CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 157Extracellular vesicles in diseaseMicroRNA in disease regulationCancer Cells and Metastasis

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 78 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Exosomal microRNAs derived from colorectal cancer-associated fibroblasts: role in driving cancer progression

Open access
Bhome, Rahul, Goh, Rebecca W., Bullock, Marc D., Pillar, Nir, Thirdborough, Stephen M., Mellone, Massimiliano, Mirnezami, Reza, Galea, Dieter, Veselkov, Kirill, Gu, Quan, Underwood, Timothy J., Primrose, John N., De Wever, Olivier, Shomron, Noam, Sayan, A. Emre, Mirnezami, Alex H.·2017·Aging
DOI 10.18632/aging.101355PMC PMC5764398
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

, we demonstrated that fibroblast exosomes are transferred to colorectal cancer cells, with a resultant increase in cellular microRNA levels, impacting proliferation and chemoresistance. To probe this further, exosomal microRNAs were profiled from paired patient-derived normal and cancer-associated fibroblasts, from an ongoing prospective biomarker study. An exosomal cancer-associated fibroblast signature consisting of microRNAs 329, 181a, 199b, 382, 215 and 21 was identified. Of these, miR-21 had highest abundance and was enriched in exosomes. Orthotopic xenografts established with miR-21-overexpressing fibroblasts and CRC cells led to increased liver metastases compared to those established with control fibroblasts. Our data provide a novel stromal exosome signature in colorectal cancer, which has potential for biomarker validation. Furthermore, we confirmed the importance of stromal miR-21 in colorectal cancer progression using an orthotopic model, and propose that exosomes are a vehicle for miR-21 transfer between stromal fibroblasts and cancer cells.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.18632/aging.101355

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Characterization of exosomes isolated by differential ultracentrifugation (A) Western blot analysis to assess expression of exosomal markers in MRC5 exosomes. “Cells” refers to total cellular protein, “all EVs” refers to the total vesicular fraction isolated by a single ultracentrifugation of conditioned medium at 100 000 g, and “exosomes” refers to small extracellular vesicles isolated by filtration and serial centrifugation. The exosomal fraction is enriched in tetraspanins (CD63 and CD81), endosomal markers (Alix and TSG101) and does not contain Golgi (GM130) or mitochondrial (cytochrome C) markers. Actin was used as an equal loading control. (B) TEM of MRC5 fibroblast exosomes at 80 000x and 120 000x demonstrating homogenous, cup-shaped vesicles with size in the order of 100 nm. Scale bar represents 200 nm in both panels. (C) Nanoparticle tracking analysis of MRC5 fibroblast exosomes represented as size vs. concentration.
Figure 1 Characterization of exosomes isolated by differential ultracentrifugation (A) Western blot analysis to assess expression of exosomal markers in MRC5 exosomes. “Cells” refers to total cellular protein, “all EVs” refers to the total vesicular fraction isolated by a single ultracentrifugation of conditioned medium at 100 000 g, and “exosomes” refers to small extracellular vesicles isolated by filtration and serial centrifugation. The exosomal fraction is enriched in tetraspanins (CD63 and CD81), endosomal markers (Alix and TSG101) and does not contain Golgi (GM130) or mitochondrial (cytochrome C) markers. Actin was used as an equal loading control. (B) TEM of MRC5 fibroblast exosomes at 80 000x and 120 000x demonstrating homogenous, cup-shaped vesicles with size in the order of 100 nm. Scale bar represents 200 nm in both panels. (C) Nanoparticle tracking analysis of MRC5 fibroblast exosomes represented as size vs. concentration.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Fibroblast exosomes are taken up by CRC cells resulting in increased miRNA levels (A) Culture of mCherry-tagged DLD1 cells (red) in the absence (top) or presence (bottom) of DiO-labelled MRC5 exosomes (green), visualized by fluorescence microscopy (10x). Co-localization of exosomes with cells is demonstrated by arrows. (B) Culture of mCherry-DLD1 cells with DiO-labelled MRC5 exosomes visualized by confocal microscopy (60x), demonstrating the presence of exosomes within cells. (C) Flow cytometry of DLD1 cells (control) and DLD1 cells co-cultured with MRC5 exosomes (exosome). The proportion of cells under the M1 region is given as a percentage. (D) Co-culture of MRC5 exosomes with DLD1 and SW480 cells with resultant increase in miR-29b-3p, miR-21-5p and miR-16-5p. Data is presented as mean +/− SEM. Paired t-test: * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001.
Figure 2 Fibroblast exosomes are taken up by CRC cells resulting in increased miRNA levels (A) Culture of mCherry-tagged DLD1 cells (red) in the absence (top) or presence (bottom) of DiO-labelled MRC5 exosomes (green), visualized by fluorescence microscopy (10x). Co-localization of exosomes with cells is demonstrated by arrows. (B) Culture of mCherry-DLD1 cells with DiO-labelled MRC5 exosomes visualized by confocal microscopy (60x), demonstrating the presence of exosomes within cells. (C) Flow cytometry of DLD1 cells (control) and DLD1 cells co-cultured with MRC5 exosomes (exosome). The proportion of cells under the M1 region is given as a percentage. (D) Co-culture of MRC5 exosomes with DLD1 and SW480 cells with resultant increase in miR-29b-3p, miR-21-5p and miR-16-5p. Data is presented as mean +/− SEM. Paired t-test: * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Fibroblast exosomes influence cellular signaling in CRC cells resulting in resistance to chemotherapy and altered proliferation (A) Western blot demonstrating ERK (left), AKT (middle) and Bad activity (right) in DLD1 cells in the absence and presence of MRC5 exosomes. MRC5 exosomes induced ERK, AKT and Bad (serine 99) phosphorylation but total ERK, AKT and Bad expression was unchanged. HSP90 was used as an equal loading control. (B) Apoptosis of DLD1 cells induced by oxaliplatin in the absence and presence of MRC5 fibroblast exosomes. Fisher's exact test: *** p<0.001. (C) Proliferation of DLD1 CRC cells in the absence and presence of MRC5 fibroblast exosomes. A significant proliferation defect occurs from day 3 onwards in exosome-exposed CRC cells. Cell counts are relative to day 0, which was given the value 1. Data is presented as mean +/− SEM. Paired t-test: ns – not significant, * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001.
Figure 3 Fibroblast exosomes influence cellular signaling in CRC cells resulting in resistance to chemotherapy and altered proliferation (A) Western blot demonstrating ERK (left), AKT (middle) and Bad activity (right) in DLD1 cells in the absence and presence of MRC5 exosomes. MRC5 exosomes induced ERK, AKT and Bad (serine 99) phosphorylation but total ERK, AKT and Bad expression was unchanged. HSP90 was used as an equal loading control. (B) Apoptosis of DLD1 cells induced by oxaliplatin in the absence and presence of MRC5 fibroblast exosomes. Fisher's exact test: *** p<0.001. (C) Proliferation of DLD1 CRC cells in the absence and presence of MRC5 fibroblast exosomes. A significant proliferation defect occurs from day 3 onwards in exosome-exposed CRC cells. Cell counts are relative to day 0, which was given the value 1. Data is presented as mean +/− SEM. Paired t-test: ns – not significant, * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 CAFs and NOFs are biochemically and morphologically different and CAF exosomes can also be transferred to CRC cells (A) Western blot of paired primary NOFs and CAFs for myofibroblastic markers alpha-smooth muscle actin (α-SMA), fibronectin ED-A (ED-A FN1), palladin and vimentin. HSC-70 was used as an equal loading control. (B) Light microscopy of representative primary NOF and CAF cells (10x). (C) Fluorescence microscopy demonstrating phalloidin staining of F-actin filaments (green), counterstained with DAPI (blue; 40x). (D) Mean surface area and (E) intensity of phalloidin staining in a representative NOF-CAF pair. (F) Flow cytometry of DLD1 cells (control) and DLD1 cells co-cultured with CAF exosomes (exosome). The proportion of cells under the M1 region is given as a percentage. (G) Co-culture of CAF exosomes with DLD1 and SW480 cells with resultant increase in miR-199b and miR-21-5p. Data is presented as mean +/− SEM. Student's t-test (D, E) or paired t-test (F, G): * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001.
Figure 4 CAFs and NOFs are biochemically and morphologically different and CAF exosomes can also be transferred to CRC cells (A) Western blot of paired primary NOFs and CAFs for myofibroblastic markers alpha-smooth muscle actin (α-SMA), fibronectin ED-A (ED-A FN1), palladin and vimentin. HSC-70 was used as an equal loading control. (B) Light microscopy of representative primary NOF and CAF cells (10x). (C) Fluorescence microscopy demonstrating phalloidin staining of F-actin filaments (green), counterstained with DAPI (blue; 40x). (D) Mean surface area and (E) intensity of phalloidin staining in a representative NOF-CAF pair. (F) Flow cytometry of DLD1 cells (control) and DLD1 cells co-cultured with CAF exosomes (exosome). The proportion of cells under the M1 region is given as a percentage. (G) Co-culture of CAF exosomes with DLD1 and SW480 cells with resultant increase in miR-199b and miR-21-5p. Data is presented as mean +/− SEM. Student's t-test (D, E) or paired t-test (F, G): * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 Differential expression of miRNAs in NOF and CAF exosomes Hierarchical cluster analysis of miRNAs in NOF and CAF exosomes. The top 20 most changing miRNAs are shown. Blue-red color scale corresponds with fold changes between −1.5 and +1.5. NOF Ex, normal fibroblast exosome; CAF Ex, cancer-associated fibroblast exosome.
Figure 5 Differential expression of miRNAs in NOF and CAF exosomes Hierarchical cluster analysis of miRNAs in NOF and CAF exosomes. The top 20 most changing miRNAs are shown. Blue-red color scale corresponds with fold changes between −1.5 and +1.5. NOF Ex, normal fibroblast exosome; CAF Ex, cancer-associated fibroblast exosome.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 6 qPCR validation confirms signature of 6 miRNAs more abundant in CAF than NOF exosomes Taqman qPCR results presented as relative fold changes between NOF and CAF exosomal miRNA for each NOF-CAF exosome pair. NOF exosome miRNA level was assigned the value 1 for each NOF-CAF exosome pair (n=3), each of which were analyzed in triplicate. Data is presented as mean +/− SEM. Student's t-test: * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001.
Figure 6 qPCR validation confirms signature of 6 miRNAs more abundant in CAF than NOF exosomes Taqman qPCR results presented as relative fold changes between NOF and CAF exosomal miRNA for each NOF-CAF exosome pair. NOF exosome miRNA level was assigned the value 1 for each NOF-CAF exosome pair (n=3), each of which were analyzed in triplicate. Data is presented as mean +/− SEM. Student's t-test: * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 7 MiR-21 is more abundant in CAF cells and exosomes and enriched in the exosomal compartment (A) On a whole-cell level, CAFs express significantly more miR-21 than NOFs. (B) CAF exosomes contain significantly more miR-21 than NOF exosomes. Results obtained by Taqman qPCR and presented as mean relative fold changes for each NOF-CAF pair (n=3), analyzed in triplicate. (C) NanoString counts normalized by global mean expression for CAF cells and exosomes. Exosomal counts are expressed relative to cellular counts which were assigned the value 1. Data is presented as mean +/− SEM. Student's t-test: ns – not significant, * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001.
Figure 7 MiR-21 is more abundant in CAF cells and exosomes and enriched in the exosomal compartment (A) On a whole-cell level, CAFs express significantly more miR-21 than NOFs. (B) CAF exosomes contain significantly more miR-21 than NOF exosomes. Results obtained by Taqman qPCR and presented as mean relative fold changes for each NOF-CAF pair (n=3), analyzed in triplicate. (C) NanoString counts normalized by global mean expression for CAF cells and exosomes. Exosomal counts are expressed relative to cellular counts which were assigned the value 1. Data is presented as mean +/− SEM. Student's t-test: ns – not significant, * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 8 Stromal miR-21 leads to tumor progression in an in vivo orthotopic CRC model (A) Confocal microscopy of tumor section generated by subcutaneous co-injection of PKH26-labeled MRC5 fibroblasts (red) and CRC cells, counterstained with DAPI (blue; 60x). (B) Liver (L), spleen (S) and colon from mice orthotopically injected with SW620 CRC cells and MRC5 control or miR-21-overexpressing fibroblasts. Arrowheads highlight liver metastases. The effect of miR-21-overexpressing cells was to increase the size and number of liver metastases. No splenic metastases were seen in either group. (C) Representative liver sections at 2x and 100x magnification. Bulky hepatic metastases are evident in the SW620/MRC5-miR-21 liver (arrowheads; 2x) with a clear histological demarcation between normal liver and metastatic tumor (NT – normal tissue, T – tumor; 100x). (D) Percentage liver replacement by metastatic tumor in SW620/MRC5-control (control) and SW620/MRC5-miR-21 (miR-21) mice. Data is presented as mean +/− SEM. Student's t-test: *** p<0.001.
Figure 8 Stromal miR-21 leads to tumor progression in an in vivo orthotopic CRC model (A) Confocal microscopy of tumor section generated by subcutaneous co-injection of PKH26-labeled MRC5 fibroblasts (red) and CRC cells, counterstained with DAPI (blue; 60x). (B) Liver (L), spleen (S) and colon from mice orthotopically injected with SW620 CRC cells and MRC5 control or miR-21-overexpressing fibroblasts. Arrowheads highlight liver metastases. The effect of miR-21-overexpressing cells was to increase the size and number of liver metastases. No splenic metastases were seen in either group. (C) Representative liver sections at 2x and 100x magnification. Bulky hepatic metastases are evident in the SW620/MRC5-miR-21 liver (arrowheads; 2x) with a clear histological demarcation between normal liver and metastatic tumor (NT – normal tissue, T – tumor; 100x). (D) Percentage liver replacement by metastatic tumor in SW620/MRC5-control (control) and SW620/MRC5-miR-21 (miR-21) mice. Data is presented as mean +/− SEM. Student's t-test: *** p<0.001.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 157

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Bhome, R., Goh, R. W., Bullock, M. D., Pillar, N., Thirdborough, S. M., Mellone, M., Mirnezami, R., Galea, D., Veselkov, K., Gu, Q., Underwood, T. J., Primrose, J. N., De Wever, O., Shomron, N., Sayan, A. E., & Mirnezami, A. H.
Affiliations
  • Southampton General Hospital (GB)
  • Tel Aviv University (IL)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
  • MRC University of Glasgow Centre for Virus Research (GB)
  • Cancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Somers Building, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK
  • University Surgical Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK
  • Department of Experimental Cancer Research, Ghent University, Radiotherapiepark, Ghent, 9000, Belgium
ORCID
Venue
Aging
Publisher
Impact Journals, LLC
Published
2017-12-24
Volume
9
Issue
12
Pages
2666-2694
ISSN
1945-4589 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.18632/aging.101355
PMC
PMC5764398
OpenAlex
W2781198385
Cited by
155
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 6
FWCI
7.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Aging (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • UK Research and Innovation
  • Cancer Research UK (A20526, 23924, 20526, S_3319)
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (CL-2015-26-003, NF-SI-0515-10059, ACF-2012-26-005, CL-2013-21-012, ACF-2007-26-004)
  • Research Councils UK
  • University of Southampton
  • Medical Research Council (MR/R002061/1)
  • Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/L020858/1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Extracellular vesicles in disease
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › MicroRNA in disease regulation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Cells and Metastasis
Keywords
exosomal microRNAs, colorectal cancer, cancer-associated fibroblasts, miR-21, tumor microenvironment, liver metastasis, chemoresistance, tumor cell proliferation, exosome transfer, biomarkers, orthotopic xenograft
MeSH terms
Cancer-Associated Fibroblasts, Aged, Animals, Female, Humans, Male, Colorectal Neoplasms, Disease Progression, MicroRNAs, Mice, Exosomes, Heterografts

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review