Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33271950›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2020

The Impact of Human Lipoaspirate and Adipose Tissue-Derived Stem Cells Contact Culture on Breast Cancer Cells: Implications in Breast Reconstruction.

Asim Ejaz, Katherine S Yang, Kaushik P Venkatesh, Somaiah Chinnapaka, Lauren E Kokai, J Peter Rubin

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Breast fat grafting and cancer: a systematic review of the science behind enhancements and concerns.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Asim EjazDepartment of Plastic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA.
Katherine S YangDepartment of Plastic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA.
Kaushik P VenkateshDepartment of Plastic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA.
Somaiah ChinnapakaDepartment of Plastic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA.
Lauren E KokaiDepartment of Plastic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA.
J Peter RubinDepartment of Plastic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA.
University of Pittsburgh · US

Funding

Injectable Engineered Tissue for Cancer ReconstructionR01CA114246 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI RUBIN, J PETER · 2006 to 2019
$3.3M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA114246NIH HHS R01-CA114246-08A1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAutologous fat transfer in the form of lipoaspirates for the reconstruction of the breast after breast cancer surgery is a commonly used procedure in plastic surgery. However, concerns regarding the oncologic risk of nutrient-rich fat tissue are widely debated. Previous studies have primarily focused on studying the interaction between adipose-derived stem cells (ASCs) and breast cancer cells.

methodsIn this study, we performed a comprehensive analysis of the paracrine- and contact-based interactions between lipoaspirates, ASCs and breast cancer cell lines. An inverted flask culture method was used to study the contact-based interaction between lipoaspirates and breast cancer cells, while GFP-expressing breast cancer cell lines were generated to study the cell-cell contact interaction with ASCs. Three different human breast cancer cell lines, MCF-7, MDA-MB-231 and BT-474, were studied. We analyzed the impact of these interactions on the proliferation, cell cycle and epithelial-to-mesenchymal (EMT) transition of the breast cancer cells.

resultsOur results revealed that both lipoaspirates and ASCs do not increase the proliferation rate of the breast cancer cells either through paracrine- or contact-dependent interactions. We observed that lipoaspirates selectively inhibit the proliferation of MCF-7 cells in contact co-culture, driven by the retinoblastoma (Rb) protein activity mediating cell cycle arrest. Additionally, ASCs inhibited MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cell proliferation in cell-cell contact-dependent interactions. Quantitative real-time PCR revealed no significant increase in the EMT-related genes in breast cancer cells upon co-culture with ASCs.

conclusionIn conclusion, this study provides evidence of the non-oncogenic character of lipoaspirates and supports the safety of clinical fat grafting in breast reconstruction after oncological surgical procedures. In vivo studies in appropriate animal models and long-term post-operative clinical data from patients are essential to reach the final safety recommendations.

Indexed as

Cell CommunicationAdipose TissueBiomarkersBreast NeoplasmsCell DifferentiationCell ProliferationCoculture TechniquesCulture Media, ConditionedFemaleHumansImmunophenotypingLipectomyMammaplastyPrimary Cell CultureStem CellsBiomarkersCulture Media, Conditionedadipose-derived stem cellsbreast cancer cellscell cycle and proliferationlipoaspirates

Identifiers

PMID33271950
PMCPMC7731376
OpenAlexW3107581174

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.