Neuro-oncology · 2025
Spatial profiling of longitudinal glioblastoma reveals consistent changes in cellular architecture, post-treatment.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ajaib Shoaib, Winter-Luke Joshua, Digby Richard J, Pollock Steven, Hemmings Gemma, Gusnanto Arief, Chakrabarty Aruna, Ismail Azzam, Wilson Erica, Hunter Bethany, Filby Andrew, McDonald David, Brockman Asa A, Ihrie Rebecca A, Stead Lucy F
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma (GBM), the most aggressive adult brain cancer, comprises a complex tumor microenvironment (TME) with diverse cellular interactions that drive progression and pathobiology. The aim of this study was to understand how these spatial patterns and interactions evolve with treatment.
METHODS: To explore these relationships, we employed imaging mass cytometry to measure the expression of 34 protein markers, enabling the identification of GBM-specific cell types and their interactions at the single-cell protein level in paired primary (pre-treatment) and recurrent (post-treatment) GBM samples from five patients.
RESULTS: We find a significant post-treatment increase in normal brain cells alongside a reduction in vascular cells. Moreover, despite minimal overall change in cellular diversity, interactions among astrocytes, oligodendrocytes, and vascular cells increase post-treatment, suggesting reorganization of the TME. The GBM TME cells form spatially organized layers driven by hypoxia pre-treatment, but this influence diminishes post-treatment, giving way to less organized layers with organization driven by reactive astrocytes and lymphocytes.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide insight into treatment-induced shifts in GBM's cellular landscape, highlighting aspects of the evolving TME that appear to facilitate recurrence and are, therefore, potential therapeutic targets.
METHODS: To explore these relationships, we employed imaging mass cytometry to measure the expression of 34 protein markers, enabling the identification of GBM-specific cell types and their interactions at the single-cell protein level in paired primary (pre-treatment) and recurrent (post-treatment) GBM samples from five patients.
RESULTS: We find a significant post-treatment increase in normal brain cells alongside a reduction in vascular cells. Moreover, despite minimal overall change in cellular diversity, interactions among astrocytes, oligodendrocytes, and vascular cells increase post-treatment, suggesting reorganization of the TME. The GBM TME cells form spatially organized layers driven by hypoxia pre-treatment, but this influence diminishes post-treatment, giving way to less organized layers with organization driven by reactive astrocytes and lymphocytes.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide insight into treatment-induced shifts in GBM's cellular landscape, highlighting aspects of the evolving TME that appear to facilitate recurrence and are, therefore, potential therapeutic targets.