Background
Cancer genome projects are providing complete landscapes of the mutations that exist in tumors, making it essential to bridge the gap between high-throughput sequencing information and the molecular mechanisms underlying the natural history of cancer [
1]. In this regard, there is an unprecedented need for mammal models of cancer: mice with naturally occurring oncogenic mutations have provided important information regarding cancer pathogenesis; genetically engineered mice have emerged as essential tools for both mechanistic studies and drug development in cancer research; transplantation models (xenografts) have been useful in the study of metastasis and for testing potential therapies. Mouse models of colon cancer have been extensively revised by Taketo and Edelmann [
2], as well as by Rosenberg and Tanaka [
3].
Cancer cachexia is a muscle wasting syndrome that affects most cancer patients [
4]. Cachexia is acknowledged to be a serious complication in many chronic diseases and is associated with a poor prognosis [
5]. Indeed, cachexia not only affects therapy and the patients' quality of life, but is responsible for at least 20% of cancer deaths [
6]. The lack of an official definition of cachexia may have led to its prevalence being underestimated, to misdiagnoses and to conflicting data being reported [
5]. A major effort has recently been made to reach the following consensus definition of cachexia: a metabolic syndrome associated with underlying illness and characterized by loss of muscle, with or without loss of fat mass, frequently associated with anorexia, inflammation, insulin resistance and increased muscle protein breakdown [
7].
The genesis of the C26 colon carcinoma model
In 1975, during an effort to establish an animal colon tumor model for biological and chemotherapy studies, colon tumors were induced and transplanted in different inbred mouse strains. Four tumors survived the first transplant, which displayed a variety of histological and malignancy features. These four tumors included the colon tumor 26, described as an undifferentiated Grade IV carcinoma that metastasizes above all in the lungs [
8]. In 1981, the colon tumor 26 was further characterized
in vivo by inoculation of serial cell doses into syngeneic BALB/c mice. The C26 line was highly tumorigenic and displayed a low tendency to metastasize; C26-inoculated mice exhibited high mortality [
9]. In 1990, C26-implanted mice were reported to suffer extensive carcass weight loss (40% of the control body weight), hypoglycemia and hypercorticism in the presence of unchanged food intake. C26 caused hepatic function disorders and loss of adipose and skeletal muscle tissue, thus proving to be an appropriate model for investigating the mechanisms underlying cachexia [
10]. Recently, we and others have subcutaneously implanted a solid fragment of the C26 tumor, as opposed to a cell suspension of C26 cells, in the flank or dorsal region of mice [
11‐
13]. It is noteworthy that C26-induced cachexia varies according to the inoculation site [
14].
Use of the C26 model for cancer studies
The C26 model has been used over the last three decades for research on the natural history of carcinomas and antitumor therapy. These studies range from earlier investigations exploiting C26 cells injected directly into the spleen of syngeneic mice to study the efficacy of MMP inhibitors [
15], to a report showing that reduced angiopoietin availability at the tumor site hampers neoangiogenesis and thus limits tumor growth and metastases [
16]. Since liver and lung metastases are the predominant cause of colorectal cancer-related mortality, cancers of the gastrointestinal tract are widely used to develop anti-tumor therapies. In this context, C26 cells were injected in mice to investigate i) the potential of CXCR3 antagonism to counteract the progression of cancer cells to target organs [
17], ii) the antitumor effect of liposomal formulation of glucocorticoids [
18] and iii) the effects of combined interstitial laser coagulation and doxorubicin treatment [
19]. Mice either orthotopically or ectopically implanted with C26 cells were used to study the effects of several other anti-tumor agents [
20,
21]. Interestingly, two subclones have been isolated of C26 cells featuring differential sensitivity to 5-fluorouracil, which may represent an important determinant of drug sensitivity and treatment response [
22]. While C26 cells are initially responsive to the blockade of MAP kinase pathways, they may become resistant to MAP kinase inhibitors due to K-ras activation [
23]. C26 cells have also been used to demonstrate the antitumor effects of interleukin-18, interleukin-27 and the chemokine CCL21/SLC [
24‐
26]. Further studies based on the C26 model were aimed at developing novel karyotypic analysis approaches to verify and track the origin and evolution of tumor cell lines [
27].
The C26 model for studies on cachexia and countermeasures
The C26 tumor enhances protein catabolism mediated by muscle specific ubiquitin ligases, atrogin-1/MAFbx and MuRF1 [
28]. During muscle atrophy, thick, but not thin, filament components are degraded by the ubiquitin-dependent proteasome pathway [
29], which is in agreement with the finding that C26 burden induces specific loss of myosin [
30] and altered myosin isoform expression [
31]. Thus, it has been suggested that muscle cachexia results from highly selective targeting of protein degradation [
30]. In C26-bearing mice, the dystrophin complex is downregulated, a phenomenon essential for wasting, thereby highlighting a regulatory role of dystrophin in cachexia [
28]. By exploiting the C26 model, we demonstrated that Peg3/PW1 and p53 participate in a positive feedback loop that regulates cachexia and stem cell numbers in skeletal muscle [
32]. We also noted that cachectic muscles are enriched in stem cells with myogenic potential, though not in inflammatory cells [
33].
Chemotherapeutic agents induce muscle wasting, which consequently persists in spite of tumor remission [
34]. By contrast, indomethacin, ibuprofen and appetite stimulants are among treatments shown to preserve muscle mass in C26 tumor-bearing mice [
35,
36]. IL-6 mediates muscle wasting induced by C26, even though it is not the sole inducer of cachexia [
37,
38]. Indeed, it is the milieu of circulating cytokines to determine the output in terms of muscle wasting in C26-bearing mice, as indicated by the finding that IL-27 treatment rescues muscle wasting in these animals [
25,
37]. Myostatin negatively regulates skeletal muscle mass, though inhibition of its downstream pathways does not attenuate C26-induced cachexia, thereby suggesting that myostatin does not play a role in this context [
39]. Anaerobic glycolysis in a C26 tumor is related to weight loss, while erythropoietin administration has been shown to reduce weight loss [
12]. Accordingly, exercise training attenuates C26-induced muscle wasting [
40]. High protein content, leucine and fish oil reduce improves functional performance in mice with cancer cachexia highlighting the relevance of dietary supplementation for cachexia [
41].
Given the clinical relevance of standardizing animal models of cachexia, we performed a full characterization of the C26-bearing mice, with the aim to provide a reference for further studies on an established model of cancer which has been poorly described from the point of view of cancer-associated cachexia. We pinpointed several outputs, from organismal to molecular level, suitable for the assessment of the progression of cancer and/or cancer-associated cachexia. Here we report for the first time the rates of C26 tumor proliferation and apoptosis, a detailed description of muscle wasting in relation to muscle fiber type, ultrastructural features of the sarcomere in cachexia underlying the novel, distinguishing functional features of the wasting muscle, i.e. fatigue in the absence of loss of specific force. These features characterize, on a functional point of view, cancer cachexia from other forms of muscle atrophy, such as sarcopenia, disuse or dystrophy-associated atrophy.
Discussion
In 2002, there were approximately one million new cases of colon cancer worldwide, making it one of the leading causes of cancer death; moreover, its prevalence was increasing in some countries [
48]. The clinical relevance of colon cancer led to an unparalleled experimental use of animal models. Mice bearing the C26 colon carcinoma represent an established murine model of cancer [
8,
9]. Cachexia is associated with most cancers, including the murine C26 colon carcinoma [
10]. Consequently, there is a striking discrepancy between the 188 papers yielded by the query "C26 AND cancer" and the 8 papers yielded by the query "C26 AND cachexia" in the NCBI's PubMed system, the most widely used method for accessing MEDLINE. Noticeably, the search using "C26 AND cancer" does not retrieve very important works on cancer cachexia that exploited the C26 model [
28,
32]. PubMed employs a Boolean search strategy, which suffers, among other shortcomings, from differences in term usage between searchers and indexers [
49]. It is apparent that the communities of scientists exploiting the C26 model to study either cancer or cachexia are not aware of each other's works, and this may have deleterious consequences for the progress of integrative medicine applied to a complex syndrome associated with underlying illness. We suggest that "C26" be included among the keywords whenever work is conducted on this experimental model to provide adequate visibility.
The definition of the C26 tumor as adenocarcinoma is a major mistake in terminology [
10,
12,
35]. We have confirmed that the C26 cells, originally obtained from a colon carcinoma, when ectopically implanted in mice form an undifferentiated carcinoma, which should thus be referred to as such. This tumor has a growth rate comparable to that of other carcinomas in rodents [
50], with the mass growing to a significant size that corresponds to 10% of the body weight at 40 days. Such a large tumor mass is inconceivable in the clinical setting. However, it is worth noting that we observe a significant effect on both body weight loss (this work) and muscle fiber atrophy [
33] far before the tumor reaches such a significant size. In particular, we note that during the lag phase of tumor growth, i.e. within the first two weeks following tumor transplantation, the presence of the tumor already affects fiber size [
33]. At day 16 (i.e. at the onset of tumor massive growth) body weight loss is already significant and has reached a plateau. While body weight negatively correlates with tumor mass in some animal models, such as the MAC-16 -bearing mice [
51], this correlation is not straightforward and depends on the type of tumor. Lung carcinoma-bearing mice do not loose weight during tumor growth while sarcoma-bearing mice loose more than 10% of their initial weight in the same time frame [
52]. This is in agreement with an independent report showing that sarcoma-bearing rats display a catastrophic weight loss at 14 days following tumor transplant, when the latter has not significantly grown yet [
53]. The fact the maximal weight loss precedes the maximal tumor growth is a useful feature since cachexia may thus be observed in the absence of significant disturbing factors, such as a relevant tumor mass. This phenomenon also indicates a non linear relation between tumor size and cachectic effects, highlighting the complexity of the underlying mechanisms. We observed relatively low standard deviations associated to any given data point of the tumor growth kinetics, even during the time lapse corresponding to the fastest tumor growth, which mirrors a good reproducibility of the experimental procedure. We inject a solid fragment (of standard dimensions) of the tumor rather than a cell suspension. We speculate that, with our approach, all the tumor cells remain in place and are exposed to the same niche, thus leading to a highly reproducible output. This is a very important issue, given the relevance of standardization in animal models of cancer-cachexia.
In keeping with tumor cell DNA distribution, C26 cells are not polyploid, but display a hypodiploid peak that is not accounted for by apoptosis. Carcinomas have been reported to be associated with hypodiploid cells, whose presence may represent a poor prognosis factor [
54,
55]. The growth-inhibitory imprinted gene Peg3 is not expressed by C26 cells, which is highly relevant since loss of Peg3 expression through promoter methylation, loss of heterozygosity and other mechanisms may stimulate clonogenic growth and contribute to the pathogenesis of a number of cancers [
56,
57]. The results regarding the metastatic potential of C26 are controversial [
8,
9]. In our studies, the low incidence of metastases and the time required for them to occur are in agreement with Sato et al.'s work and suggest that the C26 model may be exploited for studies on metastases-free tumors.
We found that the host response to C26 tumor burden includes splenomegaly, another controversial result [
8‐
10]. Splenomegaly is a marker of tumor progression that is associated with leukemoid reaction [
58,
59]. Few studies have addressed the interactions between inflammatory cells and skeletal muscle in cachexia. We found that the number of leukocytes, neutrophils and macrophages does not increase, but may on the contrary be depleted in the endomysium of tumor-bearing mice [
33]. We thus believe that the muscle damage observed in cancer cachexia [
28] is not attributable to leukocytes, neutrophils and macrophages, even though inflammatory cells do induce muscle damage and regeneration in different contexts [
60]. On the contrary, the partial cancer-associated immuno-depression displayed by C26-tumor bearing mice may be relevant to cachexia, since a role for immune cells in protection from cachexia has been reported in a different experimental setting [
61]. These findings are in agreement with the evidence that treatments leading to an improved immune competence are beneficial against cancer cachexia [
62].
The hallmark of the host response to tumor burden is cachexia [
10]. Wasting is a direct effect of circulating cytokines on skeletal muscle metabolism and cannot be ascribed to cancer-associated anorexia, since food intake by C26-bearing mice is not significantly different from that of controls [
28]. Nonetheless, we and others observed a significant loss of both fat and lean mass induced by the presence of a tumor. We observed that muscle wasting is associated to increased protein degradation, as shown by increased protein ubiquitination in muscles from C26-bearing mice. Cachexia, sarcopenia, and disuse atrophy are wasting conditions characterized by loss of muscle mass. These conditions result in different metabolic adaptations: increased rate of protein degradation in cachexia, as opposed to unchanged protein degradation in inactivity or sarcopenia [
63]. The loss of both adipose and muscle tissue is a specific feature of cachexia, making it possible to further distinguish cachexia from sarcopenia, which is characterized by loss of lean but not fat mass. Taken together, these features allow a clear discrimination among different wasting conditions and indicate that cachexia is distinct from sarcopenia and from disuse. Accordingly, this concept has been included in the recently released consensus definition of cachexia [
7].
Since loss of muscle mass is a hallmark of muscle wasting, we have measured the mass of several muscles, namely the Soleus, the EDL and the Tibialis. These muscles differ insomuch as they have very different sizes and functions, while being all anatomically located in the distal extremity of the lower limbs. Differential functions are mirrored by a different fiber type composition and oxidative metabolism, with the Soleus and EDL being predominantly composed of slow (oxidative) and fast (glycolytic) fibers, respectively; the Tibialis has a mixed fiber population. We showed that all the muscle analyzed were severely cachectic. Two-way ANOVA demonstrated that the C26 tumor significantly affects the muscle mass irrespectively of its initial size and type. We therefore conclude that muscle wasting appears to be a generalized response to tumor-burden, even though we cannot exclude that some muscles are spared (which would be demonstrated only by a systematic analysis on virtually the entire musculature). This is a novel, relevant finding; however, it does not imply that all muscles are equal with regard to all responses: for instance, both Soleus and EDL become cachectic in the presence of the C26-tumor but they do not have superimposable functional deficits (discussed below).
Muscle wasting is due to muscle fiber atrophy. The decline in muscle mass observed in both
Soleus and EDL in spite of the differences in fiber type composition suggested that fiber atrophy is not fiber-type dependent. To directly address this issue, we measured muscle fiber CSA in two different fiber populations (oxidative and glycolytic fibers identified by NADH-transferase staining) in the same muscle, namely the EDL. We observed atrophy of both glycolytic and oxidative fibers, the latter previously reported to be resistant to cachexia [
28], an observation based on the assessment of fiber diameter rather than on that of fiber cross-sectional area, as ours instead was. The latter method may be more sensitive to minor changes that would otherwise escape detection. Our findings that the tumor induces a significant decrease of the
Soleus muscle mass and of the oxidative fibers in the EDL indicate that, irrespectively of muscle type, the C26 tumor does affect a fiber type generally considered "more resistant" to cachexia.
Proteasome-mediated degradation of ubiquitinated proteins leads to sarcomere dismantling [
29]. Therefore, we investigated the structure of the sarcomeres in cross-section at the ultrastructural level. We showed that in cachexia disorganization occurs of the otherwise highly organized array of actin and myosin myofilaments. While the selective targeting of myosin heavy chain for degradation in cancer cachexia was recently reported [
30], this is the first direct demonstration of a deficit in the contractile system of cachectic muscles. In addition to protease- and proteasome-mediated digestion, autophagy plays a significant role in muscle fiber atrophy [
64], though we did not notice an increase in the number of lysosomes in cachectic muscle fibers by staining for esterase activity. This does not formally exclude a relevant role of autophagy in C26-induced muscle wasting and this issue needs further investigation. Alterations in the dystrophin complex that anchors muscle fibers to the basement membrane have been reported to occur in C26-induced cachexia [
28]; this may explain the blurred appearance of laminin, one of the main components of the basement membrane. In fact, cachectic fibers show an irregular surface and a general deregulation of the cell-matrix interactions
in vivo [
28]. Dystrophinopathies in colorectal cancer patients have also been reported [
28] (Zampieri S. et al., 2010 Spring Padua Muscle days, Terme Euganee, Padua, Italy, april 22-24, 2010: p. 69; in press; online on
http://www.bio.unipd.it/bam/). These acquired myopathies are the earliest muscle markers of cachexia observed to date, since they occur before the onset of cancer-associated cachexia [
65,
66]. For all the above, we think that it is very important to assess the status of the sarcolemmal proteins, and/or of the proteins of the basement membrane connected to the sarcolemma, in a cancer cachexia study and that this should be a routine procedure. We have shown that both p53 and Peg3/PW1 are expressed in the musculature and mediate muscle atrophy [
32]. These two factors are also regulators of myogenic differentiation
in vitro and muscle regeneration in response to cytokines [
13,
32,
44,
45,
67]. Since dystrophin downregulation renders cachectic muscle particularly fragile [
28], a reduced regenerative capacity may cause muscle wasting. From a clinical point of view, muscle weakness and fatigue are among the leading causes of distress in cachexia. Although maximal tetanic force is reduced by C26 [
68], this reduction is not substantial when force is normalized by a muscle mass index, yielding the so-called specific force. This suggests that the drop in maximal force is merely due to muscle wasting and not to alterations in the intrinsic contractile properties of the myofibers. We have shown that the EDL muscle has a 25% decrease in the fatigue time as compared to the healthy control. Thus, we propose that muscle fatigability, rather than muscle force, is a hallmark of cachectic muscle functional deficit. Interestingly, the
Soleus muscle showed a smaller, non significant decline in the fatigue time, indicating that resistance of this muscle is spared in cachexia. This occurs in spite of the fact that the
Soleus is atrophic in cachexia. This phenomenon highlights the heterogeneity of the muscle responses to cancer and the importance of addressing multiple parameters for different muscles to fully characterize cachexia
in vivo.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors' contributions
PA, EB and VC, conception, design and execution of experiments; ER, physiology experiments; BP, contributing important intellectual content; CR and FP, data collection; EPS, AB and FF, histopathology of the tumor and major intellectual contribution; SA, concept, design and editorial support, research fund collection; DC, conception and design, data collection and analysis, figure and manuscript preparation. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.