An overview on "cellular cannibalism” with special reference to oral squamous cell carcinoma

Cellular cannibalism has been defined as a large cell engulfing a slightly smaller one within its cytoplasm. It has been described in various cancers like bladder cancer, breast cancer, lung cancer, gastric cancer, oral squamous cell carcinoma. Cellular canniba­lism has been well correlated with ana...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Experimental Oncology
Datum:2015
1. Verfasser: Jain, M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:English
Veröffentlicht: Інститут експериментальної патології, онкології і радіобіології ім. Р.Є. Кавецького НАН України 2015
Schlagworte:
Online Zugang:https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/145540
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Назва журналу:Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
Zitieren:An overview on "cellular cannibalism” with special reference to oral squamous cell carcinoma / M. Jain // Experimental Oncology. — 2015. — Т. 37, № 4. — С. 242-245. — Бібліогр.: 31 назв. — англ.

Institution

Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
id nasplib_isofts_kiev_ua-123456789-145540
record_format dspace
spelling Jain, M.
2019-01-22T20:05:37Z
2019-01-22T20:05:37Z
2015
An overview on "cellular cannibalism” with special reference to oral squamous cell carcinoma / M. Jain // Experimental Oncology. — 2015. — Т. 37, № 4. — С. 242-245. — Бібліогр.: 31 назв. — англ.
1812-9269
https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/145540
Cellular cannibalism has been defined as a large cell engulfing a slightly smaller one within its cytoplasm. It has been described in various cancers like bladder cancer, breast cancer, lung cancer, gastric cancer, oral squamous cell carcinoma. Cellular canniba­lism has been well correlated with anaplasia, tumor aggressiveness, grading and metastatic potential. Present review focuses on significance of cannibalism in relation to cancer with special emphasis on oral squamous cell carcinoma. Key Words: cannibalism, phagocytosis, cancer, oral squamous cell carcinoma.
en
Інститут експериментальної патології, онкології і радіобіології ім. Р.Є. Кавецького НАН України
Experimental Oncology
Reviews
An overview on "cellular cannibalism” with special reference to oral squamous cell carcinoma
Article
published earlier
institution Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
collection DSpace DC
title An overview on "cellular cannibalism” with special reference to oral squamous cell carcinoma
spellingShingle An overview on "cellular cannibalism” with special reference to oral squamous cell carcinoma
Jain, M.
Reviews
title_short An overview on "cellular cannibalism” with special reference to oral squamous cell carcinoma
title_full An overview on "cellular cannibalism” with special reference to oral squamous cell carcinoma
title_fullStr An overview on "cellular cannibalism” with special reference to oral squamous cell carcinoma
title_full_unstemmed An overview on "cellular cannibalism” with special reference to oral squamous cell carcinoma
title_sort overview on "cellular cannibalism” with special reference to oral squamous cell carcinoma
author Jain, M.
author_facet Jain, M.
topic Reviews
topic_facet Reviews
publishDate 2015
language English
container_title Experimental Oncology
publisher Інститут експериментальної патології, онкології і радіобіології ім. Р.Є. Кавецького НАН України
format Article
description Cellular cannibalism has been defined as a large cell engulfing a slightly smaller one within its cytoplasm. It has been described in various cancers like bladder cancer, breast cancer, lung cancer, gastric cancer, oral squamous cell carcinoma. Cellular canniba­lism has been well correlated with anaplasia, tumor aggressiveness, grading and metastatic potential. Present review focuses on significance of cannibalism in relation to cancer with special emphasis on oral squamous cell carcinoma. Key Words: cannibalism, phagocytosis, cancer, oral squamous cell carcinoma.
issn 1812-9269
url https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/145540
citation_txt An overview on "cellular cannibalism” with special reference to oral squamous cell carcinoma / M. Jain // Experimental Oncology. — 2015. — Т. 37, № 4. — С. 242-245. — Бібліогр.: 31 назв. — англ.
work_keys_str_mv AT jainm anoverviewoncellularcannibalismwithspecialreferencetooralsquamouscellcarcinoma
AT jainm overviewoncellularcannibalismwithspecialreferencetooralsquamouscellcarcinoma
first_indexed 2025-11-25T23:28:42Z
last_indexed 2025-11-25T23:28:42Z
_version_ 1850584023232937984
fulltext 242 Experimental Oncology 37, 242–245, 2015 (December) AN OveRview ON “CeLLULAR CANNiBALisM” wiTH sPeCiAL ReFeReNCe TO ORAL sQUAMOUs CeLL CARCiNOMA M. Jain Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Peoples Dental Academy, Bhopal 462037, Madhya Pradesh, India Cellular cannibalism has been defined as a large cell engulfing a slightly smaller one within its cytoplasm. It has been described in various cancers like bladder cancer, breast cancer, lung cancer, gastric cancer, oral squamous cell carcinoma. Cellular canniba- lism has been well correlated with anaplasia, tumor aggressiveness, grading and metastatic potential. Present review focuses on significance of cannibalism in relation to cancer with special emphasis on oral squamous cell carcinoma. Key Words: cannibalism, phagocytosis, cancer, oral squamous cell carcinoma. The term “cannibalism” is derived from Spanish caníbal in connection with alleged cannibalism among Caribs. Also, called as anthropophagy in Greek, i.e., act or practice of humans consuming other humans [1, 2]. Actually, cannibalism is a common ecological interac- tion, occurring naturally in variety of species. Although there are different types of cannibalism, size structured cannibalism being the commonest form in which large individual feeds on smaller ones. Cannibalism occurs at cellular level in humans also [3]. Cellular cannibalism (CC) is defined as the ability of a cell to engulf another living cell leading eventually to death of internalized cell [4]. Unicellular organisms as well as single cells from multicellular organism are capable of centering their entire efforts for accomplishing their feeding require- ments, which is mandatory for survival. Experiments have revealed two pheno mena, namely self-canni- balism (macroautophagy) and xeno-cannibalism, i.e., engulfing and digesting cell siblings as well as cells from the immune system. It has been hypothesized that these two processes could be interrelated, xeno-cannibalism being representing exacerbation of self-cannibalism thus offering prolific survival benefit to cells [5]. CeLLULAR CANNiBALisM: HOw iT DiFFeRs FROM OTHeR CeLL-iN-CeLL PHeNOMeNON? Entosis. Entosis is a homogeneous cell-in-cell in- vasion while cannibalism can be either homogeneous or heterogeneous. In entosis, live epithelial cells or tu- mor cells detach from extracellular matrix and then invade their neighbor cells. Entosis rely on conjugations or adherens junctions and needs Rho and ROCK activi- ties for internalization, suggesting that entosis is an ac- tive process and requires actin polymerization [6]. Emperipolesis. Emperipolesis is a heterogenous cell-in-cell invasion in which engulfed cells are hema- topoietic. The cells are only temporarily internalized and are not destroyed [1, 2]. Efferocytosis. The recognition and elimination of apoptotic cells by tissue macrophages and non- professional phagocytes such as epithelial cells, endothelial cells, fibroblast and neutrophils known as efferocytosis is critical for development, tissue homeostasis and resolution of inflammation. It is dif- ferent from other types of cell-in-cell phenomena both cytologically and biologically [7]. Phagocytosis. A brief summary of the diffe- rences between CC and phagocytosis is presented in the Table. Table. Comparison of CC and phagocytosis as two distinct modes of cell- in-cell invasion Characteristics CC Phagocytosis Nature of mecha- nism Very calm phenomena Very expensive and dramatic process Type of cells af- fected Feeds on live cells Feeds on dead cells and toxic materials Mechanism of action In this phenomenon, free cell lay down on the membrane of cannibal cells and then sud- denly get into the tumor cells and gradually degenerate and dies off In this process, mac- rophage, embrace, surround and engulf external body through formation of huge and long pseudopod Type of activity Associated with feeding and is increased in condition of low nutrient supply. Aimed at sur- viving in unfavorable condition. Usually seen in tumor cells Associated with sca- venging activity trig- gered by starvation in normal cells Role of pH Cannibalistic cells are resistant to low pH. Acidic conditions in- creases CC Macrophages usually dies at low pH Role of caveolin-1 Caveolae-mediated endocyto- sis has a key role Not involved Role of cathep- sin-B Overexpression of cathepsin-B noted Not involved Role of ligand-re- ceptor interaction No specific ligand-receptor in- teraction seen Protein-protein inter- action noted CeLLULAR CANNiBALisM AND CANCeR CC has been frequently observed in vivo in seve ral benign and malignant tumors including breast carcinoma [8], giant cell carcinoma of lung [9], endometrial stromal sarcoma [10], malignant melanoma [11], gastric adeno- carcinoma [12], giant-cell tumor of the tendon sheath [4], lung carcinoma, gall bladder carcinoma [13], giant cell granuloma of the oral cavity [14], salivary duct carcinoma [15], oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) [16–19]. These tumor cells cannibalize their siblings as well as cells from the immune system in order to sustain and defend existing unfavorable conditions within the micro- environment such as hypoxia, lack of nutrition and acidity. Submitted: June 14, 2015. Correspondence: E-mail: megha.vipin12@gmail.com Abbreviations used: CC — cellular cannibalism; NTCC — neutrophil- tumor cell cannibalism; OSCC — oral squamous cell carcinoma. Exp Oncol 2015 37, 4, 242–245 Experimental Oncology 37, 242–245, 2015 (December) 243 Cellular cannibalism — morphology and ap- pearance CC in cytological or histological preparation is manifested as a cell that is contained within another bigger cell with a crescent shaped nucleus (Fig. 1). This particular appearance is attributed to the fact that ingested cell is contained in a big vacuole that pushes the nucleus of cannibalistic cell to the periphery [19]. Owing to such appearance it was described by Leyden in 1904 as “bird-eye cells” [20]. Fig. 1. CC in OSCC. Cannibalistic cell is marked by arrow (hae- matoxylin and eosin staining, x 40) Process of cellular cannibalism Fig. 2 illustrated the main successive steps of can- nibalism as proposed by Brouwer et al. [21]. Cannibalistic cell Free cell Contact of free cell with cannibalistic cell Gradual internalisation of free cell into cannibalistic cell Complete internalisation of free cell into cannibalis- tic cell leading to crescent shaped nucleus of latter Ultimately, internalised free cell dies off Fig. 2. Schematic representation of the main successive steps of CC Proposed mechanisms of cellular cannibalism There is not enough information on the nature and significance of tumor cell cannibalism. Exact mecha- nism by which tumor cells end up feeding on their sibling cancer cells remain obscure. Following theories have been put forward to explain this event. (A) Cannibalism occurs so that tumor cells can feed on ingested cells thus obviating tumor cell nutritional deficiencies. Experiments have shown that canniba- lism is never observed in serum-free cultures but can be reinduced by serum exposure. Also, ultrastructural examination revealed scanty lysosomal content in can- nibalistic cell in comparison with free thus proving that death and disintegration of the interiorized cell is due to starvation rather than the action of lysosomal enzymes [21]. (B) CC may function as a way of eliminating malig- nant cell thus keeping a check on tumor growth [1]. Brouwer et al. demonstrated that serum dependent cannibalism may contribute to the autodestruction of cells and frequent failure to establish human small cell carcinoma of lung cell lines [21]. (C) Few reports suggested that tumor cells have also taste for other non-sibling cells or immune cells like neutrophils, lymphocytes and erythrocytes and may cannibalise them [11, 12, 15, 16, 22, 23]. Such type of conduct signifies that cannibalistic tumor cells cannot discriminate between tumor infiltrating immune cells and sibling neoplastic cells and thus may use can- nibalism as a mechanism of tumor immune escape [1]. Factors regulating cellular cannibalism Following factors are known to control pheno- menon of cannibalism: (I) Hunger of the tumor cells/low nutrient supply [1, 4]. (II) Tumor microenvironment, i.e., acidity and hypoxia. Carcinogenesis (malignant tumors) results in acidic microenvironment owing to shift in the meta- bolic pathway which in turn favors selection of certain cell phenotypes that engulf sibling cells and are able to sustain and survive such adverse environment [4, 24, 25]. This pathogenic mechanism is not relevant to be- 244 Experimental Oncology 37, 242–245, 2015 (December) nign tumors such as peripheral giant cell granuloma and central giant cell granuloma. The giant cells of these pathologies are derived from monocyte-macrophage lineage and resemble osteoclasts thus possessing inherent property of engulfment, which is responsible for cannibalism of stromal tumor cells [26]. (III) Dynamic link between caveolin-1, actin cyto- skeleton and ezrin. This network has a key role in for- mation of cannibalistic vacuole and caveosome and is driving force for cannibalism [4, 27]. (IV) Overexpression of cathepsin B and acidic milieu of lysosomal like vesicles typify cannibalistic cells [4, 22, 27]. Cellular cannibalism: assessment parameters Cannibalism can be assessed by following para- meters [28]: (I) cellularity of cannibalism — it is semiquantita- tively assessed as: (1+) < 5 cells, (2+) 5–20 cells and (3+) > 20 cells in each preparation. Jose et al. graded cellularity of cannibalism as Grade I (< 5 cells), Grade II (6–15 cells) and Grade III (> 16 cells) [18]; (II) diameter of cannibalism — analyzed using an image analysis system; (III) chromatin pattern — evaluated as heterochro- matin pattern or euchromatin pattern; (IV) background — assessed as necrosis, isomor- phic erythrocytes and dysmorphic erythrocytes; (V) vimentin reactivity. Cellular cannibalism as a cancer predictor CC is promising marker of anaplastic grade and invasiveness as well as could serve as a valuable tool in assessing tumor behavior [8]. Barresi et al. [29] sug- gested that neutrophil-tumor cell cannibalism (NTCC) may be one of the mechanisms favoring tumor growth in gastric micropapillary carcinomas, a tumor histotype characterized by aggressive behavior and poor prog- nosis. Alok et al. [8] assessed cannibalism in 62 cyto- logically diagnosed cases of breast malignancies and found that CC was more frequent in high grade tumors, thus considering CC as a marker of anaplasia and ag- gressive tumor behavior. Study by Bansal et al. [13] illustrated that presence of CC in malignant effusions is more often an indicator of higher tumor stage. Also, cannibalism may act as a reliable predictor of tumor progression from primary to the metastatic site. Aneuploidy is one of the characteristic features of human cancers and polyploidy being a precursor to aneuploidy during tumor progression. Polyploid cells can originate from cell fusion, endoreplication, and cytokinesis failure. Recently Krajcovic et al. [30] found that cell cannibalism by entosis also leads to polyploidy, as internalized cells disrupt cytokinesis of their engulfing cell hosts. Thus this mechanism can affect cannibalistic cell behavior and could prop up tumor progression by leading to aneuploidy. Recent studies have demonstrated that horizontal or lateral DNA transfer between eukaryotic cells can occur via uptake of apoptotic bodies and could be at- tributed for aneuploidy and chromosomal instability responsible for tumor formation and progression [31]. CeLLULAR CANNiBALisM AND ORAL sQUAMOUs CeLL CARCiNOMA CC is one of the typical morphological traits often observed in aggressive malignancies, although it has been demonstrated in certain benign tumors also. It has also been considered as an indicator of ag- gressiveness, anaplasia and metastatic potential [16, 17]. CC has easily identifiable morphological features under light microscopy without the use of any ad- vanced and expensive molecular techniques. Hence, aggressiveness of the neoplasm can be assessed on a routine basis. Cellular cannibalism as a prognosticator of oral squamous cell carcinoma Jose et al. [18] evaluated 20 neck dissection cases of OSCC and found statistically significant cor- relation between advanced grade of CC and positive lymph node metastasis. So, the authors concluded that CC can be considered as one of the important parameter to assess an aggressive nature of OSCC. Sarode SC and Sarode GS (2013) screened 30 cases (25 moderately differentiated and 5 poorly differentiated) of OSCC for the presence of canniba- lism and found more number of cannibalistic cells in poorly differentiated OSCC compared to moderately differentiated OSCC [17]. No statistical difference between clinical staging of OSCC was found. Also, they have done immunohistochemical analysis with lysozyme and CD68 to validate cannibalism phe- nomena and demonstrated 10 lysozyme-positive and 5 CD68-positive cases with cell cannibalistic features. Sarode SC and Sarode GS (2014) analysed OSCC for identification of NTCC and found that those OSCC cases which showed extreme NTCC were poorly differentiated and had cervical lymph node metasta- sis [16]. Thus, NTCC in OSCC could serve as valuable prognostic marker and can foretell biological behavior. Complex cannibalism and oral squamous cell carcinoma Sarode et al. [19] studied 5 cases of OSCC and observed bizarre morphological appearance cells where one malignant cell was engulfing the other one and this complex was further engulfed by another cell. So, they proposed a newer terminology to the phenomenon as “complex cannibalism”. Maximal number of cannibalistic cells and complex cannibalism was reported in advanced stage and poorly differen- tiated OSCC. Hence, they concluded that complex canniba lism could be suggestive of highly aggressive biological behavior in OSCC. CONCLUsiON AND FUTURe PeRsPeCTive CC has been proved to be important morphological parameter and has been described in a variety of can- cers. It has been well allied with anaplasia, tumor ag- gressiveness, grading and metastatic potential. Hence it is recommended to screen each cancer specimen for identification of cannibalism to validate its role as a mor- phological predictor. Literature search fetched up few studies regarding tumor cell cannibalism and OSCC and Experimental Oncology 37, 242–245, 2015 (December) 245 therefore warrants call for future elaborative researches to justify role of CC as prognosticator of OSCC. More- over, future studies should also emphasize on under- lying biochemical and molecular aspects of CC. ReFeReNCes 1. Sharma N, Dey P. Cell cannibalism and cancer. Diagn Cytopathol 2011; 39: 229–33. 2. Sharma D, Koshy G, Grover S, et al. Cellular cannibalism: an insight. Chrismed J Health Res 2015; 2: 14–8. 3. Fais S. Cannibalism: a way to feed on metastatic tumors. Cancer Lett 2007; 258: 155–64. 4. Fernandez-Flores A. Cannibalism in a benign soft tissue tu- mor (giant-cell tumor of the tendon sheath, localized type): a study of 66 cases. Rom J Morphol Embryol 2012; 53: 15–22. 5. Malorni W, Matarrese P, Tinari A, et al. Xeno-canni- balism: a survival “escamotage”. Autophagy 2007; 3: 75–7. 6. Qian Y, Shi Y. Natural killer cells go inside: entosis versus cannibalism. Cell Resh 2009; 19: 1320–1. 7. Caruso RA, Fedele F, Finocchiaro G, et al. Neutrophil- tumor cell phagocytosis (cannibalism) in human tumors: an up- date and literature review. Exp Oncol 2012; 34: 306–11. 8. Alok M, Singh S, Swarn K, et al. Cell cannibalism as an indicator of anaplasia and tumor aggresiveness in carci- noma breast. J Adv Res Biol Sci 2013; 5: 286–9. 9. Craig ID, Desrosiers P, Lefcoe MS. Giant-cell carcino- ma of the lung. A cytologic study. Acta Cytol 1983; 27: 293–8. 10. Hong JS. The exfoliative cytology of endometrial stro- mal sarcoma in peritoneal fluid. Acta Cytol 1981; 25: 277–81. 11. Lugini L, Matarrese P, Tinari A, et al. Cannibalism of live lymphocytes by human metastatic but not primary melanoma cells. Cancer Res 2006; 66: 3629–38. 12. Caruso RA, Muda AO, Bersiga A, et al. Morphological evidence of neutrophil-tumor cell phagocytosis (cannibalism) in human gastric adenocarcinomas. Ultrastruct Pathol 2002; 26: 315–21. 13. Bansal C, Tiwari V, Singh US, et al. Cell cannibalism: a cy- tological study in effusion samples. J Cytol 2011; 28: 57–60. 14. Sarode SC, Sarode GS. Cellular cannibalism in cen- tral and peripheral giant cell granuloma of the oral cavity can predict biological behavior of the lesion. J Oral Pathol Med 2014; 43: 459–63. 15. Arya P, Khalbuss WE, Monaco SE, et al. Salivary duct carcinoma with striking neutrophil-tumor cell cannibalism. CytoJournal 2011; 8: 15. 16. Sarode SC, Sarode GS. Neutrophil-tumor cell can- nibalism in oral squamous cell carcinoma. J Oral Pathol Med 2014; 43: 454–8. 17. Sarode SC, Sarode GS. Identification of cell canniba- lism in oral squamous cell carcinoma with clinico-pathological correlation. Oral Oncol 2013; 49: S90–1. 18. Jose D, Mane DR, Datar U, et al. Evaluation of canniba- listic cells: a novel entity in prediction of aggressive nature of oral squamous cell carcinoma. Acta Odontol Scand 2014; 72: 418–23. 19. Sarode GS, Sarode SC, Karmarkar S. Complex can- nibalism: an unusual finding in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Oral Oncol 2012; 48: e4–6. 20. Bauchwitz MA. The bird’s eye cell: cannibalism or ab- normal division of tumor cells. Acta Cytol Abstr 1981; 25: 92. 21. Brouwer M, de Ley L, Feltkamp CA, et al. Serum-depen- dent “cannibalism” and autodestruction in cultures of human small cell carcinoma of the lung. Cancer Res 1984; 44: 2947–51. 22. Chi L, Vogel JE, Shelokov A. Selective phagocytosis of nucleated erythrocytes by cytotoxic amoebae in cell culture. Science 1959; 130: 1763. 23. Monteagudo C, Jorda E, Carda C, et al. Erythrophago- cytic tumour cells in melanoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the skin. Histopathology 1997; 31: 367–73. 24. Alfarouk KO, Muddathir AK, Shayoub ME. Tumor acidity as evolutionary spite. Cancers (Basel) 2011; 3: 408–14. 25. Lessi E, Marino ML, Lozupone F, et al. Tumor aci dity and malignancy: novel aspects in the design of anti-tumor therapy. Cancer Ther 2008; 6: 55–66. 26. Kale A. Cellular cannibalism. J Oral Maxillofac Pathol 2015; 19: 7–9. 27. Klionsky DJ. Cell biology: regulated self-cannibalism. Nature 2004; 431: 31–2. 28. Ohsaki H, Haba R, Matsunaga T, et al. “Cannibalism” (cell phagocytosis) does not differentiate reactive renal tubular cells from urothelial carcinoma cells. Cytopathology 2009; 20: 224–30. 29. Barresi V, Branca G, Ieni A, et al. Phagocytosis (can- nibalism) of apoptotic neutrophils by tumor cells in gastric micropapillary carcinomas. World J Gastroenterol 2015; 21: 5548–54. 30. Krajcovic M, Overholtzer M. Mechanisms of ploidy increase in human cancers: a new role for cell cannibalism. Cancer Res 2012; 72: 1596–601. 31. Bergsmedh A, Szeles A, Henriksson M, et al. Horizontal transfer of oncogenes by uptake of apoptotic bodies. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001; 98: 6407–11. Copyright © Experimental Oncology, 2015