,27,30
| Acknowledgements |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
Supported in part by Grant 862-2038 from the Roswell Park Alliance Foundation (to SRH) and by shared resources of the Roswell Park Cancer Center Support Grant CA16056.
Accepted for publication June 15, 1999.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
T. C. Hurd, S. Sait, S. Kohga, J. Winston, M. Martinick, R. Saxena, H. Lankes, G. Markus, S. Harvey, and J. F. Gibbs Plasminogen Activator System Localization in 60 Cases of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Ann. Surg. Oncol., November 1, 2007; 14(11): 3117 - 3124. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. R. Harvey, T. C. Hurd, G. Markus, M. I. Martinick, R. M. Penetrante, D. Tan, P. Venkataraman, N. DeSouza, S. N. J. Sait, D. L. Driscoll, et al. Evaluation of Urinary Plasminogen Activator, Its Receptor, Matrix Metalloproteinase-9, and von Willebrand Factor in Pancreatic Cancer Clin. Cancer Res., October 15, 2003; 9(13): 4935 - 4943. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Rosmann, D. Hahn, D. Lottaz, M.-N. Kruse, W. Stocker, and E. E. Sterchi Activation of Human Meprin-alpha in a Cell Culture Model of Colorectal Cancer Is Triggered by the Plasminogen-activating System J. Biol. Chem., October 18, 2002; 277(43): 40650 - 40658. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. J. Emenaker, G. M. Calaf, D. Cox, M. D. Basson, and N. Qureshi Short-Chain Fatty Acids Inhibit Invasive Human Colon Cancer by Modulating uPA, TIMP-1, TIMP-2, Mutant p53, Bcl-2, Bax, p21 and PCNA Protein Expression in an In Vitro Cell Culture Model J. Nutr., November 1, 2001; 131(11): 3041S - 3046. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Friedmann, I. Vlodavsky, H. Aingorn, A. Aviv, T. Peretz, I. Pecker, and O. Pappo Expression of Heparanase in Normal, Dysplastic, and Neoplastic Human Colonic Mucosa and Stroma : Evidence for Its Role in Colonic Tumorigenesis Am. J. Pathol., October 1, 2000; 157(4): 1167 - 1175. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A.-M. Khatib, G. Siegfried, A. Prat, J. Luis, M. Chretien, P. Metrakos, and N. G. Seidah Inhibition of Proprotein Convertases Is Associated with Loss of Growth and Tumorigenicity of HT-29 Human Colon Carcinoma Cells. IMPORTANCE OF INSULIN-LIKE GROWTH FACTOR-1 (IGF-1) RECEPTOR PROCESSING IN IGF-1-MEDIATED FUNCTIONS J. Biol. Chem., August 10, 2001; 276(33): 30686 - 30693. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |