Submited on: 13 Dec 2011 09:37:05 PM GMT
Published on: 14 Dec 2011 08:50:11 AM GMT
 
Cancer Stem Cells ?
Posted by Dr. Juan S Yakisich on 20 Dec 2011 07:03:58 AM GMT

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Partly
3 Is this a new and original contribution? No
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? No
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? Yes
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? Yes
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    This review of cancer stem cells seems to lack a clear focus. At the end of the introduction it seems that the aim is to understand some aspect of cancer treatment such as what cause relapse but the rest of the review is a collection of sections on cancer stems cells unrelated to this aim.

    Overall, the review is ambitious since it covers different sections that each one of them deserves a review. At the end, the review is relatively superficial and sometimes misleading.

    -           For instance, the first paragraph of “historical perspectives” mentions historical references but citations are not provided. In one case, the author probably makes reference to the Smith Papyrus without citing any reference. 

    -          The section “identification of cancer cells ” is an incomplete  list (with a brief text) of surface markers that are or were at some point used to isolate putative cancer stem cells. There is no mention of other methods such as the side population method and, more important no comment about other (additional ) criteria to define CSCs (tumorigenicity). This section is misleading since it gives the impression that surface markers are enough to isolate stem cells. Although some limitations are discussed, they are not done in an organized way. Instead of expanding this section to include details of what is lacking (that will make this manuscript unnecessary long), it will be better to add key comments and refer to updated reviews.

    -          A section about the type of cell division (asymmetrical or symmetrical) that may be relevant for maintenance of different cell subpopulation in tumors is not reviewed.

    -          No other discussion on other models of tumor biology  is presented.

    -          The section “Further evidence” II is restricted to melanomas. Cancer stem cells or cancer stem-like cells were reported in many other solid tumors.  In this review, this is mentioned randomly.

    Some statements are wrong or misleading        :

    -          Introduction: “…why even after complete eradication, a relapse sometimes become inevitable..”. In fact, there is no evidence that complete eradication of tumors that relapsed were “completely eradicated” since tumor cells often infiltrate the surrounding normal tissue.

     

    Minor comments

    Illustration       1: Replace “… mutations can transform stem cells into cancer stem cells..” for “… mutations can transform cells into cancer stem cells..”

    Illustration 2: Add a reference for Milchor et al.

     

    Illustration 3 : Add a column for references.

    References.

    Need to be consistent with the format . Several misspelling should be corrected.

    Examples:

    Reference 5: Should be “Cancer Research “ instead of “Caner Research”

    Reference 22: add title.

    Reference 23: should be “CD133+” instead of “CS133+”

     

     

     

    In summary, this article offer extensive data on cancer stem cells and has the potential to become an interesting review.  Extensive re-organization and a more clear focus will improve the quality of the review.  

     

     

  • Competing interests:
    No
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:
    Cruz M, Siden Å, Tasat DR, Yakisich JS (2010) Are all Glioma Cells Cancer Stem Cells? J Cancer Sci Ther 2: 100-106. doi:10.4172/1948-5956.1000032 http://www.omicsonline.org/ArchiveJCST/2010/July/01/JCST-02-100.pdf Pre-clinical anticancer drugs screening: perspectives from emerging models of glioma biology Juan Sebastian Yakisich DOI: 10.4081/dts.2011.e1 | http://www.pagepress.org/journals/index.php/dts/article/view/dts.2011.e1
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Research in cancer

  • How to cite:  Yakisich J S.Cancer Stem Cells ?[Review of the article 'Cancer Stem Cells ' by Katiyar S].WebmedCentral 2011;2(12):WMCRW001285
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Partly
3 Is this a new and original contribution? No
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? Yes
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? Yes
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    A review article titled “cancer stem cells” by Khurana and Katiyar (2011) (in PDF version, the author is only one, i.e. Katiyar) discussed the paradox of cancer relapse after complete eradication, which is attributed to the presence of cancer stem cells [1]. The article is well organized, but there are some typological errors in the text such as happened in one of the subtitle: Are Cancer Stem cells derived fro Normal Stem Cells? and worse is when the meaning become unclear, such as happened in a sentence under the subheading A2B5:”However, A2B5 population of were non-tumorigenic”. Moreover, the author was careless in writing references, such as reference number 22 that has no title, and inconsistencies in writing the name of journals, especially when they are abbreviated.

     

    Speaking about content, the article highlighted some markers that can be used to identify cancer stem cells of certain cancers, such as CD 133, CD 34, CD44, ABCB5, etc [1]. However, those markers are also shared by normal stem cells [1], and adult cells, for instance CD34 is a marker for hematopoetic lineage [2] and endothelium [3], CD133 (formerly called AC133) is usually co-express with CD34 and is a marker for primitive hematopoetic cells that may give rise to hematopoetic cells as well as dendritic cell precursors [4], and endothelial progenitors [5]. Therefore it will add a value to the article if it is discussed under the heading “Identification of Cancer Stem Cells” for each marker (CD133, CD34 etc).

     

    Moreover the author pointed out the difficulty in the identification of cancer stem cells due to the lack of a universal marker for cancer stem cells [1]. Therefore, more value can be added to the article, if the author discussed some other methods for the identification of cancer stem cells. In the article, it is pointed out that cancer stem cells bearing A2B5 can form neurospheres in culture, and breast cancer stem cells can form mammospheres [1]. The ability to form spheres in culture may aid as an identification method, as this ability is attributed to embryonic stem cells that are tumorigenic [6]. Moreover, lung cancer stem cells show upregulated SOX2 and Oct4 that are pluripotent markers of embryonic stem cells [7]. Therefore, addition of data concerning  cancer stem cells that can form spheres in culture will add a value to this article.

     

    Further, as many of cancer stem cells share a same feature with normal stem cells, i.e. the presence of ABC transporters, especially ABCG2, which gives them a specific ability to efflux Hoechst 33342, thus contain low Hoechst 33342 and form a side population that can be separated from other cells. This method was applied to isolate lung cancer stem cells from breast and lung cancer, and from neuroblastoma cell lines [7]. The presence of ABC transporters in cancer stem cells has been discussed in this article under the heading “Potential Therapeutic Targets” [1]. Therefore, the article will be more valuable if it adds this side population feature as one of the identification methods.

     

    Finally, the figures and table are not cited in the text, and the conclusion is too long and it will be better if it is shortened.

     

    In conclusion, this article will be suitable for publication in standard peer reviewed journal, when the article is revised and the above suggestions are included in the article.

     

    References

    1.

    Khurana S, Katiyar S.  Cancer stem cells . WebmedCentral STEM CELL RESEARCH 2011;2(12):WMC002634

    2.

    Zuk PA, Zhu M, Ashjian P, De Ugarte DA, Huang JI, Mizuno H, et al. Human adipose tissue is a source of multipotent stem cells. Mol Biol Cell. 2002; 13: 4279–95.

    3.

    Lin G, Garcia M, Ning H, Banie L, Guo Y-L, Lue TF, et al. Defining stem and progenitor cells within adipose tissue. Stem Cells  Dev. 2008; 17:1053–64.

    4.

    De Winter EA, Buck D, Hart DC, Heywood R, Coutinho LH,  Clayton A, et al. CD34+AC133+ cells isolated from cord blood are highly enriched in long-term culture-initiating cells, NOD/SCID-repopulating cells and dendritic cell progenitors. Stem Cells 1998;16:387-96.

    5.

    Gehling UM, Ergu¨n S, Schumache U, Wagener C, Pantel K, Otte M, et al. In vitro differentiation of endothelial cells from AC133-positive progenitor cells. Blood 2000; 95 (10):3106-12.

    6.

    Ng H-H, Surani MA. The transcriptional and signalling networks of pluripotency.  Nat Cell Biol. 2011; 13 (5):490-6.

    7.

    Xiang R, Liao D, Cheng T, Zhou H, Shi Q, Chuang TS, et al. Downregulation of transcription factor SOX2 in cancer stem cells suppresses growth and metastasis of lung cancer. Br J Cancer. 2011; 104, 1410 –7.

     

  • Competing interests:
    no
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:
    1. Adiwinata Pawitan J. Prospect of adipose tissue derived stem cells in regenerative medicine. Cell &tissue transplantation &therapy 2009:1; (e-journal -Published 9-11-2009) 2. Laksmitawati DR, Sardjono CT, Adiwinata Pawitan J, Sadikin M, Sandra F. Secretion of IDO, an immunomodulatory substance, by AT-MSCs. Indonesian journal of chemoprevention 2010;1(2):92-8. 3. Adiwinata Pawitan J, Bustami A, Damayanti L, Antarianto R, Swantari NM. Effect of adipose tissue processing procedures in culture result: A preliminary study. Med J Indones 2011;20(1):15-9. 4. Adiwinata Pawitan J, Damayanti L, Bustami A, Swantari NM. Detection of Morphological Changes in Adipose Tissue Derived Stem Cells after Passage by the Simple Spot Method. J US-China med Sci 2011; (Februari 2011) 5. Laksmitawati DR, Sardjono CT, Adiwinata Pawitan J, Sadikin M, Utomo AR. Detection of human immunoglobulin receptors on mesenchymal stem cell isolated from lipoaspirate. 2nd International Conference on Pharmacy and advanced pharmaceutical sciences. Yogyakarta, UGM, 19-20 Juli 2011. 6. Adiwinata Pawitan J. Adipose tissue contains various kinds of stem cells and stem cells with myogenic properties need fibronectin to adhere to plastic: review and comment[Review of the article 'Human Adipose Tissue-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells Acquire Muscle Identity Only after Spontaneous Fusion with Myoblasts ' by Massoudi A.].WebmedCentral 2011;2(10):WMCRW00991
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Doing researches on adipose tissue derived stem cell and review articles concerning stem cell research in Webmedcentral

  • How to cite:  Adiwinata Pawitan J .Additional Methods for the Identification of cancer stem cells (comment and review)[Review of the article 'Cancer Stem Cells ' by Katiyar S].WebmedCentral 2011;2(12):WMCRW001282
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Cancer Stem Cells
Posted by Prof. Valentin Shichkin on 16 Dec 2011 08:44:38 PM GMT

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? No
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? No
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    The review article “Cancer Stem Cells” (CSC) discusses historical and current aspects of finding, origin and treatment of CSC. Despite a great interest and a huge number of works related to the CSC problem, there still exist conceptual differences of opinions that are a some barrier for development of fully successful cancer treatment strategies. Author presented consistent and well-reasoned discuss the problem through the paper. The article makes a good impression of qualitative and adequately performed review, and it written in clear, concise and correct language. There is just one remark concerning of cited works, because almost half of them are older five years.Thus, the  review article gives some idea for searching of new strategies in cancer treatment and don’t need in revision. 

  • Competing interests:
    No
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Yes

  • How to cite:  Shichkin V .Cancer Stem Cells[Review of the article 'Cancer Stem Cells ' by Katiyar S].WebmedCentral 2011;2(12):WMCRW001276
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse