Шаблоны LeoTheme для Joomla.
GavickPro Joomla шаблоны

cancer banner


Extracellular Microenvironment Components of Glioblastoma as Possible Therapeutic Targets

 Marzenna Wiranowska*

*Corresponding author: Marzenna Wiranowska Ph.D., Department Pathology and Cell Biology, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA, E-mail:mwiranow@health.usf.edu

Submitted: 07-27-2014 Accepted: 10-27-2014  Published: 11-06-2014

Download PDF






Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), is a highly invasive primary brain tumor representing more than half of all gliomas with an average patient survival time of only 12 to 15 months [1]. Unlike tumors derived from peripheral tissues, GBM is known to rarely metastasize outside its original location in the central nervous system (CNS). This characteristic is attributed to both a limited survival time of GBM patients as well as the specific and unique composition of the  extracellular matrix (ECM) in the brain supportive for migration and invasion by glioma cells into the normal brain tissue.

Data generated by The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network [2] resulted in an integrated genomic analysis of GBM. It identified clinically relevant subtypes of GBM such as classical, proneural, neural and mesenchymal [3]. Also certain genomic abnormalities associated with GBM that relate to several ECM-related signaling pathways were revealed [4]. Despite these significant findings in the molecular characterization of GBM, more attention still needs to be devoted to understanding the heterogeneous nature of these tumors and their complex and unique interaction with the microenvironment components of the brain ECM.

Glioma cells are capable of invading deep into the brain through the barriers of the CNS which normally prevent the movement [5]. In contrast to glioma, other highly invasive peripheral tumors rarely invade adjacent neural tissues [5,6]. In addition, the peripheral tumors which metastasized into the CNS do not truly infiltrate the brain, but instead, they rather “push” the nervous tissue away or infiltrate only perivascular tissue [7].

GBM however, shows diffused infiltration into the normal brain parenchyma and interacts with the ECM components in the brain. Despite standard GBM therapies such as surgery, radiation and chemotherapy, a single glioma cells still may migrate through ECM and establish new recurrent tumor foci elsewhere in the normal brain tissue escaping early detection [8]. Recently, it was reported that glioma associated microglia/macrophages may also support infiltration and invasion of glioma cells into the normal brain tissue through increased expression of certain ECM degrading metalloproteinases (MMPs) [9]. In fact, GBM is known to show a high level of infiltration by macroglia and macrophages [10]. Another characteristic of GBM is the increased ECM rigidity found in the vicinity of the tumor in contrast to normal brain. This higher ECM rigidity was found to promote glioma cell migration [4]. Further research toward understanding the intricate interactions between glioma cells and the brain ECM may reveal new targets and new pathways for more effective therapies for glioma patients.

Extracellular Matrix Molecules in the Normal Brain and in GBM

The extracellular space in the CNS (approximately 15-25% of CNS volume) is filled with ECM molecules while rest of the CNS volume consists of cellular elements including neurons, glia, astrocytic processes and blood vessels [11]. Some normal brain regions such as the subarachnoid space, supependymal packets, and perivascular space around arterioles and venules are especially rich in ECM. The main ECM component in the normal brain include space-filling carbohydrate, a large glycosaminoglycan (GAG), hyaluronan (HA), also called hyaluronic acid, the production of which is increased in glioma [12]. In addition its CD44 receptor is also overexpressed in glioma cells [13-15] and found in vivo at the leading edge of glioma, at the brain-tumor interface [16].

Other prominent ECM components include proteoglycans (PGs), protein-bound carbohydrate molecules, which consist of a core protein attached to a GAG chain. These complexes of HA and PGs form the ECM domains called perineuronal nets first described by Camillo Golgi in 1893. They enwrap the neuronal cell bodies and proximal dendrites and fill the space between neurons and glial processes. The PGs which are present at high levels in the normal brain include sulfated proteoglycans: chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans (CSPGs) and heparan sulfate proteoglycans (HSPGs). Both CSPGs and HSPGs play a major role in regulation of cell signaling and migration providing an essential support in interactions between the tumor and its microenvironment [17]. Interestingly, CSPG proteoglycan, also known as neuroglial protein-2 (NG2) is a characteristic marker of oligodendrocyte progenitor cells and often expressed by gliomas[16]. Based on expression of NG2 these cells have been suggested to be the originating cells for glioma [18].

In the ECM of the normal brain there are also low levels of fibrous proteins associated with the basement membranes of the brain’s vasculature. These fibrous proteins include collagens, fibronectin, and laminin [19-21]. However, in GBM, these fibrous proteins may be expressed at high levels and correlated with the glioma grade [22,23]. In addition, some types of fibrous proteins such as collagen XVI only known as a minor component of the connective tissue may actually play a significant role in GBM invasion through modification of the beta-1 integrin [24].

The lining of blood vessels by basal laminae rich in HSPGs was suggested to serve as a storage site of growth factors and cytokines [25]. The basal laminae of blood vessels as well as myelinated nerve fibers of white matter tracts exhibit a higher mechanical rigidity and serve as the infiltrative path of glioma into the normal brain parenchyma [26,27]. In addition, the microenvironment of glioma vasculature establishes a niche in which cancer stem cells (CSCs) can transmit and receive signals from the ECM. This vascular niche can shield CSCs cells and therefore interfere with radiation and chemotherapy resulting in the resistance to treatments as shown recently [28].

Other important molecules within the ECM are proteases, MMPs, and their inhibitors (TIMPS) essential in remodeling of ECM in the normal brain and highly expressed in glioma [7,29]. The MMPs expressed by gliomas mainly include the MMP class of gelatinases: MMP2 and MMP9 [26,30]. It has been shown recently that MMP9 is predominantly expressed by glioma–associated macroglia/ macrophages [9]. Glioma cells actively modify their ECM through proteolytic degradation of the normal brain matrix providing for a stiffer and rigid tumor-like ECM microenvironment which supports glioma cell invasion [4] .

Therapeutic Targets in the extracellular environment of GBM

It has been proposed to use invasion as a target for therapy for GBM specifically focusing on targeting the infiltrative behavior of glioblastoma cells in the modified ECM [31].

In the past, MMPs essential in ECM modification, tumor cell migration and invasion and initiation of angiogenesis were considered a potential target for anti-cancer therapies. However, due to highly pleiotropic activities of MMPs the initial use in clinical studies of broad spectrum MMP inhibitors interfered with multiple functions of these enzymes and led to disappointing results and termination of these studies [32]. However, based on MMPs’ role in tumor progression, more specific approaches in inhibiting MMPs derived from glioma and microglia should be used for therapeutic interventions [7,9]. Other suggested therapeutic ECM targets include blocking of tumor-associated proteoglycans [17], interference with HA-CD44 ligand receptor [12,14,15] or targeting glioma associated fibronectins using peptide-conjugated nanoparticles [33]. Therefore, ECM molecules within the GBM microenvironment may have an important potential in the development of new therapeutic strategies which aim to disrupt the tumor–microenvironment interactions and halt invasiveness of GBM cells.



1.Wen PY, Kesari S. Malignat gliomas in adults. N Engl J Med. 2008, 359(5): 492-507.

2.Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Comprehensive genomic charachterization defines human glioblastoma genes and core pathways, Nature. 2008, 455(7216): 1061- 1068.

3.Verhaak RG, Hoadley KA, Purdom E, Wang V, Qi Y et al. Integrated genomic analysis identifies clinically relevant subtypes of glioblastoma characterized by abnormalities in PDGFRA, IDH1, EGFR, and NF1. Cancer Cell. 2010, 17(1): 98-110.

4.Ulrich TA, de Juan Pardo EM, Kumar S. The mechanical rigidity of the extracellular matrix regulates the structure, motility, and proliferation of glioma cells. Cancer Res. 2009, 69(10): 4167-4174.

5.Dwyer CA, Bi WL, Viapiano MS, Matthews RT. Brevican knock down reduces late-stage glioma tumor aggressiveness. J Neurooncol. 2014, 120(1): 63-72.

6.Bellail AC, Hunter SB, Brat DJ, Tan C, Van Meir EG. Microregional extracellular matrix heterogeneity in brain modulates glioma cell invasion. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2004, 36(6): 1046-1069.

7.Mentlein R, Hattermann K, Held-Feindt J. Lost in disruption: role of proteases in glioma invasion and progression. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2012, 1825(2): 178-185.

8.Bolteus A J, Berens ME, Pilkington GJ. Migration and invasion in brain neoplasms. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2001, 1(3): 225-232.

9.Hu F, Ku MC, Markovic D, A Dzaye OD, Lehnardt S et al. Glioma-associated microglial MMP9 expression is upregulated by TLR2 signaling and sensitive to minocycline. Int J Cancer. 2014, 135(11): 2569-2578.

10.Coniglio SJ, Segall JE. Review: molecular mechanism of microglia stimulated glioblastoma invasion. Matrix Biol. 2013, 32(7-8): 372-378.

11.Quirico-Santos T, Fonseca CO, Lagrota-Candido J. Brain sweet brain: importance of sugars for the cerebral microenvironment and tumor development. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2010, 68(5): 799-803.

12.Wiranowska M, Ladd S, Moscinski LC, Hill B, Haller E et al. Modulation of hyaluronan production by CD44 positive glioma cells. Int J Cancer. 2010, 127(3): 532-542.

13.Wiranowska M, Naidu AK. Interferon effect on glycosaminoglycans in mouse glioma in vitro. J Neurooncol. 1994, 18(1): 9-17.

14.Wiranowska M, Tresser N, Saporta S. The effect of interferon and anti-CD44 antibody on mouse glioma invasiveness in vitro. Anticancer Res. 1998, 18(5A): 3331-3338.

15.Xu Y, Stamenkovic I, Yu Q. CD44 attenuates activation of the hippo signaling pathway and is a prime therapeutic target for glioblastoma. Cancer Res. 2010, 70(6): 2455- 2464.

16.Wiranowska M, Ladd S, Smith SR, Gottschall PE. CD44 adhesion molecule and neuro-glial proteoglycan NG2 as invasive markers of glioma. Brain Cell Biol. 2006, 35(2-3): 159-172.

17.Wade A, Robinson AE, Engler JR, Petritsch C, James CD et al. Proteoglycans and their roles in brain cancer. FEBS J. 2013, 280(10): 2399-2417.

18.Stallcup WB, Huang FJ. A role for the NG2 proteoglycan in glioma progression. Cell Adh Migr. 2008, 2(3): 192-201.

19.Wiranowska M, Plaas A. Cytokines and Extracellular Matrix Remodeling in the Central Nervous System In: Neuroimmune Biology (I. Berczi, and A. Szentivanyi, eds.), vol. 6, Cytokines and the Brain, Elsevier B.V. Science, 2008.

20.Wiranowska M, Rojiani MV. Extracellular Matrix Microenvironment in Glioma Progression, InTech Open Access Publisher: Glioma/ Book 1-Exploring its Biology and Practical Relevance (Anirban Ghosh ed.,), 2011.

21.Wiranowska M, Rojiani MV. Glioma extracellular matrix molecules as therapeutic targets In: Gliomas: Symptoms, Diagnosis and Treatment Options” (*M Wiranowska and F.D. Vrionis eds.), Nova Science Publishers, Inc. NY (*MW invited Book Editor), 2013.

22.Mahesparan R, Read TA, Lund-Johansen M, Skaftnesmo KO, Bjerkvig R et al. Expression of extracellular matrix components in a highly infiltrative in vivo glioma model. Acta Neuropathol. 2003, 105(1): 49-57.

23.Noreen R, Moenner M, Hwu Y, Petibois C. FTIR spectro-imaging of collagens for characterization and grading of gliomas. Biotechnol Adv. 2012, 30(6): 1432- 1446.

24.Grässel S, Bauer RJ. Collagen XVI in health and disease. Matrix Biol. 2013, 32(2): 64-73.

25.Brightman MW, Kaya M. Permeable endothelium and the interstitial space of brain. Cell Mol Neurobiol. 2000, 20(2): 111-130.

26.Rao JS. Molecular mechanisms of glioma invasiveness: the role of proteases. Nat Rev Cancer. 2003, 3(7): 489-501.

27.Lefranc F, Brotchi J, Kiss R. Possible future issues in the treatment of glioblastomas: special emphasis on cell migration and the resistance of migrating glioblastoma cells to apoptosis. J Clin Oncol. 2005, 23(10): 2411-2422.

28.Denysenko T, GenneroL, Roos MA, Melcarne A, Juenemann C et al. Glioblastoma cancer stem cells: heterogeneity, microenvironment and related therapeutic strategies. Cell Biochem Funct. 2010, 28(5): 343-351.

29.Wiranowska M, Rojiani AM, Gottschall PE, Moscinski LC, Johnson J et al. CD44 expression and MMP-2 secretion by mouse glioma cells: effect of interferon and anti-CD44 antibody. Anticancer Res. 2000, 20(6B): 4301-4306.

30.Rojiani MV, Wiranowska M and Rojiani AM. Matrix Metalloproteinases and Their Inhibitors-Friend or Foe In: Tumor Microenvironment (D.W. Siemann ed) J. Wiley and Sons, Ltd, 2011.

31.Vehlow A, Cordes N. Invasion as target for therapy of glioblastoma multiforme. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2013, 1836(2): 236-244.

32.Coussens LM, Fingleton B, Matrisian LM. Matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors and cancer: trials and tribulations. Science. 2002, 295(5564): 2387-2392.

33.Zhang B, Shen S, Liao Z, Shi W, Wang Y et al. Targeting fibronectins of glioma extracellular matrix by CLT1 peptide-conjugated nanoparticles. Biomaterials. 2014, 35(13): 4088-4098.

Cite this article: Marzenna W. Extracellular Microenvironment Components of Glioblastoma as Possible Therapeutic Targets. J J Cancer Sci Res. 2014, 1(1): 001.

Contact Us:
TRAIL # 150 W
E-mail : info@jacobspublishers.com
Phone : 512-400-0398