Tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual
The existence of the majority of microorganisms in the form of three-dimensional associates on the phase interface proves the significant survivable advantages of such form of life at compare with monocellular planktonic ones. These advantages provided to biofilms a place of the most widely distribu...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Вiopolymers and Cell |
|---|---|
| Date: | 2018 |
| Main Authors: | , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Інститут молекулярної біології і генетики НАН України
2018
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/154272 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Journal Title: | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| Cite this: | Tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual / S.V. Verevka, N.M. Voroshylova // Вiopolymers and Cell. — 2018. — Т. 34, № 1. — С. 72-81. — Бібліогр.: 35 назв. — англ. |
Institution
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine| _version_ | 1860091883440570368 |
|---|---|
| author | Verevka, S.V. Voroshylova, N.M. |
| author_facet | Verevka, S.V. Voroshylova, N.M. |
| citation_txt | Tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual / S.V. Verevka, N.M. Voroshylova // Вiopolymers and Cell. — 2018. — Т. 34, № 1. — С. 72-81. — Бібліогр.: 35 назв. — англ. |
| collection | DSpace DC |
| container_title | Вiopolymers and Cell |
| description | The existence of the majority of microorganisms in the form of three-dimensional associates on the phase interface proves the significant survivable advantages of such form of life at compare with monocellular planktonic ones. These advantages provided to biofilms a place of the most widely distributed form of life if not the dominative one. There is a strong similarity in properties of biofilms and malignant tumors that promotes considering the latter as some kind of biofilms. Such point of view facilitates understanding some features of carcinogenesis as well as the grounds for perspective directions in the prevention of metastases.
Існування більшості мікроорганізмів у формі тривимірних асоціатів на межі розподілу фаз свідчить про її значні переваги такої для виживання, порівняно з дисперсною формою, та дозволяє визначити біоплівки як домінуючу форму життя. Спостерігається виражена подібність багатьох властивостей біоплівок та злоякісних пухлин, що дозволяє провести певну аналогію між ними. Подібний погляд полегшує розуміння окремих рис карциногенеза та створює передумови для обґрунтування перспективних напрямків попередження метастазування.
Существование большинства микроорганизмов в форме трехмерных ассоциатов на границе раздела фаз свидетельствует о значительных преимуществах для выживания по сравнению с дисперсным существованием, что позволяет определить биопленки как доминирующую форму жизни. Наблюдается выраженное подобие множества свойств биопленок и злокачественных опухолей, что позволяет провести определенную аналогию между ними. Подобный взгляд облегчает понимание отдельных черт карциногенеза и создает предпосылки для обоснования перспективных направлений предупреждения метастазирования.
|
| first_indexed | 2025-12-07T17:23:58Z |
| format | Article |
| fulltext |
72
S. V. Verevka, N. M. Voroshylova
© 2018 S. V. Verevka et al.; Published by the Institute of Molecular Biology and Genetics, NAS of Ukraine on behalf of Bio-
polymers and Cell. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited
UDC 616-006:616-033-2:616-093/-098.001.8
Tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual
S. V. Verevka, N. M. Voroshylova
State institution “O. S. Kolomiychenko Institute of Otolaryngology Of National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine”
3, Zoologichna, Kyiv, Ukraine, 02000
verevka.biochem@gmail.com
The existence of the majority of microorganisms in the form of three-dimensional associates
on the phase interface provides significant advantages as compared with unicellular plank-
tonic ones. There is a strong similarity in properties of biofilms and malignant tumors that
allows considering the latter ones as some kind of biofilms. Such point of view facilitates our
understanding of some features of carcinogenesis and provides perspective directions in the
prevention of metastases.
K e y w o r d s: biofilms, carcinogenesis, metastasis
The most widely distributed form
of life
Arthur Kornberg noted once, that multicellular
organisms, including mammals, are the rare
exclusion in the world that belongs to micro-
organisms [1]. Up to 95–99% of them exist in
natural environments in the form of bio-
films [2]. In other words, biofilms represent
the most widely distributed and successful
model of life on the Earth [2]. According to
the universally acknowledged definition, they
are aggregates of microorganisms in which
cells are frequently embedded in a self-pro-
duced matrix of extracellular polymeric sub-
stances that are adherent to each other and/or
surface [3]. All higher organisms, including
humans, are colonized by microorganisms that
form biofilms, which can be associated with
persistent infections in plants and animals, and
with contamination of medical devices and
implants [5]. What are the advantages of as-
sociated form of microorganisms’ life in con-
trary to quite rare free planktonic one? These
advantages have to be extremely significant
because they determine the choice of biofilm’s
form of life by immeasurable diversity of mi-
croorganisms. Unfortunately, the same advan-
tages were suitable for multicellular organisms
with the grave consequences for the latter.
The importance of being biofilm
Biofilms are complex systems that have high
cell density, ranging from 108 to 1011 cells g-1
Discussions ISSN 1993-6842 (on-line); ISSN 0233-7657 (print)
Biopolymers and Cell. 2018. Vol. 34. N 1. P 72–81
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.7124/bc.000972
73
Tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual
wet weight, and typically comprise many spe-
cies. As a rule, biofilms are formed in flow
system in the presence of the necessary growth
substrates. A further source of heterogeneity
is the ability of cells to undergo differentiation,
which can be triggered by local conditions,
and to coordinate life cycles that include stage-
specific expression of genes and proteins. That
is typical for the growth and development of
microorganisms in spatially heterogeneous
systems. The emergent properties of biofilm
communities comprise novel structures, ac-
tivities, patterns and properties that arise dur-
ing their growth that leads to the formation of
self-organized complex system [4]. There is
an opinion that the key condition for the bio-
films formation is the presence of some factor
which suppresses significantly the growth of
individual microorganisms [5]. This point of
view has the right to exist, although often in
the absence of adverse factors microorganisms
are still inclined to form biofilms. The list of
hostile factors seems to be endless and con-
tains innumerous chemical toxicants, antibiot-
ics, oxygen reactive species, metal ions, ionic
force, temperature, pH, detergents and desic-
cation. The list of has to be supplemented by
more complicated defensive systems when we
consider microorganisms living inside multi-
cellular organisms. All these factors suppress
the development of separate microorganisms
and lead to the formation of biofilms. There
are a lot of processes both at molecular and
cellular levels that promote the intercellular
association. Thus, the influence of an unfavor-
able factor alters the normal metabolism of
microorganisms. This leads to the production
of significant number of abnormal proteins,
lipids, and carbohydrates that may be evalu-
ated as some kind of endogenous intoxication
at the simplest, unicellular level [6]. It is
known that proteins with imbalanced or in-
complete structures interact with outer cell
membranes by quite rigid rules, which leads
to the anchoring of hydrophobic residues in-
side membrane where as the positively charged
ones were directed inside the cell (“positive-
inside” rule [7]). Such allocation creates even
ideal conditions for non-enzymatic glycosyl-
ation, or rather for interaction of intracellular
part of the protein with numerous carbonyl-
containing compounds, whose content in the
cell increases sharply when cell is exposed to
unfavorable factors. At the same time glycation
of the protein intracellular part creates precon-
ditions for exposure of bulky and chemically
active carbohydrate derivatives on the cell
surface. The following growth of extracellular
cover may pass by well-known mechanisms
of advanced glycation end products (AGEs)
self-assembling with the formation of numer-
ous intermolecular and intercellular bounds.
In addition, non-functional glycation is a well-
recognized inducer of the conformational rear-
rangement of the protein molecules into β-fold
structures that are capable of self-assembly
into amyloid-like fibrils [8, 9]. Formation of
such mixed cover on the outer cell membrane
protects to some extent the cell from the con-
tact with hostile environment and persists at
mitotic division to both newly formed cells.
These and similar associative processes sup-
port the mutual adhesion of dividing cells and
the formation of an extracellular polymeric
substance (EPS). Evidently the given examples
are far from the exhausting of the set of the
processes that lead to the formation of three-
dimensional cells’ coat, but even they are
74
S. V. Verevka, N. M. Voroshylova
enough for the transformation into autoch-
tonic parametabolic process that outruns cells
division. At such look the community of free-
born microbes may be recognized as the mise-
rable lump of the clayed poor fellows, that by
the skin of their teeth survive in the hostile
habitat. However, EPS isn’t a simply amor-
phous gel that is composed by polysaccharides,
lipopolysaccharides, and glycoproteins, but
instead has a highly ordered three-dimension-
al structure that contributes to its function and
emergent properties [10–12]. It provides the
protection of microorganisms, redistribution
of nutrients between individual cell layers and
accumulation of active intracellular compo-
nents in inaccessible for free microorganisms
concentrations. EPS accumulates inside the
matrix innumerous substances that may be
inactivated or transformed into nutrients by
various enzymes, that were secreted by cells
and immobilized in EPS’ net. All these proper-
ties transform the EPS matrix in some kind of
external digestion system [13].
Survivorship bias at microbial level
There is no consensus on the causes of phe-
notypic variation of microorganisms at the
biofilm forming. Some components of the
extracellular polymeric substances may be
mutagenic. The horizontal gene transfer may
be also possible due to enriching the genome
of compactly grouped microorganisms by
various inclusions of extracellular DNA [4,
5]. The exchange on genetic information may
play a notable role in the intercellular interac-
tions in biofilm, but in clean and feed-abun-
dant conditions such enrichments are at best
useless and mutant forms lose to normal one,
lag behind in the dynamics of reproduction
and eventually disappear. Contrary, under the
influence of an unfavorable factor, some (the
rarest) change in the genome prove to be use-
ful, ensuring to mutant form advantages in
surviving and multiplication over an original
form. It is impossible to exclude the possibi-
lity of evolutionarily formed permanent phe-
notype dispersion with an unchanged geno-
type. Pheno ty pic plasticity seems to be the
most important prerequisite for survival. The
community of the cells that are phenotypi-
cally different among themselves proves to
be more adapted to survival and reproduction
under the influence of any unfavorable factor.
The plasticity of the phenotype is also neces-
sary for the formation of internal layers of
biofilm under conditions that differ from both
an ideal pure medium and conditions of hab-
itation of the outer layers of the forming film.
Thus, at certain thickness of the outer layer
the transition from aerobic metabolism to
anaerobic one becomes in demand. No less
useful are the abilities to supply catabolites
of the outer la yers’ cells, extracellular poly-
meric substance, died or less aggressive cells,
and even the material of the supporting sur-
face [4, 14]. Biofilms’ habitat conditions pre-
determine an increase of aggressiveness and
intensive production of lytic enzymes. The
expansion of new food base supports the
domination of the fittest iso-forms. Less suc-
cessful cells as well as that ones which got
under annoying conditions, are eliminated by
more luckier relatives and bacteriopha-
ges [15]. In this way, spontaneously but reg-
ularly, feeding cavities, chanels, and pores
are forming.
Deepening the cells’ differentiation by the
biofilm development leads to the formation of
75
Tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual
subpopulations with properties that are very
different from the free form of the same cells.
As a result, the concept has emerged of the
special “biofilm phenotype”, which in com-
munity is less sensitive for the influence of the
corresponding unfavorable factors [4, 16].
There is no doubt that the formation of “win-
ning” lines is not a single act of creation, but
proceeds permanently, with a constant rejec-
tion of less adapted forms. Therefore, the con-
sideration of the formation of biofilms as a
purposeful process is a typical example of a
systematic survivorship bias – accounting for
winning cases without considering the many
losers. Of the many phenotypic forms that are
formed, only those ones whose phenotype
contributes to survival and reproduction under
the yoke of an unfavorable factor or changed
environmental conditions are observable. Both
the initial planktonic form, and innumerous
ones with useless or harmful changes of phe-
notype, lose in distribution and, as a result,
lose in representation. But this doesn’t mean
that they are still not forming. From this point
of view the systematically formed failure
forms are an indispensable condition for the
adaptation and survival of society as a whole.
There is nothing unusual in this, if notify that
microbes are the product of the selection du-
ring the myriad generations. The formation of
the aggregate isn’t a consequence of the sti-
cking together of individual cells, but is the
result of proliferation of the cellular forms
which were more adapted to the given condi-
tions. On these reasons biofilms are neither
“fortresses” nor “cities”, but they are the result
of rigid selection of cells by phenotype con-
formity or inconsistency for the changed ha-
bi tat conditions.
Under the pressure of the immune
system
For obvious reasons, the features of biofilms’
existence inside the higher organisms are of
increased interest. The main feature of this
coexistence is the presence of powerful pro-
tective systems designed to neutralize or re-
move the alien inclusions from the body. In
this case, the recognition of «one’s own» and
«others» is determined by the presence or
absence on the cells’ surface of structural
groups that don’t conform to the structural
rules adopted in this particular biological
system [17]. One can confidently identify
three key strategies for the survival of micro-
organisms under similar circumstances. The
simplest and most successful one is based on
the reaching of the maximal correspondence
of the cell’s surface to the structural rules
adopted by multicellular proprietary organ-
ism. This strategy is the typical one for most
obligate microorganisms that live in biofilms
whose outer layer doesn’t cause noticeable
reaction of the host’s defensive systems. A
more complex case is represented by micro-
organisms that change antigenic determinants
of the surface after the forming of a full-scale
immune response to them. Such strategy is
quite videspread among various bacterias and
protosoas, which in contrast to Leopard may
change their spots. For example, an African
trypanosomias (Trypanosoma brucel) makes
such transformations up to 20 times, that fi-
nally leads to the death of the host [18]. In
such cases the decisive demands are the phe-
notypic plasticity and rigid selection of forms
that were acceptable for changing environ-
mental conditions. In some cases microorgan-
isms may minimize the impact of immune
76
S. V. Verevka, N. M. Voroshylova
system by formation of a kind of smoke bar-
ragen by intensive biosynthesis of the sub-
stances, which interaction with environmen-
tal components leads to the formation of im-
munogenic compounds with corresponding
redistribution of the immune system’s action.
All the noted strategies do not contradict to
each other and may be used together. So,
Strepto coccus pyogenes and Staphylococcus
aureus are typical obligate microorganisms
existing in the form of biofilms. They do not
create any problems for the carrier at the
normal functioning of the immune system.
However, both of them produce intensively
the proteins, that initiate activative processes
resulting in the formation of significant
amounts of immunogenic derivatives. Thus,
streptokinase produced by Streptococcus pyo-
genes forms a complex with plasminogen
circulating in the bloodstream. Such a com-
plex, in turn, activates other molecules of
plasminogen to free plasmin that is immedi-
ately blocked by α2-an ti plasmin. The plasmin-
α2-antiplasmin complex is recognized by
clearance systems as a protein to be elimi-
nated immediately [19]. Staphylo co ccus au-
reus produces staphylokinase that acts simi-
larly, even in some simplified manner. Both
proteins possess little immunogenicity and
are not needed for their cells-producers in
itself, but derivatives of these proteins redis-
tribute substantially the influence of immune
system from producer cells. That leads to the
survival of the latter in a state of quasi-sta-
tionary equilibrium with the host organism.
Meanwhile, the weakening of immune system
caused by any reasons reduces the restrictions
of microorganisms’ growth, that leads to the
hard consequences.
… let slip the dogs …
Mutual negative interactions of the familiar
cells have also been observed in biofilms.
Competition between cells inside biofilms can
involve various killing mechanisms, such as
those using antibiotics, bacteriocins, or extra-
cellular membrane vesicles (which can contain
enzymes that kill or impede the growth of
competiting organisms), or strategies that com-
promise growth, such as nutrient depletion or
the inhibition of quorum sensing [4, 20]. Thus,
the binary biofilm is formed by two Rumi no-
so ccus species, one of which forms a bacterio-
cin active against the other [21]. For the same
reasons biofilms release significant amount of
substances that inhibit the growth and repro-
duction of free planktonic forms as well as
those ones which were pulled out by the bio-
film on the late stage of maturation. These
substances play the role of some kind of self-
produced adverse factor. That is why the pos-
sibilities of free cells’ spreading with following
forming new biofilms are determined by the
complex of external unfavorable factors, by
the ability of plankton forms for mutual bind-
ing, and by the availability of a substrate suit-
able for the primary sorption. No less signifi-
cant is the ability of these microorganisms to
retain certain phenotypic acquisitions irrespec-
tive of the initial conditions. That is why some
phenotypes become even impossible to self-
propagation in the absence of hostile factor
and are doomed to disappear. On the contrary,
some other biofilm-origin microorganisms sur-
vive at returning to a free planktonic state, or
rather, when dividing cells pass through this
stage. That is the cause of the endless race
between the spread of diseases which infec-
tious agents became resistant to some antibio-
77
Tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual
tics and the development of qualitatively new
drugs, for which the resistance has not been
formed yet. In some cases the weakening of
the master’s organism counteraction leads to
the spread of biofilm formed cellular iso-forms
with increased aggressiveness and altered nu-
trient speci fi ci ty. Therefore, the transformation
of known obligate microorganisms at the
weakening of the immune system into the hard
damaging factor is natural and inevitable.
Together with the previously developed resis-
tance to antibiotics, this transformation can be
lethal for the host.
Too much coincidences to be casual
The concept of biofilms has been proposed
recently – in the mid-1980s [22]. It is wide-
spread mainly among microbiologists, infec-
tious disease specialists, biotechnologists and
ecologists, whereas for the numerous repre-
sentatives of other branches of biological and
medical sciences it remains as a kind of exo tics
that is very far from their interests. However,
even the simplest comparison of the regulari-
ties of formation and development of biofilms
and malignant tumors is striking by similarity.
In both cases we are dealing with the formation
of three-dimensional associates of cells, which
differ sharply from the environment. Whatever
the reasons for the formation of malignant
cells, a metabolic disorder is accompanied by
a massive contamination of the outer cell
membrane by the binding of the diverse extra-
cellular material. This, on one hand, causes a
regular reaction of the immune system, that
may be considered as the powerful unfavorable
factor that promotes the formation of the bio-
film. On the other hand, high reactivity of the
surface carbohydrate components provides
both mutual recognition of tumor cells and
endotheliocytes’ surface, ensuring primary
adhesion of tumor cells to the endothelium of
the vessels of the target organ that is the key
stage of metastasis [23, 24]. At the same time,
the material adsorbed on the cell surface initi-
ates a cascade of activative processes, that lead
to the cleavage of surrounding tissues, the
development of oxidative stress and other pro-
cesses resulting in the formation of significant
amounts of various abnormal metabolites [25].
Some of them, forming and accumulating in
the tumor tissue in concentrations which are
unattainable for a single cell, cause an unpre-
dictable cascades of cells’ transformations with
a rigid selection of formed cellular isoforms
according to the criteria considered above for
the biofilms. Other components contribute to
the tumor survival by damaging surrounding
tissues and reducing the impact of the immune
system by smoke screen of damaged proteins.
The intercellular stroma of the tumor is a typ-
ical extracellular polymeric substance by both:
its content and functions [26]. The presence of
β-structured protein aggregates in stroma’s
composition is also understandable and is
similar for the cases of biofilms and for some
other tissues with disturbed metabolism [7]. It
is worth to underline, that the formation of
β-stacked protein aggregates in the living body
in itself leads to severe consequences associ-
ated with the disruption of the normal func-
tioning of a number of biological systems.
A special group of tumor-producing substan ces
are the tumors’ restrictors, that more or less
effectively block the interactions essential for
metastasis and invasion [27, 28]. Similarly to
biofilms, the reaching of the three-dimension-
al tumor’s size causes the cells’ differentiation,
78
S. V. Verevka, N. M. Voroshylova
formation of feeding vessels and changes in
the character and intensity of the local me-
tabolism. Thus, the increase in growth factors
expression is the typical tumors feature and
may be caused by phenotypic differentiation.
At the same time the development of nonfunc-
tional proteolysis, which is typical for malig-
nant processes, leads to the activation of
growth factors followed by intensification of
angiogenesis, which is typical for tumor de-
velopment, too [29]. All these alterations are
not a directional process, but are the result of
a complex of processes leading to the forma-
tion of phenotype-different forms with subse-
quent selection according to the criterion of
the ability to survive and divide under perma-
nently changing conditions.
The marked analogy of the processes of
formation of biofilms and malignant neoplasms
makes it possible to draw several conclusions
that can have practical significance. If to ex-
amine tumor as a kind of a mature biofilm, the
high phenotypic plasticity of the tumors’ cel-
lular society complicates significantly, if not
excludes completely, the blocking of the ma-
lignant process by the body itself. The same
reasons cause the formation of chemotherapy-
resistant forms similarly to the formation of
antibiotic-resistant biofilms. Thus, the forma-
tion of cytostatics-resistant tumor cells is
caused by a change in the lipid composition
of their outer membranes, leading to decrease
in permeability for cis-platin and doxorubi-
cin [30, 31]. At the same time, resistance to
liposomal forms of these cytostatics has not
been detected, which clearly indicates the ad-
visability of using preparations with enhanced
membrane permeability in the treatment of
recurrent oncological diseases [31, 32]. The
process of metastasis is mediated by the stage
of formation of a “floating island” of malignant
cells [23]. By the analogy with the mechanisms
of formation and development of biofilms, it
it is possible to suppose that in this state the
conglomerate of malignant cells is the most
vulnerable. It is known that only a small part
of malignant cells circulating in the blood-
stream is capable of anchoring with the sub-
sequent formation of a tumor. In other words,
the limiting stage of the metastasis is the bind-
ing of floating cells to suitable landing sites on
the intima of blood vessels. Similarly to the
biofilm-forming processes, this process is li-
mi ted by a number of tumor-produced sub-
stances that block the binding sites and boun-
ded groups, which are responsible for cells’
sorption. The elimination of tumor removes
these blocking compounds, thus creating the
prerequisites for relapse. This necessitates the
postoperative use of angiostatins, trombospon-
dins and similar substances for limitation of
undesirable sorptive processes. An important
consequence of the formation of antimetasta-
tic-resistance is the increase in the aggressive-
ness of cells, which is associated with activity
of the proteolytic enzymes. Thus, for cytos ta-
tics-resistant cells more than triple increase in
trypsin-like activity was shown [33]. By ana-
lo gy with the mechanisms of biofilm develop-
ment, such increase in aggressiveness is a di-
rect consequence of the selection of more ag-
gressive cellular isoforms, which are more
adapted for surviving under the pressure of
more complicated complex of unfavorable
factors. It is worth to emphasize that proteo-
lytic enzymes formed due to non-functional
activation are structurally damaged and can’t
be blocked by the protein inhibitors of blood
79
Tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual
circulation. This encourages the search for
biocompatible inhibitors of proteinases, that
are different in the mechanism of action from
ineffective natural ones. For these reasons the
experimental work on the suppression of recur-
rence by protein inhibitors of thrombin from
the leech salivary glands deserve attention [34,
35]. It seems that such drugs may not only
effectively prevent the development of post-
operative thromboses, but also have significant
antimetastatic effects.
Conclusions
The presented data testify for a possible simi-
larity of the processes of the formation of
biofilms and malignant tumors. It also follows
that the formation of multicellular anomalies
is largely mediated by the action of a complex
of non-enzymatic processes. The components
of this complex of reactions proceed autoch-
thonically and independently, but their total
action ensures the survival of more adapted
cellular forms. Such an order is disastrous for
less adapted cells, but it ensures the survival
of society as a whole. In both cases, the forma-
tion and development of a multicellular as-
sociate is a consequence of a complex of bio-
chemical and biophysical processes, that lead
to the permanent formation of phenotypically
different forms with permanent selection ac-
cording to the changing environment, which
is permanent, too. In the mature state both
biofilms and tumors have increased resistance
to a variety of unfavorable factors. Therefore,
the suppression of undesirable processes is
more effective at the early stages of their de-
velopment that leads to the search for ways to
influence on the less resistant early forms. Both
biofilms and tumors produce substances that
limit the spread of the free forms of corre-
sponding cells. That is why the usage of these
substances is necessary after tumor elimina-
tion. At the same time free cells’ forms are
more vulnerable for the substances, that are
able to limit their aggressivity. The acquired
resistance to one unfavorable factor is useless
in relation to another one, that differs by mech-
anism of action. Accounting of these consid-
erations seems to be worth of attention for the
search of effective approaches for suppression
of the malignant neoplasm development. One
can not but agree with the opinion that in the
study of the genesis of biofilms there are more
questions than answers. The same can be said
about the mechanisms of tumor formation and
development. However, in both cases the ex-
pressed role of a complex of non-enzymatic
reactions is traced, whose resulting effect leads
to the formation of a stable multicellular as-
sociate.
RefeRences
1. Kornberg A. Centenary of the birth of modern bio-
chemistry. Trends Biochem Sci. 1997;22(8):282–3.
2. Stoodley P, Sauer K, Davies DG, Costerton JW.
Biofilms as complex differentiated communities.
Annu Rev Microbiol. 2002;56:187–209.
3. Vert M, Doi Y, Hellwich K-H, Hess M, Hodge P, Kubi-
sa P, Rinaldo M, Schue F. Terminology for biorelated
polymers and applications (IUPAC Recommendations
2012). Pure Appl Chem. 2012; 84(2):377–410.
4. Flemming HC, Wingender J, Szewzyk U, Steinberg P,
Rice SA, Kjelleberg S. Biofilms: an emergent form of
bacterial life. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2016;14(9):563–75.
5. Nikolaev YuA, Plakunov VK. Biofilm – “City of
Microbes” or an analogue of multicellular orga-
nisms? Microbilolgy. 2007; 76(2):125–38.
6. Lozins’ka LM, Semchyshyn HM. [Biological aspects
of non-enzymatic glycosylation]. Ukr Biokhim Zh
(1999). 2012;84(5):16–37.
80
S. V. Verevka, N. M. Voroshylova
7. Verevka SV. Parametabolic β-aggregation of proteins:
familiar mechanisms with diverse sequels. in: Ed
Berhardt LV. Advances in Medicine and Biology.
NY: Nova Science Publishers, 2013, 72: 29–48.
8. Vicente Miranda H, Outeiro TF. The sour side of
neurodegenerative disorders: the effects of protein
glycation. J Pathol. 2010;221(1):13–25.
9. Volinsky R, Kinnunen PK. Oxidized phosphatidyl-
cholines in membrane-level cellular signaling: from
biophysics to physiology and molecular pathology.
FEBS J. 2013;280(12):2806–16.
10. Hobley L, Harkins C, MacPhee CE, Stanley-Wall NR.
Giving structure to the biofilm matrix: an overview
of individual strategies and emerging common
themes. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2015;39(5):649–69.
11. Sutherland I. Biofilm exopolysaccharides: a strong and
sticky framework. Microbiology. 2001;147(Pt 1):3–9.
12. Branda SS, Vik S, Friedman L, Kolter R. Biofilms: the
matrix revisited. Trends Microbiol. 2005;13(1):20–6.
13. Tielen P, Kuhn H, Rosenau F, Jaeger KE, Flem-
ming HC, Wingender J. Interaction between extra-
cellular lipase LipA and the polysaccharide alginate
of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. BMC Microbiol.
2013;13:159.
14. López D, Vlamakis H, Losick R, Kolter R. Canniba-
lism enhances biofilm development in Bacillus sub-
tilis. Mol Microbiol. 2009;74(3):609–18.
15. Abedon ST. Bacteriophage exploitation of bacterial
biofilms: phage preferencefor less mature targets?
FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2016;363(3). pii: fnv246.
16. Cochran WL, McFeters GA, Stewart PS. Reduced
susceptibility of thin Pseudomonas aeruginosa bio-
films to hydrogen peroxide and monochloramine.
J Appl Microbiol. 2000;88(1):22–30.
17. Verevka SV. Formation and recognition of superficial
microclusters as the integral part of processing of
proteins. in: Eds. Boscoe AB, Listov CR, Protein
Research Progress: New Research. NY: Nova Sci-
ence Publishers, 2008:9–15.
18. Askers J. Normal immune responses to protosoal
infections. In: Ed. Dick G. Immunological aspects
of infectious diseases. Lancaster: MTP Press,
1979:77–115.
19. Kurkina T, Sambur M, Verevka S. Activating action
of streptokinase and its rile in the injury of immune
homeo-stasis. in: Ed. Zabolotny DI. Molecular Pa-
thology of Proteins. N.Y.: Nova Science Publishers,
2009, 153–8.
20. Balsalobre C, Silván JM, Berglund S, Mizunoe Y,
Uhlin BE, Wai SN. Release of the type I secreted
alpha-haemolysin via outer membrane vesicles from
Escherichia coli. Mol Microbiol. 2006;59(1):99–112.
21. Odenyo AA, Mackie RI, Stahl DA, White BA. The
use of 16S rRNA-targeted oligonucleotide probes
to study competition between ruminal fibrolytic
bacteria: development of probes for Ruminococcus
species and evidence for bacteriocin production.
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1994;60(10):3688–96.
22. Flemming HC. EPS-Then and Now. Microorgan-
isms. 2016;4(4). pii: E41.
23. Chikina A, Alexandrova A. The cellular mechanisms
and regulation of metastasis formation. Mol Biol.
2014; 48(2): 165–80.
24. Alizadeh AM, Shiri S, Farsinejad S. Metastasis re-
view: from bench to bedside. Tumour Biol. 2014;
35(9):8483–523.
25. Verevka S, Grinenko T. Pseudo-functional interac-
tions of plasminogen: molecular mechanisms and
pathologic appearance. In: Ed. Berhardt LV. Ad-
vances in medicine and biology. NY: Nova Science
Publishers, 2011; 34: 35–62.
26. Chekhun VF. Stroma – regulator of cancer cell pro-
gression. Onkologia. 2009; 11(3): 164–5.
27. Nyberg P, Xie L, Kalluri R. Endogenous inhibitors
of angiogenesis. Cancer Res. 2005;65(10):3967–79.
28. Tykhomyrov AA, Vovchuk IL, Grinenko TV. Plas-
minogen and angiostatin levels in female benign
breast lesions. Ukr Biochem J. 2015;87(5):103–12.
29. Kessenbrock K, Plaks V, Werb Z. Matrix metallo-
proteinases: regulators of the tumor microenviron-
ment. Cell. 2010;141(1):52–67.
30. Yurchenko O, Todor I, Tryndyak V, Tregubova N,
Kovtonyuk O, Solyanuk G, Kulik G, Chekhun V.
Resistance of Guerin’s carcinoma cell to cisplatin:
biochemical and morphological aspects. Exp Oncol.
2003; 25(1):64–8.
31. Nosko MM, Pivnyuk VM, Solyanik GI, Kulik GI,
Todor IN, Momot VY, Melnikov OR, Ponomare-
va OV, Chekhun VF. Biodistribution analysis of
cisplatin in liposomal form in animals with cispla-
81
Tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual
tin-resistant and cisplatin-sensitive carcinoma. Exp
Oncol. 2010;32(1):40–3.
32. Naleskina LA, Todor IN, Nosko MM, Lukianova NY,
Pivnyuk VM, Chekhun VF. Alteration in lipid com-
position of plasma membranes of sensitive and re-
sistant Guerin carcinoma cells due to the action of
free and liposomal form of cisplatin. Exp Oncol.
2013;35(3):192–7.
33. Chekhun VF, Kovtonyuk OV, Todor IN, Kulik GI.
Total proteolytic activity and levels of the main pro-
teinase inhibitors in blood plasma of mice bearing
Lewis lung carcinoma upon development of resis-
tance to cisplatin. Exp Oncol. 2005;27(4):286–9.
34. Guo RR, Liu Y, Lu WL, Zhao JH, Wang XQ,
Zhang H, Wang JC, Zhang X, Zhang Q. A recombi-
nant peptide, hirudin, potentiates the inhibitory ef-
fects of stealthy liposomal vinblastine on the growth
and metastasis of melanoma. Biol Pharm Bull.
2008;31(4):696–702.
35. Lu Q, Lv M, Xu E, Shao F, Feng Y, Yang J, Shi L.
Recombinant hirudin suppresses the viability, adhe-
sion, migration and invasion of Hep-2 human laryn-
geal cancer cells. Oncol Rep. 2015;33(3):1358-64.
Пухлина та біоплівки: забагато співпадань,
щоб бути випадковими
С. В. Верьовка, Н.М. Ворошилова
Існування більшості мікроорганізмів у формі тривимір-
них асоціатів на межі розподілу фаз свідчить про її зна-
чні переваги такої для виживання, порівняно з дисперс-
ною формою, та дозволяє визначити біоплівки як до-
мінуючу форму життя. Спостерігається виражена поді-
бність багатьох властивостей біоплівок та злоякісних
пухлин, що дозволяє провести певну аналогію між ними.
Подібний погляд полегшує розуміння окремих рис кар-
циногенеза та створює передумови для обґрунтування
перспективних напрямків попередження метастазування.
К л юч ов і с л ов а: біоплівки, карциногенез, мета-
стазирование.
Опухоль и биопленки: слишком много
совпадений, чтобы быть случайными
С. В. Веревка, Н. М. Ворошилова
Существование большинства микроорганизмов в фор-
ме трехмерных ассоциатов на границе раздела фаз
свидетельствует о значительных преимуществах для
выживания по сравнению с дисперсным существова-
нием, что позволяет определить биопленки как доми-
нирующую форму жизни. Наблюдается выраженное
подобие множества свойств биопленок и злокачествен-
ных опухолей, что позволяет провести определенную
аналогию между ними. Подобный взгляд облегчает
понимание отдельных черт карциногенеза и создает
предпосылки для обоснования перспективных направ-
лений предупреждения метастазирования.
К л юч е в ы е с л ов а: биопленки, карциногенез,
метастазирование.
Received 23.05.2017
|
| id | nasplib_isofts_kiev_ua-123456789-154272 |
| institution | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| issn | 0233-7657 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2025-12-07T17:23:58Z |
| publishDate | 2018 |
| publisher | Інститут молекулярної біології і генетики НАН України |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | Verevka, S.V. Voroshylova, N.M. 2019-06-15T12:11:48Z 2019-06-15T12:11:48Z 2018 Tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual / S.V. Verevka, N.M. Voroshylova // Вiopolymers and Cell. — 2018. — Т. 34, № 1. — С. 72-81. — Бібліогр.: 35 назв. — англ. 0233-7657 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7124/bc.000972 https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/154272 616-006:616-033-2:616-093/-098.001.8 The existence of the majority of microorganisms in the form of three-dimensional associates on the phase interface proves the significant survivable advantages of such form of life at compare with monocellular planktonic ones. These advantages provided to biofilms a place of the most widely distributed form of life if not the dominative one. There is a strong similarity in properties of biofilms and malignant tumors that promotes considering the latter as some kind of biofilms. Such point of view facilitates understanding some features of carcinogenesis as well as the grounds for perspective directions in the prevention of metastases. Існування більшості мікроорганізмів у формі тривимірних асоціатів на межі розподілу фаз свідчить про її значні переваги такої для виживання, порівняно з дисперсною формою, та дозволяє визначити біоплівки як домінуючу форму життя. Спостерігається виражена подібність багатьох властивостей біоплівок та злоякісних пухлин, що дозволяє провести певну аналогію між ними. Подібний погляд полегшує розуміння окремих рис карциногенеза та створює передумови для обґрунтування перспективних напрямків попередження метастазування. Существование большинства микроорганизмов в форме трехмерных ассоциатов на границе раздела фаз свидетельствует о значительных преимуществах для выживания по сравнению с дисперсным существованием, что позволяет определить биопленки как доминирующую форму жизни. Наблюдается выраженное подобие множества свойств биопленок и злокачественных опухолей, что позволяет провести определенную аналогию между ними. Подобный взгляд облегчает понимание отдельных черт карциногенеза и создает предпосылки для обоснования перспективных направлений предупреждения метастазирования. en Інститут молекулярної біології і генетики НАН України Вiopolymers and Cell Discussions Tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual Пухлина та біоплівки: забагато співпадань, щоб бути випадковими Опухоль и биопленки: слишком много совпадений, чтобы быть случайными Article published earlier |
| spellingShingle | Tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual Verevka, S.V. Voroshylova, N.M. Discussions |
| title | Tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual |
| title_alt | Пухлина та біоплівки: забагато співпадань, щоб бути випадковими Опухоль и биопленки: слишком много совпадений, чтобы быть случайными |
| title_full | Tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual |
| title_fullStr | Tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual |
| title_full_unstemmed | Tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual |
| title_short | Tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual |
| title_sort | tumors and biofilms: too much coincidences to be casual |
| topic | Discussions |
| topic_facet | Discussions |
| url | https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/154272 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT verevkasv tumorsandbiofilmstoomuchcoincidencestobecasual AT voroshylovanm tumorsandbiofilmstoomuchcoincidencestobecasual AT verevkasv puhlinatabíoplívkizabagatospívpadanʹŝobbutivipadkovimi AT voroshylovanm puhlinatabíoplívkizabagatospívpadanʹŝobbutivipadkovimi AT verevkasv opuholʹibioplenkisliškommnogosovpadeniičtobybytʹslučainymi AT voroshylovanm opuholʹibioplenkisliškommnogosovpadeniičtobybytʹslučainymi |