title: Development of a swine model of secondary liver tumor from a genetically induced swine fibroblast cell line.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Metastatic disease is the most common liver tumor. Although alternative therapies have been developed for non-surgical candidates, those therapies lacked ideal testing prior to clinical application because of a paucity of large animal models. The purpose of the present study was to develop a model for secondary liver tumor in a large animal.
  
  
  METHODS
  Fibroblasts were isolated from swine ear lobules and then transfected with amphotrophic retroviruses encoding human or murine genetic material (hTERT, p53(DD), cyclinD-1, CDK4(R24C), Myc (T58A), Ras(G12V)). Transformed cell lines were finally inoculated subcutaneously (s.c.) into: 1) immunodeficient mice (nude), 2) immunocompetent mice (wild type), 3) immunosuppressed swine (under tacrolimus or corticosteroids), 4) immunocompetent swine, and 5) into the liver and portal circulation of swine under steroid-based immunosuppression.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In the murine model, tumor growth was evident in 100% of the nude mice (n=5), with a peak size of 20 mm (15.22+/-4.5 mm; mean+/-SD) at the time of sacrifice (3 weeks). Tumor growth was evident in 71% of the wild mice (n=21), with a peak size of 7.8 mm (4.19+/-1.1 mm) by the third week of growth. In the swine model, tumor growth was evident in 75% (3/4 ears; n=2) of swine under tacrolimus-based immunosuppression versus 50% of swine under steroids-based immunosuppression (n=2). Tumor growth was slow in two animals, while in one animal the tumor was larger with a peak growth of 42 mm at 3 weeks. The tumor pattern in the ear lobules was characterized by slow growth, with a peak size of 6-8 mm in the immunocompetent swine at 3 weeks. All tumors were shown to be malignant by histology. In contrast, inoculums of the transformed fibroblast cell line in swine livers showed no evidence of tumor growth at 3 weeks.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Development of a transformed swine fibroblast cell line was successful, resulting in an in vivo malignant tumor. Cell line inoculums had tumorigenic properties in nude mice, wild-type mice, and immunosuppressed swine, as judged by uncontrolled cell growth, invasion of surrounding tissue, neoangiogenesis, and invasion of normal vasculature, resulting in the formation of tumor nodules. Such properties were not observed in swine upon inoculation into the liver/portal circulation.
authors.affiliation: Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106, USA.
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Abbas
authors.forename: S J
authors.initials: SJ
authors.lastname: Adam
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Okadal
authors.forename: H
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Groar
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Anderson
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Sanabria
references.citation: J Clin Invest. 2004 Mar;113(5):664-7
references.pmid: 14991063
references.citation: Contemp Top Lab Anim Sci. 2001 Mar;40(2):37-9
references.pmid: 11300687
references.citation: Ann Intern Med. 1976 Mar;84(3):304-15
references.pmid: 769625
references.citation: Am J Transplant. 2008 Jan;8(1):15-20
references.pmid: 18093269
references.citation: Semin Oncol. 2005 Feb;32(1):85-94
references.pmid: 15726510
references.citation: J Clin Oncol. 2005 Oct 1;23(28):7125-34
references.pmid: 16192596
references.citation: Arch Surg. 1997 May;132(5):505-10; discussion 511
references.pmid: 9161393
references.citation: Cancer. 1996 Apr 1;77(7):1254-62
references.pmid: 8608500
references.citation: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000 Dec;175(6):1619-25
references.pmid: 11090390
references.citation: Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2006 Jun;26(6):747-9
references.pmid: 16793590
references.citation: Cell Transplant. 2003;12(6):593-8
references.pmid: 14579927
references.citation: Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens. 2007 Nov;16(6):535-41
references.pmid: 18089967
references.citation: Expert Rev Mol Med. 2000 Jun 21;2(4):1-23
references.pmid: 14585137
references.citation: Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2003 Nov;19(6):565-71
references.pmid: 15703606
references.citation: Ann Surg. 1999 Jul;230(1):1-8
references.pmid: 10400029
references.citation: J Clin Oncol. 1991 Jul;9(7):1105-12
references.pmid: 2045852
references.citation: Oncogene. 2007 Feb 15;26(7):1038-45
references.pmid: 16964292
references.citation: Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25(11):935-47
references.pmid: 17960952
references.citation: J Immunol. 2002 Aug 15;169(4):1837-43
references.pmid: 12165507
references.citation: J Clin Invest. 1974 Jan;53(1):240-6
references.pmid: 4808638
references.citation: Radiol Clin North Am. 1998 Mar;36(2):349-63
references.pmid: 9520987
references.citation: Semin Cancer Biol. 2002 Feb;12(1):25-31
references.pmid: 11926408
references.citation: J Am Coll Surg. 1999 Sep;189(3):291-9
references.pmid: 10472930
references.citation: Lancet Oncol. 2004 Sep;5(9):550-60
references.pmid: 15337485