Hypothesis: Are Neoplastic Macrophages/Microglia Present in Glioblastoma Multiforme?

Abstract

Most malignant brain tumours contain various numbers of cells with characteristics of activated or dysmorphic macrophages/microglia. These cells are generally considered part of the tumour stroma and are often described as TAM (tumour-associated macrophages). These types of cells are thought to either enhance or inhibit brain tumour progression. Recent evidence indicates that neoplastic cells with macrophage characteristics are found in numerous metastatic cancers of non-CNS (central nervous system) origin. Evidence is presented here suggesting that subpopulations of cells within human gliomas, specifically GBM (glioblastoma multiforme), are neoplastic macrophages/microglia. These cells are thought to arise following mitochondrial damage in fusion hybrids between neoplastic stem cells and macrophages/microglia.

Keywords

fusion glioblastoma multiforme glioma macrophage microglia phagocytosis

INTRODUCTION

It has recently been suggested that many types of human cancers (lung, breast, colon, kidney, etc.) contain neoplastic cells with mesenchymal/macrophage properties (Huysentruyt and Seyfried, 2010). These neoplastic macrophages are often the most highly invasive and metastatic cells within the tumour. It is not clear if similar kinds of cells are part of the malignant-cell population in human GBM (glioblastoma multiforme). GBM is the most common form of primary brain cancer in adults and represents ∼65% of all newly diagnosed malignant gliomas (Ohgaki and Kleihues, 2005; Stupp et al., 2009). GBM portends an extremely poor outcome with only approx. 10% of patients surviving 5 years after diagnosis, and a median survival of ∼12 months (Krex et al., 2007; Preusser et al., 2011). The poor prognosis is due largely to the highly invasive nature of this tumour. GBM invades throughout the brain and often produces multi-centric secondary legions at sites distant from the primary tumour (Scherer, 1940; Rubinstein, 1972; Laws et al., 1993). Complete surgical resection of GBM is extremely rare. Radiation therapy, which enhances the necrotic microenvironment, often results in further tissue damage and more aggressive tumours (Lakka and Rao, 2008; Kargiotis et al., 2010; Seyfried et al., 2010, 2011). Thus, effective therapeutic options are desperately needed for GBM patients.

GBM is classified as either primary or secondary. Primary GBM arise de novo without any prior evidence of a low-grade tumour, whereas secondary GBM arises from malignant progression of a lower grade glioma (Ohgaki and Kleihues, 2009). A defining characteristic of GBM is the ‘secondary structures of Scherer’ which include diffuse parenchymal invasion, perivascular growth, subpial surface growth and invasion along white matter tracks (Scherer, 1940; Shelton et al., 2010b). While systemic metastasis of GBM is uncommon due to early patient death, GBM can be extremely metastatic especially if the neoplastic cells gain access to extraneural sites (Hoffman and Duffner, 1985; Rubinstein, 1972; Ng et al., 2005; Taha et al., 2005; Frank et al., 2009; Zhen et al., 2010; Gotway et al., 2011). These findings indicate that GBM is not only highly invasive within the CNS (central nervous system), but can also invade outside the CNS.

GBM generally contain multiple morphologically diverse cell types that express neural, glial and myeloid markers (Rubinstein, 1972; Wood and Morantz, 1979; Seyfried, 2001; Yuan et al., 2004; Huysentruyt et al., 2008). In fact, mesenchymal cells with characteristics of TAM (tumour-associated macrophages) and/or microglia can comprise up to. 70% of some GBM (Morantz et al., 1979). It has been difficult to determine with certainty, however, the origin of all the mesenchymal and macrophage-like cells that appear within the GBM (Tso et al., 2006; Ricci-Vitiani et al., 2010). Based on numerous similarities between macrophages and invasive neoplastic cells in non-CNS tumours (Huysentruyt and Seyfried, 2010), we propose that some neoplastic cells within the GBM arise from transformed macrophage/microglia. As cells of the myeloid/macrophage lineage naturally embody the capacity to invade (Mallat et al., 2005; Banaei-Bouchareb et al., 2006), we suggest that some of the highly invasive mesenchymal-type cells within GBM may arise from resident or infiltrating myeloid cells of the tumour stroma that then become neoplastic during disease progression (Huysentruyt and Seyfried, 2010).

Our hypothesis comes from information on the VM (vasculogenic mimicry) mouse model of GBM which consists of highly invasive tumours (Shelton et al., 2010b). The VM tumours arise spontaneously in the brains of inbred VM mice (Fraser, 1971, 1986; Shelton et al., 2010b). The neoplastic cells in the invasive VM brain tumours express multiple properties of macrophages and microglial cells and the VM-M3 and VM-M2 tumours have been established as a model system for human GBM (Huysentruyt et al., 2008; Huysentruyt et al., 2010; Huysentruyt and Seyfried, 2010; Shelton et al., 2010b). We recently reviewed evidence showing that many invasive and metastatic human cancers also express multiple properties of mesenchymal myeloid cells (Huysentruyt and Seyfried, 2010). If many non-neural metastatic tumours arise from mesenchymal myeloid type cells, what about malignant tumours of the CNS? The goal of this commentary is to highlight similarities between myeloid cells and the invasive-cell populations of GBM, and to discuss possible mechanisms by which neoplastic cells could express these properties.

MYELOID CELLS AND INVASIVE CANCER

Myeloid cells have long been considered the origin of human metastatic cancers; however, this hypothesis has received little attention in the cancer field (Munzarova and Kovarik, 1987; Rachkovsky et al., 1998; Huysentruyt and Seyfried, 2010; Pawelek, 2000; Vignery, 2005; Pawelek and Chakraborty, 2008). Although large numbers of cells with macrophage and myeloid properties are found in most malignant cancers including GBM, these cells are generally considered part of the tumour stroma and not part of the neoplastic population (Seyfried, 2001; Mantovani et al., 2002). These cells are often referred to as TAM, and are thought to facilitate tumour development and malignant progression (Seyfried, 2001; Bingle et al., 2002; Lewis and Pollard, 2006; Talmadge et al., 2007; Pollard, 2008). The tumour stroma is a complex microenvironment that generally comprises malignant tumour cells and host infiltrating cells that include immune and epithelial cells (Bissell and Hines, 2011). The most commonly accepted view is that tumour-derived chemoattractants signal monocytes to extravasate out of the bloodstream and infiltrate the tumour mass (Bottazzi et al., 1983; Murdoch et al., 2004). Once in the tumour microenvironment, enhanced inflammation and angiogenesis establish the pre-metastatic niche, thus contributing to tumour progression (Seyfried, 2001; Bingle et al., 2002; Lewis and Pollard, 2006; Talmadge et al., 2007; Pollard, 2008). However, little consideration has been given to the possibility that microglial or TAM subsets might actually be part of the neoplastic cell population within GBM (Graeber et al., 2002; Watters et al., 2005). As cells of macrophage/microglial origin can express multiple mesenchymal morphologies depending on the microenvironment, how is it possible to be sure that none of these stromal cells are part of the neoplastic cell population?

Macrophages and microglia are among the most versatile cells of the body with respect to their ability to migrate, to change shape and to secrete growth factors and cytokines (Gordon, 1999; Stossel, 1999; Burke and Lewis, 2002; Huysentruyt et al., 2008). Macrophages fluctuate between two activation states depending on the microenvironment. Macrophages can become classically activated (M1 activation) in response to pathogens and pro-inflammatory molecules, resulting in the generation of NO and ROS (reactive oxygen species) (Sica et al., 2002, 2006; Biswas et al., 2008; Mantovani and Sica, 2010; Qian and Pollard, 2010). In contrast, macrophages can become alternatively activated (M2 activation) in response to anti-inflammatory molecules such as IL-4 (interleukin-4) and IL-10 and are the major wound-healing cells (Gordon, 2003; Biswas et al., 2008). Interestingly, the two macrophage subpopulations play separate roles in tumorigenic processes (Biswas et al., 2008). M1 macrophages, located at sites of chronic inflammation, contribute to neoplastic transformation through the release of cytotoxic and DNA damaging pro-inflammatory molecules (Biswas et al., 2008). Macrophages with an M2 phenotype contribute to angiogenesis and metastasis within the established tumour (Mantovani et al., 2002; Sica et al., 2006; Biswas et al., 2008; Huysentruyt and Seyfried, 2010; Mantovani and Sica, 2010). However, recent evidence suggests that TAMs may be a more complex subtype that can share features of both activation states (Ojalvo et al., 2009, 2010; Qian and Pollard, 2010).

Ineffective anti-tumour immunity resulting from reduced T-cell function is a hallmark of many cancers including GBM (Waziri, 2010; Raychaudhuri et al., 2011). Recently, it has been suggested that another myeloid cell type, MDSCs (myeloid-derived suppressor cells) are partially responsible for GBM-related immune suppression (Raychaudhuri et al., 2011). MDSCs are a heterogeneous population of immature myeloid cells that accumulate in tumour-bearing hosts where they suppress T-cell function, resulting in ineffective anti-tumour immunity (Gabrilovich and Nagaraj, 2009; Ostrand-Rosenberg, 2010; Raychaudhuri et al., 2011). This cell type accumulates in the blood, lymph nodes and spleen in patients with solid tumours and has been reported to represent approx. 5% of the total tumour mass in various experimental tumour-model systems (Yang et al., 2004). Raychaudhuri et al. demonstrated that patients with GBM have increased MDSC counts in their blood when compared with healthy controls and these cells likely promote T-cell immune suppression in this patient population (Raychaudhuri et al., 2011). While the phenotype and function of MDSCs are believed to be distinct from those of TAMs, MDSCs can differentiate into TAMs within the tumour microenvironment thus further contributing to tumour progression (reviewed in Gabrilovich and Nagaraj, 2009). To our knowledge, it has not been demonstrated if MDSCs contribute to GBM tumour mass.

Figure 1

(A) Phagocytic behaviour of the VM-M2 and macrophage RAW 264.7 cell lines was assessed from merging (Merge) the fluorescence (Fl) images and the differential interference contrast images after feeding the cells florescent beads. The image indicated that the malignant VM-M2 cells were phagocytic. (B) MNGC in a human GBM containing engulfed cell debris (arrow). (A) From Huysentruyt et al. (2008), reproduced with permission from Wiley, © 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc. (B) Provided by A. Persson.

PHAGOCYTOSIS A DEFINING BEHAVIOUR OF MACROPHAGES AND INVASIVE CELLS

Phagocytosis, involving engulfment and ingestion of extracellular material, is a defining property of macrophages/microglia and of other professional phagocytes (Burke and Lewis, 2002). In order to maintain tissue homoeostasis, macrophages phagocytose cellular debris, apoptotic cells and pathogens (Burke and Lewis, 2002). Phagocytosis is also expressed in numerous invasive and metastatic cancers including breast, lung, liver, pancreatic, skin and brain (reviewed in Huysentruyt and Seyfried, 2010). It has been suggested that invasive tumour cells use phagocytosis to facilitate migration through the extracellular matrix and into surrounding tissues (Bjerknes et al., 1987; Coopman et al., 1998).

The phagocytic/cannibalistic behaviour of tumour cells was first described over a century ago when foreign cell bodies were identified within human cancer cells (reviewed in Steinhaus, 1981). These cells were commonly described as ‘signet-ring’ and ‘birds-eye’ cells due to the peripheral displacement of their nuclei from engulfed materials (Fais, 2007). Although numerous micro-organisms use cannibalism as a feeding mechanism, cellular cannibalism is an exclusive property of malignant tumour cells (Fais, 2007). Both human and murine cancers have been shown to phagocytose tumour cells, erythrocytes, leucocytes, platelets, apoptotic cells and extracellular particles (reviewed in Huysentruyt and Seyfried, 2010). Interestingly, phagocytic tumour cells are observed in malignant gliomas, especially in GBM (Figure 1) (Youness et al., 1980; Bjerknes et al., 1987; Nitta et al., 1992; Zimmer et al., 1995; Chang et al., 2000; Persson and Englund, 2009; van Landeghem et al., 2009).

We previously identified two spontaneous brain tumours (VM-M2 and VM-M3) in the inbred VM mouse strain that are highly invasive in brain (Huysentruyt et al., 2008; Shelton et al., 2010b). These VM brain tumours express multiple properties of macrophages including phagocytic activity and are a model for human GBM (Huysentruyt et al., 2008; Shelton et al., 2010b). The phagocytic phenotype in these cells is remarkably similar to that of observed in the RAW 264.7 macrophage cell line (Figure 1A) (Huysentruyt et al., 2008). In a similar study to ours that examined the phagocytic activity of four rat glioma cell lines with varying degrees of in vivo invasiveness, Bjerknes et al. demonstrated that the invasive glioma cells phagocytosed bacteria, red blood cells, zymosan particles and glia cell fragments (Bjerknes et al., 1987). Furthermore, the two most invasive rat glioma cell lines displayed the highest level of phagocytosis. The authors noted that the phagocytic behaviour correlated with the amount of rat brain destruction during tumour cell invasion, suggesting that phagocytic activity may be connected to the excretion of lysosomal enzymes (Bjerknes et al., 1987). Lysosomal enzyme secretion and phagocytosis are macrophage-specific behaviours. Invasive glioma cell lines that display macrophage/microglia-like behaviours suggest a myeloid origin. Chang et al. (2000) also demonstrated that the glioma cell lines U87, U251 and SF268 exhibit phagocytic behaviour against apoptotic glioma cells. These findings further demonstrate that invasive glioma cells can exhibit macrophage-like phagocytic behaviour.

Although astrocytes have been described as semi-professional phagocytes, their phagocytic ability is limited. It could be suggested that the phagocytic behaviour observed in the GBM might arise from transformed astrocytes. However, the recent findings of Persson and Englund (2009) suggest that the phagocytic activity observed in human GBM are properties of malignant macrophages/microglia, rather than properties of malignant astrocytes. Utilizing paraffin-embedded GBM material, they identified numerous CD68-positive phagocytic macrophage/microglia throughout brain tumour specimens. Double-immunostaining with CD68 and the tumour cell marker hTERT (human telomerase reverse transcriptase) was used to verify that the CD68-positive cells were in fact part of the malignant GBM cell population (Persson and Englund, 2009). These findings support the hypothesis that neoplastic macrophages/microglia can exist within GBM.

In addition to GBM, other invasive CNS tumours contain neoplastic phagocytic cells. For example, phagocytic cells were observed in the bone marrow of a patient with a highly invasive and metastatic medulloblastoma, which involved invasion and metastasis to brainstem, bone marrow, lymph nodes and spinal cord (Youness et al., 1980). After extensive characterization of the phagocytic cells via histopatholgy, electron microscopy and cytogenetics, the authors stated that the phagocytic cells were unquestionably metastatic medulloblastoma cells. Interestingly, this tumour metastasized outside the CNS after excision of the primary tumour from the right cerebellar region (Youness et al., 1980). While extracranial metastasis of CNS tumours is uncommon, invasive CNS tumours can metastasize throughout the body if they gain access to extraneural sites (Rubinstein, 1972; Hoffman and Duffner, 1985; Vural et al., 1996; Taha et al., 2005). In fact, several reports show that GBM can be highly metastatic (Hoffman and Duffner, 1985; Ng et al., 2005; Taha et al., 2005; Frank et al., 2009; Zhen et al., 2010; Gotway et al., 2011). It therefore appears that this case of metastatic medulloblastoma exhibited the macrophage/microglia characteristics seen in some GBM.

While it might be difficult to demonstrate a myeloid origin of invasive GBM, the evidence reviewed here suggests that subpopulations of neoplastic GBM cells display the phagocytic behaviour of macrophages/microglia. As microglia are the resident macrophages of the brain, we propose that subpopulations of the malignant GBM cells could arise from microglia/macrophages (Morantz et al., 1979; Seyfried, 2001). Human GBM contain mixtures of numerous neoplastic cell types, many of which have mesenchymal properties, do not express GFAP (glial fibrillary acidic protein) and are of unknown origin (Duffy, 1983; Ohgaki and Kleihues, 2009; Han et al., 2010). Indeed, the original 19th century observations of Virchow (1863/1865) described glioblastomas as gliosarcomas of mesenchymal origin (Scherer, 1940; Zagzag et al., 2008). While numerous mesenchymal cells are frequently seen in GBM, the specific classification of all tumour cell types within human GBM remains ambiguous at best (Yates, 1992; Tso et al., 2006; Fan et al., 2007). According to our hypothesis, some of these neoplastic mesenchymal cells could arise from transformed macrophages/microglia.

Novel therapeutic approaches to GBM management become possible if the phagocytic behaviour can be targeted. Gollapudi and co-workers demonstrated that tumour cells undergo apoptosis after ‘feeding’ tumour cells with anti-tumour agents (Ghoneum and Gollapudi, 2004; Ghoneum et al., 2005, 2007, 2008). They showed that various tumour cells, grown either in vitro or in vivo, underwent a yeast-induced apoptosis after engulfing Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Recent studies indicate that similar approaches could have therapeutic efficacy in GBM. Glioblastoma patients underwent treatment with a magnetic nanoparticle-based immunotherapy where nanoparticles were engulfed by cells within the GBM (van Landeghem et al., 2009). To identify the phagocytic cells within the tumour, these investigators stained post-mortem fixed GBM sections with either the macrophage marker, CD68, or with the astrocyte/CNS stem cell marker, GFAP (van Landeghem et al., 2009). The authors reported that most of the cells engulfing the magnetic nanoparticles were CD68-positive. It was not possible from their study, however, to determine if the CD68-positive cells were also neoplastic since CD68 would stain both transformed macrophages/microglia as well as non-neoplastic TAM.

FUSOGENICITY

Fusogenicity involves the merging of two distinct plasma membranes and is a defining characteristic of macrophages and microglia (Vignery, 2000; Duelli and Lazebnik, 2003; Huysentruyt and Seyfried, 2010). Cell fusion is a highly regulated process that is essential for fertilization, skeletal muscle and placenta formation (Duelli and Lazebnik, 2003). Outside of normal developmental processes, fusion events are normally restricted to cells of myeloid origin (reviewed in Duelli and Lazebnik, 2003). Macrophages often fuse during osteoclast formation and wound healing in order increase cell volume to facilitate engulfment of large extracellular materials (Vignery, 2000, 2005). Macrophages also undergo heterotypic fusions with numerous cell types. It is currently believed that macrophage heterotypic fusion is a mechanism by which macrophages can ‘heal’ a defective cell or tissue (Vignery, 2000; Camargo et al., 2004a, 2004b; Vignery, 2005; Powell et al., 2011). There is also considerable evidence demonstrating that macrophages fuse with tumour cells (reviewed in Huysentruyt and Seyfried, 2010). These properties would also be expected in microglia since microglia are the resident macrophages of the CNS.

Figure 2

(A) The fusion hybrid hypothesis suggests that a macrophage x tumour-cell hybrid will express genetic and functional traits of both parental cells. (B) A bi-nucleated cell in human GBM expressing the macrophage fusion protein CD98 (arrows). (C) Human PXA demonstrating double immunoreactivity of the glial marker GFAP (brown) and macrophage CD68 (red). (B) From Takeuchi et al. (2008), reproduced with permission from Wiley, © 2007 Japanese Society of Neuropathology. (C) From Matyja et al. (2003), reproduced with permission from Folia Neuropathologica © Termedia.

Nearly a century ago, Aichel first suggested that fusions between somatic cells and leucocytes could result in aneuploidy and malignant hybrids (reviewed in Rachkovsky et al., 1998). Sixty years later, Mekler and Warner proposed that fusions between myeloid cells and tumour cells would produce daughter cells endowed with the invasive properties of the myeloid cell as well as the unlimited proliferative potential of the tumour cell (reviewed in Rachkovsky et al., 1998). The fusion hybrid hypothesis has emerged as a credible alternative to the epithelial mesenchymal transition for the origin of invasive and metastatic cancers (Huysentruyt and Seyfried, 2010; Pawelek and Chakraborty, 2008). Indeed, Pawelek and co-workers showed that fusions between non-metastatic cells and macrophages result in cells with the ability to invade and metastasize (Rachkovsky et al., 1998; Rachkovsky and Pawelek, 1999; Chakraborty et al., 2000, 2001, 2004; Pawelek, 2000, 2005; Handerson et al., 2005; Yilmaz et al., 2005; Pawelek and Chakraborty, 2008). Additionally, they provided evidence demonstrating that these fusion events occur spontaneously both in vitro and in vivo in a variety of animal models and in human cancers (Rachkovsky et al., 1998; Chakraborty et al., 2000, 2004; Yilmaz et al., 2005). Fusions between tumour cells and macrophage/microglia, with subsequent nuclear fusion, could produce novel phenotypes in the absence of new mutations since the tumour-macrophage hybrids express genetic and functional traits of both parental cells (Figure 2A) (Rachkovsky et al., 1998; Powell et al., 2011). Tumour-macrophage hybrids could also account in part for immune surveillance evasion seen in GBM and other metastatic cancers (Huysentruyt and Seyfried, 2010).

GBM is composed of neoplastic cells with features that vary from small round cells to MNGCs (multinucleated giant cells) (Homma et al., 2006). MNGCs arise from the fusion of two or more macrophages (Vignery, 2000, 2005). Recent reports suggest that MNGCs in GBM could arise through fusions of peripheral macrophages or microglia with glioma cells (Alvarez-Dolado et al., 2003). A recent study demonstrated that CD98, a protein that regulates monocyte fusion events, was expressed on the surface of MNGCs in 15/16 GBMs (Figure 2B) (Takeuchi et al., 2008). These findings suggest that MNGC formation in GBM is similar to what occurs during normal monocyte/macrophage fusion events (Takeuchi et al., 2008). Microglia and bone-marrow derived cells can fuse with CNS cells resulting in MNGCs (Alvarez-Dolado et al., 2003; Ackman et al., 2006). The MNGCs in GBM often express GFAP, a protein expressed on CNS stem cells and astrocytes, suggesting that this cell population contains macrophage/microglia and CNS stem cell/astrocyte hybrids (Takeuchi et al., 2008). Patient prognosis is generally worse when GBMs contain large numbers of MNGCs and other macrophage-like cells when compared with GBMs containing fewer of these cells (Deininger et al., 2003). This situation is similar to that seen in non-CNS tumours in that prognosis is generally worse for malignant tumours with higher rather than lower numbers of macrophages (Leek et al., 1996; Homma et al., 2006; Shabo et al., 2009; Huysentruyt and Seyfried, 2010).

The large size and unique phenotype of MNGCs make them easily detectable in brain tumour biopsy specimens (Figure 1B) (Rubinstein, 1972). However, it can be difficult to detect fusion events among tumour cells and myeloid cells with subsequent nuclear fusions. Utilizing a double immunostaining technique, Deininger et al. (2000) identified a subset of glioma cells that were positive for both GFAP and AIF1 (allograft inflammatory factor 1), a microglial marker also referred to as Iba1. GFAP+/AIF1+ cells were localized near areas of tumour growth and were indicative of spontaneous in vivo fusion events (Deininger et al., 2000). It is well documented that TAM aid tumour progression by promoting angiogenesis, invasion and metastasis (reviewed in Seyfried, 2001; Lewis and Pollard, 2006). However, fusion events between tumour cells and tissue macrophage/microglia would also accelerate tumour progression since resulting daughter cells would inherit the invasive/migratory potential of microglia and unlimited proliferative potential of the tumour cell. Hence, a microglial/glioma cell hybrid could rapidly acquire an invasive phenotype in the absence of novel mutations.

Table 1

Malignant glioma cell expression of myeloid antigens

Myeloid antigen	References

CD98	Takeuchi et al. (2008)
AIF-1 (Iba-1)	Deininger et al. (2000) and Huysentruyt et al. (2008)
CD14	Deininger et al. (2003)
HLA-class II	Rossi et al. (1987) and Matyja et al. (2003)
CD68	Leenstra et al. (1995), Matyja et al. (2003), Strojnik et al. (2006),
	Huysentruyt et al. (2008) and Strojnik et al. (2009)
CD11b	Leenstra et al. (1995) and Huysentruyt et al. (2008)
HAM56	Leenstra et al. (1995)

The macrophage-like characteristics and invasive properties of the murine VM-M2 and VM-M3 brain tumours are more similar to human GBM than to most previously described experimental mouse brain tumour models (Shelton et al., 2010b). If fusion hybridization of neoplastic cells with macrophages/microglia could be the origin of invasive cells within human GBM, why are these cell types rarely found in rodent brain tumour transplant models? Most macrophage/microglia seen in chemically induced brain tumours are derived from resident microglia and TAM (Ecsedy et al., 1998). We suggest that the mouse or the rat brain would respond to a tumour implant as if it were an acute infection. This would involve invasion of TAM and activation of local microglia. This is not what usually occurs in the development of a human GBM, where neoplastic transformation is a protracted process. For example, GBM can arise many years after head wound trauma (Gruss et al., 1993; Sabel et al., 1999). It is therefore possible that conditions for macrophage/microglia fusogenicity are greater in the microenvironment of human brain than in the microenvironment of the rodent brain during malignant transformation.

GLIOMA CELL EXPRESSION OF MYELOID ANTIGENS

Macrophages and microglia express unique antigens that can help identify these cells in various tissues (Roggendorf et al., 1996; Guillemin and Brew, 2004). A list of some of these antigens is shown in Table 1. Numerous studies have reported high numbers of cells in GBM that express antigens seen only in macrophages/microglia (Rossi et al., 1987; Roggendorf et al., 1996; Leung et al., 1997; Badie and Schartner, 2000; Graeber et al., 2002). As mentioned above, most cells within GBM that express macrophage antigens are generally considered host-infiltrating TAM, and are not considered part of the neoplastic tumour cell population (Roggendorf et al., 1996; Seyfried, 2001). However, several reports show that macrophage/microglial antigens are expressed on neoplastic cells within GBM (Figure 3) (Rossi et al., 1987; Leenstra et al., 1995; Graeber et al., 2002; Deininger et al., 2003; Strojnik et al., 2006). These findings in GBM are consistent with findings reported for other human cancer types including breast, lung, skin, ovarian, pancreatic, rectal and renal (Rossi et al., 1987; Leenstra et al., 1995; Deininger et al., 2003; Matyja et al., 2003; Strojnik et al., 2006, 2009; Colman et al., 2010) and reviewed in Huysentruyt and Seyfried (2010). The expression of macrophage antigens in neoplastic cell subpopulations within GBM would support our hypothesis that malignant microglia are a component of human GBM.

Deininger et al. (2003) utilized double labelling experiments to demonstrate that neoplastic cells located in regions of infiltrative glioma growth were positive for both GFAP and the macrophage marker CD14. It is currently thought that TAM, localized at the leading edge of the tumour, facilitate local tumour cell invasion (Lewis and Pollard, 2006). However, the invading cells were CD14+/GFAP+ suggesting that these cells were part of the invading tumour cell population and not TAM. It is possible that these cells arise through fusion of tumour cells with macrophages/microglia, thus representing a neoplastic hybrid-cell population. In contrast to the Deininger et al.'s study (Deininger et al., 2003), most studies of macrophages in brain tumours have not used double labelling to distinguish neoplastic cells from non-neoplastic cells (Rossi et al., 1987; Shinonaga et al., 1988; Morimura et al., 1990; van Landeghem et al., 2009). Consequently, it is often difficult to determine with certainty the origin of all cell types that express macrophage/microglia antigens in GBM. However, the human glioblastoma cell line U138 expressed the macrophage marker Ki-M1P (CD68) in an in vitro environment where there were no contaminating TAMs (Figure 3A) (Paulus et al., 1992). This finding is similar to what we showed for the murine VM-M2 and VM-M3 cell lines (Huysentruyt et al., 2008). A few investigators have entertained the possibility that some macrophage/microglial-type cells in GBM might be part of the neoplastic cell population. Several previous studies show, however, that subpopulations of neoplastic macrophage-like cells are present in most human cancers (reviewed in Huysentruyt and Seyfried, 2010). It would therefore be important to consider the possibility that some GBM cell subpopulations, previously identified as TAM, are in fact neoplastic cells.

Figure 3

(A) Expression of the macrophage marker CD68 (Ki-M1P) in the human GBM cell line U138 (x 475). (B) CD68 expression in most tumour cells of a human GBM (x 400). (C) Expression of the macrophage/microglia marker Iba1 in tumour cells of the VM-M2 tumour, a mouse model of human GBM (x 630). (A) From Paulus et al. (1992), with kind permission from Springer Science+Business Media: Acta Neuropathologica, Ki-MIP as a marker for microglia and brain macrophages in routinely processed human tissues, 84, 1992, 538–544, W Paulus, W Roggendorf and T Kirchner, © Springer-Verlag, 1992. (B) From Strojniket al. (2009), reproduced with permission from International Institute of Cancer Research. (C) From Huysentruyt et al. (2008), reproduced with permission from Wiley, © 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Like GBM, PXA (pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma) contains cells of multiple morphologies (Matyja et al., 2003). As in GBM, MNGC are also a characteristic cell type in PXA (Matyja et al., 2003). In an attempt to further characterize this cell subtype, Matyja et al. (2003) evaluated the co-expression of glial and macrophage markers in the various tumour cell populations in eight cases of PXA. The authors identified a population of neoplastic cells that expressed GFAP and either HLA-class II or CD68 within the cytoplasm (Matyja et al., 2003). Many of these neoplastic cells were large and lipid-laden suggesting a mesenchymal origin. According to our hypothesis, neoplastic microglia/macrophages could give rise to PXA following fusion hybridizations.

Expression of macrophage markers has been reported in high-grade gliomas including GBM (Rossi et al., 1987; Leenstra et al., 1995; Strojnik et al., 2006). Leenstra et al. (1995) examined macrophage characteristics in six malignant glioma cell lines. All the cell lines examined were classified as malignant gliomas based upon DNA flow cytometry and GFAP expression. Interestingly, all six glioma lines co-expressed macrophage markers and GFAP. In contrast, macrophage antigens were not found in cultured astrocytes isolated from healthy brain tissue, suggesting that the macrophage markers expressed by malignant astrocytes were not artefacts of an in vitro culture environment (Leenstra et al., 1995). In a separate study, immunohistochemical analysis revealed that 40% of grade III astrocytomas and GBM tumour specimens contained neoplastic cells with macrophage markers (Rossi et al., 1987). The U87 GBM model has also been shown to express both CD68 (Figure 3B) and glia markers when grown either in vitro or in vivo (Strojnik et al., 2006). Strojnik et al. (2009) evaluated the prognostic significance of CD68 expression in malignant human gliomas. It was clear form their study that the presence of high levels of CD68-positive tumour cells was predictive of reduced survival. CD68 was expressed by both microglia and tumour cells (Strojnik et al., 2009). The macrophage/microglia marker, Iba1, is also expressed by the VM-M2 mouse GBM tumour cells (Figure 3C) (Huysentruyt et al., 2008). Taken together, these findings support our hypothesis and indicate that some neoplastic GBM cells could be of macrophage/microglial origin.

NUMEROUS HUMAN CANCERS EXPRESS MACROPHAGE PROPERTIES

Evidence presented above suggests that subpopulations of the invasive GBM tumour cells include neoplastic cells with multiple characteristics of macrophages/microglia. Recent studies show that macrophage properties and antigens are expressed in the neoplastic cells of numerous human metastatic cancers including bladder, brain, breast, carcinoma of unknown primary, endometrial, fibrosarcoma, gall bladder, liver, lung, lymphoma, melanoma, multiple myeloma, ovarian, pancreatic, rectal, rhabdomyosarcoma and renal cancers (reviewed in Huysentruyt and Seyfried, 2010). Commonly, these macrophage characteristics are observed in the invasive and metastatic cell populations, further highlighting the possibility that the highly-invasive tumour cells may be of mesenchymal origin. Indeed, these observations led to our recent prediction that the metastatic cells in most human cancers are of myeloid origin (Huysentruyt and Seyfried, 2010). As microglia are mesenchymal cells of myeloid origin, we suggest that neoplastic microglia can represent an invasive cell population in GBM. This shared property among numerous invasive/metastatic tumours could have broad therapeutic implications. For example, any therapy that is able to reduce invasion and metastasis of one tumour type would likely be effective in treating tumours with macrophage characteristics.

POSSIBLE MECHANISMS

How could resident microglia or TAM become part of the neoplastic cell population in GBM? We recently reviewed evidence indicating that all cancer, regardless of tissue or cellular origin, is primarily a disease of impaired cellular energy metabolism (Seyfried and Shelton, 2010). Otto Warburg first proposed that all types of cancers arise from irreversible damage to cellular respiration (Warburg, 1931, 1956). Persistent injury to oxidative phosphorylation will require compensatory non-oxidative energy metabolism to maintain viability (Seyfried and Shelton, 2010; Seyfried et al., 2010; Shelton et al., 2010a). The mitochondrial stress response or RTG (retrograde) signalling from the mitochondria to the nucleus is required to up-regulate the oncogenes needed to sustain glycolysis and non-oxidative mitochondrial energy production (Seyfried and Shelton, 2010; Seyfried et al., 2010). However, persistent RTG activation leads to eventual nuclear genomic instability and other recognized hallmarks of cancer (Butow and Avadhani, 2004; Singh et al., 2005; Seyfried and Shelton, 2010). Mitochondria energy production is often damaged as a consequence of mutagens, hypoxia, inflammation, ROS or inherited mutations (Kiebish et al., 2008). We recently showed that mitochondria isolated from murine gliomas contain numerous lipid defects supporting previous findings that respiratory energy production is dysfunctional in tumour mitochondria (Kiebish et al., 2008, 2009; Ordys et al., 2010; Seyfried and Shelton, 2010). Macrophages/microglia home to mitochondria-damaging environments in response to inflammation, infection, wound repair and tumorigenesis (Giulian et al., 1989; Chettibi, 1999; Bingle et al., 2002; Graeber et al., 2002; Lewis and Murdoch, 2005; Martin and Leibovich, 2005; Lewis and Pollard, 2006). Inflammation and hypoxia in the tumour's microenvironment can damage macrophage mitrochondria (Frost et al., 2005; Navarro and Boveris, 2005). It is therefore possible that mitochondria could become dysfunctional when macrophages/microglia respond to various chronic tissue injuries, resulting in a persistent RTG response with eventual malignant transformation (Seyfried and Shelton, 2010). Hence, we suggest that some invasive GBM cells could arise from resident tissue microglia or TAM that have suffered mitochondrial damage during tumour initiation or progression.

Focal hypoxia combined with persistent inflammation and stem cell proliferation could produce macrophage-microglia or macrophage–stem cell fusions. Respiratory damage could either proceed or follow fusion events thus initiating the path to frank neoplasia. Additionally, damaged mitochondria could also be passed from one cell to another via cytoplasmic inheritance during cellular–fusion events (Seyfried and Shelton, 2010). Although normal mitochondria are known to suppress tumorigenesis in fusion hybrids (Seyfried and Shelton, 2010), persistent inflammation in the tumour microenvironment could contribute to continued mitochondrial damage in the fused hybrids. This would enhance the Warburg effect, unbridled proliferation and genomic instability. As microglia naturally embody the ability to migrate throughout the brain (Graeber and Streit, 1990; Amat et al., 1996), we suggest that transformed cells of macrophage/microglia origin would possess invasive potential.

Currently, the cause of macrophage and tumour cell hybridization is unknown. Various stages of the macrophage response to tumour development could increase the probability for cell-fusion events. The host immune system treats tumours as unhealed wounds (Dvorak, 1986; Seyfried, 2001; Bissell and Hines, 2011). Macrophages home to hypoxic tumour areas in the process of wound healing. The failure of macrophages to completely digest apoptotic cells could result in macrophage x tumour hybrid cells (Pawelek, 2000). It is therefore possible that macrophages fuse with tumour cells in an attempt to ‘heal’ the tumour, as macrophages are known to fuse with non-myeloid cells during tissue repair. Radiation is commonly used as a primary therapy for most brain tumours. However, radiation therapy enhances the incidence of fusion hybrid formation and could result in a more aggressive and invasive tumours (Shabo et al., 2009; Seyfried et al., 2011). This could account in part for the exacerbating effects of radiation therapy on GBM progression (Seyfried et al., 2010).

The macrophage fusion hybrid hypothesis could potentially explain many of the distinguishing characteristics seen in invasive and metastatic GBM tumour cells. These macrophage-reprogramming strategies may account for some of the cellular heterogeneity seen in human GBM since macrophage x CNS cell hybrids would likely retain the histology of the CNS fusion partner. Tumour hybrids could also account for the cancer cell aneuploidy and chromosomal abnormalities often seen in tumour cells (Steinhaus, 1981; Pawelek, 2000). Further studies will be needed to determine the extent to which fusion hybridization might contribute to the invasive properties seen in GBM.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

GBM is a highly complex and lethal tumour. Unfortunately, the current therapies available to GBM patients are largely ineffective and often have a negative impact on the patient's quality of life. In this commentary, we aim to highlight the possibility that the most aggressive and invasive cells in human GBMs are neoplastic macrophages/microglia. While further experimentation is needed to confirm the gene expression and immunohistochemical data reviewed here, we believe that novel therapeutic approaches could be developed targeting the macrophage characteristics of invasive GBM cells. It would be of particular interest to determine if the CD68+ cell population of human GBM has neoplastic properties.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We thank Dr Annette Persson for providing Figure 1(b) and for invaluable discussions. We also thank Dr Werner Paulus for providing the high-resolution image for .

Funding

This work was supported, in part, by the National Institutes of Health [grant numbers HD-39722, NS- 55195 and CA-102135], a grant from the American Institute of Cancer Research and the Boston College Expense Fund.

Abbreviations

References

Ackman

Siddiqi

Walikonis

LoTurco

(2006) Fusion of microglia with pyramidal neurons after retroviral infection. J Neurosci 26:11413–11422.

Alvarez-Dolado

Pardal

Garcia-Verdugo

Fike

Lee

Pfeffer

Lois

Morrison

Alvarez-Buylla

(2003) Fusion of bone-marrow-derived cells with Purkinje neurons, cardiomyocytes and hepatocytes. Nature 425:968–973.

Amat

Ishiguro

Nakamura

Norton

(1996) Phenotypic diversity and kinetics of proliferating microglia and astrocytes following cortical stab wounds. Glia 16:368–382.

Badie

Schartner

(2000). Flow cytometric characterization of tumor-associated macrophages in experimental gliomas. Neurosurgery 46: 957–961.

Banaei-Bouchareb

Peuchmaur

Czernichow

Polak

(2006) A transient microenvironment loaded mainly with macrophages in the early developing human pancreas. J Endocrinol 188:467–480.

Bingle

Brown

Lewis

(2002) The role of tumour-associated macrophages in tumour progression: Implications for new anticancer therapies. J Pathol 196:254–265.

Bissell

Hines

(2011) Why don't we get more cancer? A proposed role of the microenvironment in restraining cancer progression. Nat Med 17:320–329.

Biswas

Sica

Lewis

(2008) Plasticity of macrophage function during tumor progression: Regulation by distinct molecular mechanisms. J Immunol 180:2011–2017.

Bjerknes

Bjerkvig

Laerum

(1987) Phagocytic capacity of normal and malignant rat glial cells in culture. J Natl Cancer Inst 78:279–288.

10.

Bottazzi

Polentarutti

Acero

Balsari

Boraschi

Ghezzi

Salmona

Mantovani

(1983) Regulation of the macrophage content of neoplasms by chemoattractants. Science 220:210–212.

11.

Burke

Lewis

(2002) The Macrophage. Oxford University Press, New York.

12.

Butow

Avadhani

(2004) Mitochondrial signaling: The retrograde response. Mol Cell 14:1–15.

13.

Camargo

Chambers

Goodell

(2004a) Stem cell plasticity: From transdifferentiation to macrophage fusion. Cell Prolif 37:55–65.

14.

Camargo

Finegold

Goodell

(2004b) Hematopoietic myelomonocytic cells are the major source of hepatocyte fusion partners. J Clin Invest 113:1266–1270.

15.

Chakraborty

Lazova

Davies

Backvall

Ponten

Brash

Pawelek

(2004) Donor DNA in a renal cell carcinoma metastasis from a bone marrow transplant recipient. Bone Marrow Transplant 34:183–186.

16.

Chakraborty

de Freitas Sousa

Espreafico

Pawelek

(2001) Human monocyte x mouse melanoma fusion hybrids express human gene. Gene 275:103–106.

17.

Chakraborty

Sodi

Rachkovsky

Kolesnikova

Platt

Bolognia

Pawelek

(2000) A spontaneous murine melanoma lung metastasis comprised of host x tumor hybrids. Cancer Res 60:2512–2519.

18.

Chang

Barbaro

Pieper

(2000) Phosphatidylserine-dependent phagocytosis of apoptotic glioma cells by normal human microglia, astrocytes, glioma cells. Neuro Oncol 2:174–183.

19.

Chettibi

Ferguson

MWJ

(1999) Wound repair: An overview. In Inflammation: Basic Principals and Clinical Correlates ( Snyderman

, ed.), pp. 865–881. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, New York.

20.

Colman

Zhang

Sulman

McDonald

Shooshtari

Rivera

Popoff

Nutt

Louis

Cairncross

Gilbert

Phillips

Mehta

Chakravarti

Pelloski

Bhat

Feuerstein

Jenkins

Aldape

. (2010) A multigene predictor of outcome in glioblastoma. Neuro Oncol 12:49–57.

21.

Coopman

Thompson

Mueller

(1998) Phagocytosis of crosslinked gelatin matrix by human breast carcinoma cells correlates with their invasive capacity. Clin Cancer Res 4:507–515.

22.

Deininger

Meyermann

Schluesener

(2003) Expression and release of CD14 in astrocytic brain tumors. Acta Neuropathol (Berl) 106:271–277.

23.

Deininger

Seid

Engel

Meyermann

Schluesener

(2000) Allograft inflammatory factor-1 defines a distinct subset of infiltrating macrophages/microglial cells in rat and human gliomas. Acta Neuropathol (Berl) 100:673–680.

24.

Duelli

Lazebnik

(2003) Cell fusion: A hidden enemy? Cancer Cell 3:445–448.

25.

Duffy

(1983) Astrocytes: Normal, Reactive, and Neoplastic. 224 pp, Raven Press, New York.

26.

Dvorak

(1986). Tumors: Wounds that do not heal. Similarities between tumor stroma generation and wound healing. N Engl J Med 315:1650–1659.

27.

Ecsedy

Yohe

Bergeron

Seyfried

(1998) Tumor-infiltrating macrophages contribute to the glycosphinglipid composition of brain tumors. J Lipid Res 39:2218–2227.

28.

Fais

(2007) Cannibalism: A way to feed on metastatic tumors. Cancer Lett 258:155–164.

29.

Fan

Salford

Widegren

(2007) Glioma stem cells: Evidence and limitation. Semin Cancer Biol 17:214–218.

30.

Frank

Kuhn

Brodhun

Mueller

Romeike

Kosmehl

Regenbrecht

Ewald

Reichart

Kalff

(2009) Metastatic glioblastoma cells use common pathways via blood and lymphatic vessels. Neurol Neurochir Pol 43:183–190.

31.

Fraser

(1971) Astrocytomas in an inbred mouse strain. J Pathol 103:266–270.

32.

Fraser

(1986) Brain tumours in mice, with particular reference to astrocytoma. Food Chem Toxicol 24:105–111.

33.

Frost

Wang

Moncada

Singer

(2005) Hypoxia accelerates nitric oxide-dependent inhibition of mitochondrial complex I in activated macrophages. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 288:R394–R400.

34.

Gabrilovich

Nagaraj

(2009) Myeloid-derived suppressor cells as regulators of the immune system. Nat Rev Immunol 9:162–174.

35.

Ghoneum

Gollapudi

(2004) Phagocytosis of Candida albicans by metastatic and non metastatic human breast cancer cell lines in vitro . Cancer Detect Prev 28:17–26.

36.

Ghoneum

Hamilton

Brown

Gollapudi

(2005) Human squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue and colon undergoes apoptosis upon phagocytosis of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the baker's yeast, in vitro . Anticancer Res 25:981–989.

37.

Ghoneum

Matsuura

Braga

Gollapudi

(2008) S. cerevisiae induces apoptosis in human metastatic breast cancer cells by altering intracellular Ca²⁺ and the ratio of Bax and Bcl-2. Int J Oncol 33:533–539.

38.

Ghoneum

Wang

Agrawal

Gollapudi

(2007) Yeast therapy for the treatment of breast cancer: A nude mice model study. In Vivo 21:251–258.

39.

Giulian

Chen

Ingeman

George

Noponen

(1989) The role of mononuclear phagocytes in wound healing after traumatic injury to adult mammalian brain. J Neurosci 9:4416–4429.

40.

Gordon

(1999) Development and distribution of mononuclear phagocytes: Revelance to inflammation. In Inflammation: Basic Principles and Clinical Correlates ( Gallin

and Snyderman

, eds), pp. 35–48. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, New York.

41.

Gordon

(2003) Alternative activation of macrophages. Nat Rev Immunol 3:23–35.

42.

Gotway

Conomos

Bremner

(2011) Pleural metastatic disease from glioblastoma multiforme. J Thorac Imaging 26:W54–W58.

43.

Graeber

Scheithauer

Kreutzberg

(2002) Microglia in brain tumors. Glia 40:252–259.

44.

Graeber

Streit

(1990) Microglia: Immune network in the CNS. Brain Pathol 1:2–5.

45.

Gruss

Spohr

Leiber

Tasler

Menzl

Hofstadter

(1993) The traumatic origin of a glioblastoma. Zentralbl Neurochir 54:186–189.

46.

Guillemin

Brew

(2004) Microglia, macrophages, perivascular macrophages, and pericytes: A review of function and identification. J Leukoc Biol 75:388–397.

47.

Han

Yang

Otero

Ahn

Tihan

McDermott

Berger

Chang

Parsa

(2010) Secondary gliosarcoma after diagnosis of glioblastoma: Clinical experience with 30 consecutive patients. J Neurosurg 112:990–996.

48.

Handerson

Camp

Harigopal

Rimm

Pawelek

(2005) Beta1, 6-branched oligosaccharides are increased in lymph node metastases and predict poor outcome in breast carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 11:2969–2973.

49.

Hoffman

Duffner

(1985) Extraneural metastases of central nervous system tumors. Cancer 56:1778–1782.

50.

Homma

Fukushima

Vaccarella

Yonekawa

Di Patre

Franceschi

Ohgaki

(2006) Correlation among pathology, genotype, and patient outcomes in glioblastoma. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 65:846–854.

51.

Huysentruyt

Mukherjee

Banerjee

Shelton

Seyfried

(2008) Metastatic cancer cells with macrophage properties: Evidence from a new murine tumor model. Int J Cancer 123:73–84.

52.

Huysentruyt

Seyfried

(2010) Perspectives on the mesenchymal origin of metastatic cancer. Cancer Metastasis Rev 29:695–707.

53.

Huysentruyt

Shelton

Seyfried

(2010) Influence of methotrexate and cisplatin on tumor progression and survival in the VM mouse model of systemic metastatic cancer. Int J Cancer 126:65–72.

54.

Kargiotis

Geka

Rao

Kyritsis

(2010) Effects of irradiation on tumor cell survival, invasion and angiogenesis. J Neurooncol 100:323–338.

55.

Kiebish

Han

Cheng

Chuang

Seyfried

(2008) Cardiolipin and electron transport chain abnormalities in mouse brain tumor mitochondria: Lipidomic evidence supporting the Warburg theory of cancer. J Lipid Res 49:2545–2556.

56.

Kiebish

Han

Cheng

Seyfried

(2009) In vitro growth environment produces lipidomic and electron transport chain abnormalities in mitochondria from non-tumorigenic astrocytes and brain tumours. ASN NEURO 1:e00011.

57.

Krex

Klink

Hartmann

von Deimling

Pietsch

Simon

Sabel

Steinbach

Heese

Reifenberger

Weller

, and Schackert

(2007) Long-term survival with glioblastoma multiforme. Brain 130:2596–2606.

58.

Lakka

Rao

(2008) Antiangiogenic therapy in brain tumors. Expert Rev Neurother 8:1457–1473.

59.

Laws

Jr Goldberg

Bernstein

(1993) Migration of human malignant astrocytoma cells in the mammalian brain: Scherer revisited. Int J Dev Neurosci 11:691–697.

60.

Leek

Lewis

Whitehouse

Greenall

Clarke

Harris

(1996) Association of macrophage infiltration with angiogenesis and prognosis in invasive breast carcinoma. Cancer Res 56:4625–4629.

61.

Leenstra

Das

Troost

de Boer

Bosch

(1995) Human malignant astrocytes express macrophage phenotype. J. Neuroimmunol 56:17–25.

62.

Leung

Wong

Chung

Chan

Yuen

(1997) Monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 expression and macrophage infiltration in gliomas. Acta Neuropathol (Berl) 93:518–527.

63.

Lewis

Murdoch

(2005) Macrophage responses to hypoxia: Implications for tumor progression and anti-cancer therapies. Am J Pathol 167:627–635.

64.

Lewis

Pollard

(2006) Distinct role of macrophages in different tumor microenvironments. Cancer Res 66:605–612.

65.

Mallat

Marin-Teva

Cheret

(2005) Phagocytosis in the developing CNS: More than clearing the corpses. Curr Opin Neurobiol 15:101–107.

66.

Mantovani

Sica

(2010) Macrophages, innate immunity and cancer: Balance, tolerance, and diversity. Curr Opin Immunol 22:231–237.

67.

Mantovani

Sozzani

Locati

Allavena

Sica

(2002) Macrophage polarization: Tumor-associated macrophages as a paradigm for polarized M2 mononuclear phagocytes. Trends Immunol 23:549–555.

68.

Martin

Leibovich

(2005) Inflammatory cells during wound repair: The good, the bad and the ugly. Trends Cell Biol 15:599–607.

69.

Matyja

Kroh

Taraszewska

Naganska

Zabek

Marchel

(2003) Expression of macrophage/histiocytic antigens in pleomorphic xanthoastrocytomas. Folia Neuropathol 41:89–95.

70.

Morantz

Wood

Foster

Clark

Gollahon

(1979) Macrophages in experimental and human brain tumors. Part 2: Studies of the macrophage content of human brain tumors. J Neurosurg 50:305–311.

71.

Morimura

Neuchrist

Kitz

Budka

Scheiner

Kraft

Lassmann

(1990) Monocyte subpopulations in human gliomas: Expression of Fc and complement receptors and correlation with tumor proliferation. Acta Neuropathol (Berl) 80:287–294.

72.

Munzarova

Kovarik

(1987) Is cancer a macrophage-mediated autoaggressive disease? Lancet 1:952–954.

73.

Murdoch

Giannoudis

Lewis

(2004) Mechanisms regulating the recruitment of macrophages into hypoxic areas of tumors and other ischemic tissues. Blood 104:2224–2234.

74.

Navarro

Boveris

(2005) Hypoxia exacerbates macrophage mitochondrial damage in endotoxic shock. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 288:R354–R355.

75.

Yeo

Kaye

(2005) Spinal and extracranial metastatic dissemination of malignant glioma. J Clin Neurosci 12:379–382.

76.

Nitta

Okumura

Sato

(1992) Lysosomal enzymic activity of astroglial cells. Pathobiology 60:42–44.

77.

Ohgaki

Kleihues

(2005) Epidemiology and etiology of gliomas. Acta Neuropathol (Berl) 109:93–108.

78.

Ohgaki

Kleihues

(2009) Genetic alterations and signaling pathways in the evolution of gliomas. Cancer Sci 100:2235–2241.

79.

Ojalvo

King

Cox

Pollard

(2009) High-density gene expression analysis of tumor-associated macrophages from mouse mammary tumors. Am J Pathol 174:1048–1064.

80.

Ojalvo

Whittaker

Condeelis

Pollard

(2010) Gene expression analysis of macrophages that facilitate tumor invasion supports a role for Wnt-signaling in mediating their activity in primary mammary tumors. J Immunol 184:702–712.

81.

Ordys

Launay

Deighton

McCulloch

Whittle

(2010) The role of mitochondria in glioma pathophysiology. Mol Neurobiol 42:64–75.

82.

Ostrand-Rosenberg

(2010) Myeloid-derived suppressor cells: More mechanisms for inhibiting antitumor immunity. Cancer Immunol Immunother 59:1593–1600.

83.

Paulus

Roggendorf

Kirchner

(1992) Ki-M1P as a marker for microglia and brain macrophages in routinely processed human tissues. Acta Neuropathol (Berl) 84:538–544.

84.

Pawelek

(2000) Tumour cell hybridization and metastasis revisited. Melanoma Res 10:507–514.

85.

Pawelek

(2005) Tumour-cell fusion as a source of myeloid traits in cancer. Lancet Oncol 6:988–993.

86.

Pawelek

Chakraborty

(2008) Fusion of tumour cells with bone marrow-derived cells: A unifying explanation for metastasis. Nat Rev Cancer 8:377–386.

87.

Persson

Englund

(2009) The glioma cell edge-winning by engulfing the enemy? Med Hypotheses 73:336–337.

88.

Persson

Englund

(2008) The glioma cell lead winning by eating? In 9th European Congress of Neuropathology Clinical Neuropathology, Athens, Greece, p. 194.

89.

Pollard

(2008) Macrophages define the invasive microenvironment in breast cancer. J Leukoc Biol 84:623–630.

90.

Powell

Anderson

Davies

Silk

Pelz

Impey

Wong

(2011) Fusion between intestinal epithelial cells and macrophages in a cancer context results in nuclear reprogramming. Cancer Res 71:1497–1505.

91.

Preusser

de Ribaupierre

Wohrer

Erridge

Hegi

Weller

Stupp

(2011) Current concepts and management of glioblastoma. Ann Neurol 70:9–21.

92.

Qian

Pollard

(2010) Macrophage diversity enhances tumor progression and metastasis. Cell 141:39–51.

93.

Rachkovsky

Pawelek

(1999) Acquired melanocyte stimulating hormone-inducible chemotaxis following macrophage fusion with Cloudman S91 melanoma cells. Cell Growth Differ 10:517–524.

94.

Rachkovsky

Sodi

Chakraborty

Avissar

Bolognia

McNiff

Platt

Bermudes

Pawelek

(1998) Melanoma x macrophage hybrids with enhanced metastatic potential. Clin Exp Metastasis 16:299–312.

95.

Raychaudhuri

Rayman

Ireland

Rini

Borden

Garcia

Vogelbaum

Finke

(2011) Myeloid-derived suppressor cell accumulation and function in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Neuro Oncol 13:591–599.

96.

Ricci-Vitiani

Pallini

Biffoni

Todaro

Invernici

Cenci

Maira

Parati

Stassi

Larocca

De Maria

(2010) Tumour vascularization via endothelial differentiation of glioblastoma stem-like cells. Nature 468:824–828.

97.

Roggendorf

Strupp

Paulus

(1996) Distribution and characterization of microglia/macrophages in human brain tumors. Acta Neuropathol (Berl) 92:288–293.

98.

Rossi

Hughes

Esiri

Coakham

Brownell

(1987) Immunohistological study of mononuclear cell infiltrate in malignant gliomas. Acta Neuropathol (Berl) 74:269–277.

99.

Rubinstein

(1972) Tumors of the central nervous system. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Washington DC 400 pp.

100.

Sabel

Felsberg

Messing-Junger

Neuen-Jacob

Piek

(1999) Glioblastoma multiforme at the site of metal splinter injury: A coincidence? Case report. J Neurosurg 91:1041–1044.

101.

Scherer

(1940) The forms of growth in gliomas and their practical significance. Brain 63:1–34.

102.

Seyfried

(2001) Perspectives on brain tumor formation involving macrophages, glia, and neural stem cells. Perspect Biol Med 44:263–282.

103.

Seyfried

Kiebish

Marsh

Shelton

Huysentruyt

Mukherjee

(2011) Metabolic management of brain cancer. Biochim Biophys Acta 1807:577–594.

104.

Seyfried

Shelton

(2010) Cancer as a metabolic disease. Nutr Metab (Lond) 7:7.

105.

Seyfried

Shelton

Mukherjee

(2010) Does the existing standard of care increase glioblastoma energy metabolism? Lancet Oncol 11:811–813.

106.

Shabo

Olsson

Sun

Svanvik

(2009) Expression of the macrophage antigen CD163 in rectal cancer cells is associated with early local recurrence and reduced survival time. Int J Cancer 125:1826–1831.

107.

Shelton

Huysentruyt

Mukherjee

Seyfried

(2010a) Calorie restriction as an anti-invasive therapy for malignant brain cancer in the VM mouse. ASN NEURO 2:e00038.

108.

Shelton

Mukherjee

Huysentruyt

Urits

Rosenberg

Seyfried

(2010b) A novel pre-clinical in vivo mouse model for malignant brain tumor growth and invasion. J Neurooncol 99:165–176.

109.

Shinonaga

Chang

Suzuki

Sato

Kuwabara

(1988) Immunohistological evaluation of macrophage infiltrates in brain tumors. Correlation with peritumoral edema. J Neurosurg 68:259–265.

110.

Sica

Saccani

Mantovani

(2002) Tumor-associated macrophages: A molecular perspective. Int Immunopharmacol 2:1045–1054.

111.

Sica

Schioppa

Mantovani

Allavena

(2006) Tumour-associated macrophages are a distinct M2 polarised population promoting tumour progression: Potential targets of anti-cancer therapy. Eur J Cancer 42:717–727.

112.

Singh

Kulawiec

Still

Desouki

Geradts

Matsui

(2005) Intergenomic cross talk between mitochondria and the nucleus plays an important role in tumorigenesis. Gene 354:140–146.

113.

Steinhaus

(1981) Ueber carcinom-einschlusse. Virchows Arch 126:533–535.

114.

Stossel

(1999) Mechanical responses of white blood cells. In Inflammation: Basic Principals and Clinical Correlates ( Snyderman

, ed.), pp. 661–679. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, New York.

115.

Strojnik

Kavalar

Lah

(2006) Experimental model and immunohistochemical analyses of U87 human glioblastoma cell xenografts in immunosuppressed rat brains. Anticancer Res 26:2887–2900.

116.

Strojnik

Kavalar

Zajc

Diamandis

Oikonomopoulou

Lah

(2009) Prognostic impact of CD68 and kallikrein 6 in human glioma. Anticancer Res 29:3269–3279.

117.

Stupp

Hegi

Mason

van den Bent

Taphoorn

Janzer

Ludwin

Allgeier

Fisher

Belanger

Hau

Brandes

Gijtenbeek

Marosi

Vecht

Mokhtari

Wesseling

Villa

Eisenhauer

Gorlia

Weller

Lacombe

Cairncross

Mirimanoff

(2009) Effects of radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide versus radiotherapy alone on survival in glioblastoma in a randomised phase III study: 5-year analysis of the EORTC-NCIC trial. Lancet Oncol 10:459–466.

118.

Taha

Ahmad

Wharton

Jellinek

(2005) Extra-cranial metastasis of glioblastoma multiforme presenting as acute parotitis. Br J Neurosurg 19:348–351.

119.

Takeuchi

Kubota

Kitai

Nakagawa

Hashimoto

(2008) CD98 immunoreactivity in multinucleated giant cells of glioblastomas: An immunohistochemical double labeling study. Neuropathology 28:127–131.

120.

Talmadge

Donkor

Scholar

(2007) Inflammatory cell infiltration of tumors: Jekyll or Hyde. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 3–4:373–400.

121.

Tso

Shintaku

Chen

Liu

Chen

Yoshimoto

Mischel

Cloughesy

Liau

Nelson

(2006) Primary glioblastomas express mesenchymal stem-like properties. Mol Cancer Res 4:607–619.

122.

van Landeghem

Maier-Hauff

Jordan

Hoffmann

Gneveckow

Scholz

Thiesen

Bruck

von Deimling

(2009) Post-mortem studies in glioblastoma patients treated with thermotherapy using magnetic nanoparticles. Biomaterials 30:52–57.

123.

Vignery

(2000) Osteoclasts and giant cells: Macrophage-macrophage fusion mechanism. Int J Exp Pathol 81:291–304.

124.

Vignery

(2005) Macrophage fusion: Are somatic and cancer cells possible partners? Trends Cell Biol 15:188–193.

125.

Vural

Hagmar

Walaas

(1996) Extracranial metastasis of glioblastoma multiforme diagnosed by fine-needle aspiration: A report of two cases and a review of the literature. Diagn Cytopathol 15:60–65.

126.

Warburg

(1931) The Metabolism of Tumours, p. 327, Richard R. Smith, New York.

127.

Warburg

(1956) On the origin of cancer cells. Science 123:309–314.

128.

Watters

Schartner

Badie

(2005) Microglia function in brain tumors. J Neurosci Res 81:447–455.

129.

Waziri

(2010) Glioblastoma-derived mechanisms of systemic immunosuppression. Neurosurg Clin N Am 21:31–42.

130.

Wood

Morantz

(1979) Immunohistologic evaluation of the lymphoreticular infiltrate of human central nervous system tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst 62:485–491.

131.

Yang

DeBusk

Fukuda

Fingleton

Green-Jarvis

Shyr

Matrisian

Carbone

Lin (2004) Expansion of myeloid immune suppressor Gr+CD11b+ cells in tumor-bearing host directly promotes tumor angiogenesis. Cancer Cell 6:409–421.

132.

Yates

(1992) An overview of principles for classifying brain tumors. Mol-Chem-Neuropathol 17:103–120.

133.

Yilmaz

Lazova

Qumsiyeh

Cooper

Pawelek

(2005) Donor Y chromosome in renal carcinoma cells of a female BMT recipient: Visualization of putative BMT-tumor hybrids by FISH. Bone Marrow Transplant 35:1021–1024.

134.

Youness

Barlogie

Ahearn

Trujillo

(1980) Tumor cell phagocytosis. Its occurrence in a patient with medulloblastoma. Arch Pathol Lab Med 104:651–653.

135.

Yuan

Curtin

Xiong

Liu

Waschsmann-Hogiu

Farkas

Black

(2004) Isolation of cancer stem cells from adult glioblastoma multiforme. Oncogene 23:9392–9400.

136.

Zagzag

Esencay

Mendez

Yee

Smirnova

Huang

Chiriboga

Lukyanov

Liu

Newcomb

(2008) Hypoxia- and vascular endothelial growth factor-induced stromal cell-derived factor-1alpha/CXCR4 expression in glioblastomas: One plausible explanation of Scherer's structures. Am J Pathol 173:545–560.

137.

Zhen

Yufeng

Zhenyu

Lei

(2010) Multiple extracranial metastases from secondary glioblastoma multiforme: A case report and review of the literature. J Neurooncol 97:451–457.

138.

Zimmer

Weissleder

Poss

Bogdanova

Wright

Jr Enochs

(1995) MR imaging of phagocytosis in experimental gliomas. Radiology 197:533–538.