The results of the present investigation demonstrate a differential interaction between platelets and ovarian cancer cell lines, not only in terms of the effect of ovarian cancer cells on platelets, but also in the effect of platelets on ovarian cancer cells. Firstly, we used a panel of ovarian cell lines to assess platelet adhesion under static conditions. Adhesion across the 5 cells lines was extremely heterogeneous with significant platelet adhesion to the 59M, A2780, and A2780cis cell lines, while adhesion to the HI0-80 and SK-OV-3 cell lines was not significant compared to the BSA negative control []. The adhesion of platelets to all ovarian cancer cell lines was significantly less than to fibrinogen, suggesting that the adhesion is mediated by either a lower copy number receptor-ligand interaction, or a lower affinity interaction than platelet integrin αIIbβ3 mediated adhesion to fibrinogen. The molecular mechanisms mediating platelet adhesion to ovarian cancer cells remains to be elucidated. Secondly, we assessed the ability of ovarian cancer cells to induce platelet activation. We found that ovarian cancer cells induce platelet activation and degranulation in a dose dependent manner with the most significant platelet activation seen in response to the 59M and SK-OV-3 ovarian cancer cell lines [].
Using 59M cells we then investigated the effect of different platelet inhibitors to determine the mechanism of ovarian cancer cell induced platelet activation. Following treatment with cangrelor [P2Y12 antagonist], MRS2179 [P2Y1 antagonist], or apyrase [ADP/ATPase], platelet activation in the presence of 59M ovarian cancer cells was greatly diminished, suggesting a P2Y12/P2Y1 dependent mechanism of activation, mediated by the release of ADP by 59M cells, as the 59M cell supernatant induced comparable platelet activation []. Consistent with the literature, other studies have also demonstrated ADP dependent platelet aggregation induced by cancer cells
[21]. Of note, Uluckan et al have shown that treatment with APT102 [an ADPase] and aspirin in combination, inhibited B16 melanoma cell induced aggregation, and decreased metastasis in a murine B16 melanoma model of bone metastasis
[22]. Italiano et al have previously shown that platelets differentially package angiogenic regulatory proteins in separate alpha granules that are subject to differential release depending on the platelet agonist
[23]. Interestingly, Bambace et al have demonstrated that ADP induced platelet activation causes the release of VEGF [pro-angiogenic] but not endostatin [anti-angiogenic]
in vitro [24], indicating a potential mechanism by which ovarian cancer cells could induce the release of pro-angiogenic but not anti-angiogenic factors by platelets
in vivo.
Ovarian cancer cells alone induce activation of platelets. However, thrombosis is a complex process that involves many different agonists
in vivo. Therefore, we examined how ovarian cancer cells modulate agonist induced platelet activation. At low cellular concentrations, both A2780 and 59M cells potentiate TRAP, PAR-4 agonist, and arachidonic acid induced platelet activation, but not ADP, epinephrine, or collagen induced platelet activation []. This suggests a synergistic relationship between PAR-1/PAR-4/TxA2 receptor mediated activation and the mode of ovarian cancer cell induced activation. Thrombin is the physiological ligand for the PAR-1 and PAR-4 receptors, and its generation is critical for coagulation. The expression of thrombin has been identified in ovarian cancer tissue
[25] and is known to potentiate invasion in an
in vitro model of ovarian cancer
[26]. Holmes et al have also shown that TRAP treated platelets increase ovarian cancer cell invasion
[27]. Prostaglandin synthesis is also increased in ovarian cancer, with a trend towards higher fold increases in pro-aggregatory TxA2 levels compared to anti-aggregatory PGI
2 levels
[28].
Having established that ovarian cancer cells interact with platelets, we next assessed the effect of platelet adhesion and platelet granule release on ovarian cancer cells. Overall analysis of gene expression changes in ovarian cancer cells following treatment with washed platelets or platelet releasate showed an upregulation of anti-apoptotic, anti-autophagy, pro-angiogenic, pro-cell cycle and metabolic genes in the treated ovarian cancer cells [, , , ]. However, ovarian cancer cells of variable phenotype showed differential gene expression profiles, possibly related to their underlying biology.
In HIO-80 cells, there was significant upregulation of genes encoding for proteins associated with ovarian cancer metastasis [SERPINB2/PAI2], metabolic activities [IDI1, PMM2] and gene expression/transcription [PCGF6, ZNF267]
[29]. LRP8 [ApoER2] which showed significantly increased expression in response to platelet releasate exposure was also observed to be up regulated in response to washed platelet exposure and its activation has been observed to alter migratory capability in a non-tumorigenic breast epithelial [MCF 10A] cell model
[30]. It also has a key role in mediating increased platelet activation and adhesion in association with other glycoproteins or clotting factors
[31]–
[34] and may promote signalling in cells via ApoER2. HIO-80 are a non-tumorigenic normal human ovarian surface epithelial cell line, which has been immortalised by transfection with a plasmid encoding for the SV40 large T gene. SERPINB2/PAI2 was the most significantly upregulated gene on validation and this upregulation may be explained by the fact that platelets can release TNFα
[35] which in turn has been shown to induce matrix proteolytic enzyme production and basement remodelling by human ovarian surface epithelial cells providing a molecular mechanism linking ovulation and ovarian cancer risk
[36]59M cells exhibited aberrant upregulation of genes involved in anti-autophagy, anti-apoptotic and pro-angiogenic signalling [TRAF2, CCL2, TNFAIP2]
[37]–
[39]. Among the other pathways showing altered expression were pro-angiogenic signalling through increased PDGFb transcription in response to washed platelet exposure with further pro-proliferative [HBEGF, CSF2/GMCSF, IRAK2] immune suppression [CD274/PDL1] anti-apoptotic [BIRC3/CIAP], cell adhesion & migration [ICAM1] signalling
[40]–
[44].
SK-OV-3 cells exhibited significant overexpression in the Cardiolipin Synthase [CRLS1] gene, which is responsible for cardiolipin [CL] production. Anti-cardiolipin antibodies are associated with both solid and non-solid tumours and are associated with increased thrombocytosis
[45]. This gene product [CRLS1] may also have an anti-apoptotic role as reduced CL expression is associated with increased apoptosis
[46]. Genes associated with increased cell invasion/motility in breast and pancreatic cancers [ANXA2] were also dysregulated. Following treatment with platelet releasate, SK-OV-3 cells also showed expression changes in genes involved in, anti-autophagy in endometrial and ovarian cancer [KIAA1324/EIG121], as well as transcriptional regulation [ACTL6A], cell cycle[MUS81], cytoskeletal [TPM4] and homeostatic [TPM4] processes
[47],
[48].
The A2780 cell line and its cisplatin resistant daughter cell line A2780cis displayed different responses to the exposure treatments. The A2780 cell line did not show significant alteration of gene expression following treatment with either platelet releasate or washed platelets. Conversely, the A2780cis cell line revealed a panel of dysregulated genes following treatment with washed platelet but none following treatment with platelet releasate. Increased expression was observed in genes for cancer associated proteases [KLK1],cell adhesion/migration molecules [ITGB2/LFA-1], and reduced expression of genes involved in maintaining genomic instability [GMNN], inhibition of gene transcription/expression [CCDC7B, ZNF271, ZNF706, LARP7, MASEH2B], in pro-apoptotic regulators [STK17B/DRAK2] and immune response/evasion [CD58/LFA3]
[49],
[50].
TaqMan expression analysis of EMT associated genes demonstrated constitutive expression of the majority of EMT associated genes []. It appears that EMT related genes are effectively ‘primed’ and that interaction with platelets does not significantly alter the capacity of cancer cells to mount this type of response. Other studies have reported similar findings in breast cancer
[51],
[52].
In summary, our data shows for the first time that there is a potent dynamic interaction between ovarian cancer cells and platelets in vitro. This interaction involves platelet adhesion, platelet activation and degranulation and a resultant pro-survival and pro-angiogenic signal for the ovarian cancer cell that could potentially promote ovarian cancer cell metastasis. Further work is required to determine the significance of this interaction in vivo.