Author Contributions
Conceptualization, L.B., D.A.B., W.W.H. and M.R.S.; Methodology, L.B., D.A.B., E.S., A.M.Y., Y.L., I.W., M.G., W.W.H. and M.R.S.; Software, L.B., D.A.B., E.S., E.B.A., A.M.Y., Y.L., I.W., E.N., M.G., T.B.-G., K.M., W.W.H. and M.R.S.; Validation, L.B., D.A.B., E.S., E.B.A., A.M.Y., Y.L., I.W., E.N., M.G., T.B.-G., K.M., W.W.H. and M.R.S.; Formal analysis, L.B., D.A.B., E.B.A., Y.L., I.W., T.B.-G., W.W.H. and M.R.S.; Investigation, L.B., D.A.B., E.S., I.W., E.N., M.G., K.M., W.W.H. and M.R.S.; Resources, M.R.S.; Data curation, L.B., D.A.B., E.S. and M.R.S.; Writing—original draft, L.B., D.A.B., E.S., E.B.A., A.M.Y., Y.L., I.W., E.N., M.G., T.B.-G., W.W.H. and M.R.S.; Writing—review & editing, L.B., D.A.B., E.S., E.B.A., A.M.Y., Y.L., I.W., E.N., M.G., T.B.-G., K.M., W.W.H. and M.R.S.; Visualization, L.B., D.A.B., E.N., M.G., T.B.-G., K.M. and M.R.S.; Supervision, W.W.H. and M.R.S.; Project administration, M.R.S.; Funding acquisition, M.R.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Figure 1.
Cytokine treatment increases the number of tunneling nanotubes, while cytokines with OP decrease their quantity in PANC-1 cells. (A) Images of PANC-1 cells depicting an example of TNT analysis. (B) The image reveals an enlarged extent of microtube conduits between cancer cells (arrows). (C) PANC-1 cells were treated with either TGFβ-1 (4.0 × 10−3 μg/mL), IL-6 (4.1 × 10−5 μg/mL), or HGF (5.97 × 10−4 μg/mL), or media without FBS (control) for 24 h prior to being stained with a plasma membrane cell mask (excitation at 554 nm). Cell mask and DAPI nuclear staining are shown alongside TNT images (green). Imaging of stained cells demonstrated that the addition of all three cytokines increased the number of cellular extensions (tunneling nanotubes) (C,D). The addition of OP significantly decreased cytokine-induced TNTs (C,F). Images were captured using Zeiss Imager M2 epifluorescent microscopy (cell + OP, scale bar: 40× magnification; cell, scale bar: 40× magnification). Quantification of these extensions using fluorescence density (D), represented as mean ± SEM (n = 6, independent experiments 2–3), F (3, 20) = 5.583, p = 0.0060, significantly increased the amount and xplainedlength of extensions (p < 0.009). (E) A normal QQ plot assesses the normality of a dataset, assuming it follows a normal distribution. In contrast, the addition of OP (C,F) decreased tunneling nanotubes when combined with TGFβ-1, IL-6, and HGF (p = 0.0121, p = 0.0002, p = 0.0142, respectively), F (6, 34) = 5.716, p = 0.0003. As indicated by asterisks, statistical significance was calculated with ANOVA and Fisher’s uncorrected LSD post hoc test at a confidence level of 95%, *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01 and * p < 0.05. Abbreviations: TGFβ-1: Transforming growth factor beta-1; IL-6: interleukin-6; HGF: hepatocyte growth factor; OP: Oseltamivir phosphate.
Figure 1.
Cytokine treatment increases the number of tunneling nanotubes, while cytokines with OP decrease their quantity in PANC-1 cells. (A) Images of PANC-1 cells depicting an example of TNT analysis. (B) The image reveals an enlarged extent of microtube conduits between cancer cells (arrows). (C) PANC-1 cells were treated with either TGFβ-1 (4.0 × 10−3 μg/mL), IL-6 (4.1 × 10−5 μg/mL), or HGF (5.97 × 10−4 μg/mL), or media without FBS (control) for 24 h prior to being stained with a plasma membrane cell mask (excitation at 554 nm). Cell mask and DAPI nuclear staining are shown alongside TNT images (green). Imaging of stained cells demonstrated that the addition of all three cytokines increased the number of cellular extensions (tunneling nanotubes) (C,D). The addition of OP significantly decreased cytokine-induced TNTs (C,F). Images were captured using Zeiss Imager M2 epifluorescent microscopy (cell + OP, scale bar: 40× magnification; cell, scale bar: 40× magnification). Quantification of these extensions using fluorescence density (D), represented as mean ± SEM (n = 6, independent experiments 2–3), F (3, 20) = 5.583, p = 0.0060, significantly increased the amount and xplainedlength of extensions (p < 0.009). (E) A normal QQ plot assesses the normality of a dataset, assuming it follows a normal distribution. In contrast, the addition of OP (C,F) decreased tunneling nanotubes when combined with TGFβ-1, IL-6, and HGF (p = 0.0121, p = 0.0002, p = 0.0142, respectively), F (6, 34) = 5.716, p = 0.0003. As indicated by asterisks, statistical significance was calculated with ANOVA and Fisher’s uncorrected LSD post hoc test at a confidence level of 95%, *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01 and * p < 0.05. Abbreviations: TGFβ-1: Transforming growth factor beta-1; IL-6: interleukin-6; HGF: hepatocyte growth factor; OP: Oseltamivir phosphate.
![Biomolecules 16 00292 g001a Biomolecules 16 00292 g001a]()
![Biomolecules 16 00292 g001b Biomolecules 16 00292 g001b]()
Figure 2.
Cytokine treatment increases the number of tunneling nanotubes, while cytokines with OP decrease their quantity in MCF-7 cells. (A) MCF-7 breast cancer cells were treated with either TGFβ-1 (4.0 × 10−3 μg/mL), IL-6 (4.1 × 10−5 μg/mL) or HGF (5.97 × 10−4 μg/mL), or media without FBS (control) for 24 h prior to being stained with a plasma membrane cell mask (excitation at 554 nm). Nuclear staining is shown with DAPI. Imaging of stained cells (A) demonstrated that the addition of all three cytokines increased the number of cellular extensions (tunneling nanotubes), whereas the addition of OP decreased cytokine-induced TNTs. Images were captured using a Zeiss Imager M2 epifluorescent microscope (40× magnification, scale bar). (B) Quantification of these extensions using fluorescence density represented as mean ± SEM (n = 6, independent experiments 2) significantly increased the amount and length of extensions (TGFβ-1 p < 0.0001; IL-6 p = 0.0448; HGF p = 0.0005), F (3, 20) = 10.37, p = 0.0002. (C) A normal QQ plot assesses the normality of a dataset and is expected to follow a normal distribution. (D) The addition of OP decreased TNTs when combined with TGFβ-1, IL-6, and HGF (p < 0.0001, p = 0.0418, p = 0.0035, respectively), F (7, 38) = 7.980, p < 0.0001. As indicated by asterisks, statistical significance was calculated with ANOVA and Fisher’s uncorrected LSD post hoc test at a confidence level of 95%. **** p < 0.0001, *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, and * p < 0.05.
Figure 2.
Cytokine treatment increases the number of tunneling nanotubes, while cytokines with OP decrease their quantity in MCF-7 cells. (A) MCF-7 breast cancer cells were treated with either TGFβ-1 (4.0 × 10−3 μg/mL), IL-6 (4.1 × 10−5 μg/mL) or HGF (5.97 × 10−4 μg/mL), or media without FBS (control) for 24 h prior to being stained with a plasma membrane cell mask (excitation at 554 nm). Nuclear staining is shown with DAPI. Imaging of stained cells (A) demonstrated that the addition of all three cytokines increased the number of cellular extensions (tunneling nanotubes), whereas the addition of OP decreased cytokine-induced TNTs. Images were captured using a Zeiss Imager M2 epifluorescent microscope (40× magnification, scale bar). (B) Quantification of these extensions using fluorescence density represented as mean ± SEM (n = 6, independent experiments 2) significantly increased the amount and length of extensions (TGFβ-1 p < 0.0001; IL-6 p = 0.0448; HGF p = 0.0005), F (3, 20) = 10.37, p = 0.0002. (C) A normal QQ plot assesses the normality of a dataset and is expected to follow a normal distribution. (D) The addition of OP decreased TNTs when combined with TGFβ-1, IL-6, and HGF (p < 0.0001, p = 0.0418, p = 0.0035, respectively), F (7, 38) = 7.980, p < 0.0001. As indicated by asterisks, statistical significance was calculated with ANOVA and Fisher’s uncorrected LSD post hoc test at a confidence level of 95%. **** p < 0.0001, *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, and * p < 0.05.
![Biomolecules 16 00292 g002 Biomolecules 16 00292 g002]()
Figure 3.
SW620 cells do not express tunneling nanotubes at the highest magnification. (A) Colorectal cancer cells (SW620) were treated with either TGFβ-1 (4.0 × 10−3 μg/mL), IL-6 (4.1 × 10−5 μg/mL) or HGF (5.97 × 10−4 μg/mL), or media without FBS (control) for 24 h or OP (300 μg/mL) for 15 min prior to the addition of the same concentration of cytokines as part A. Cells were stained with cell mask plasma membrane (excitation at 545 nm). Nuclear staining with DAPI was also done. Images were captured using a Zeiss Imager M2 epifluorescent microscope (40× magnification, scale bar). Imaging of stained sections demonstrates the absence of tunneling nanotubes, including the untreated control at the highest microscope magnification (40× objective), representing one out of two independent experiments. (B) The control image was enlarged to reveal the extent of TNTs.
Figure 3.
SW620 cells do not express tunneling nanotubes at the highest magnification. (A) Colorectal cancer cells (SW620) were treated with either TGFβ-1 (4.0 × 10−3 μg/mL), IL-6 (4.1 × 10−5 μg/mL) or HGF (5.97 × 10−4 μg/mL), or media without FBS (control) for 24 h or OP (300 μg/mL) for 15 min prior to the addition of the same concentration of cytokines as part A. Cells were stained with cell mask plasma membrane (excitation at 545 nm). Nuclear staining with DAPI was also done. Images were captured using a Zeiss Imager M2 epifluorescent microscope (40× magnification, scale bar). Imaging of stained sections demonstrates the absence of tunneling nanotubes, including the untreated control at the highest microscope magnification (40× objective), representing one out of two independent experiments. (B) The control image was enlarged to reveal the extent of TNTs.
Figure 4.
Cytokine treatment increases wound closure rate in PANC-1 cells. Pancreatic cancer cells (PANC-1) were treated with either TGFβ-1 (4.0 × 10−3 μg/mL), IL-6 (4.1 × 10−5 μg/mL), or HGF (5.97 × 10−4 μg/mL), or media with FBS (control). A scratch wound was created using a sterile pipette tip, and the wound closure rate was measured hourly for 6 h, then subsequently at 12 h following the creation of the wound. (A) Imaging was taken with a Nikon Eclipse Ti2 microscope (4× magnification) every hour for the first 6 h, and 12 h after the creation of the scratch wound. The wound width was measured at 6–8 points per image using the microscope NIS-Elements AR software, version 5.21.00, and the results were analyzed to create a simple linear regression (red dashed line) (B). To determine the significance of the wound closure rate of the cytokine-treated cells compared to untreated controls, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used (C), with each bar representing the mean ± SEM (obtained from B) (p < 0.0001), F (3, 182) = 22.66, p < 0.0001. (D) A normal QQ plot assesses the normality of a dataset and is expected to follow a normal distribution. (E) The addition of 300 μg/mL OP to cytokine-treated cells significantly reduces the rate of wound closure. (F) The addition of OP 15 min prior to cytokine treatment significantly decreases wound closure rate and alters the morphology of colorectal cancer cells (G). Comparison of cytokine-treated cells with cells treated with cytokine and OP is a representation of one of three separate experiments with similar results, using the mean ± SEM (obtained from F); F (6, 317) = 15.55, p < 0.0001. As indicated by asterisks, statistical significance was calculated with ANOVA and Fisher’s uncorrected LSD post hoc test at a confidence level of 95%, **** p < 0.0001, ** p < 0.01. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) shows a significant decrease in wound-healing rate across all treatment groups (p < 0.0001). (H) A normal QQ plot assesses the normality of a dataset and is expected to follow a normal distribution.
Figure 4.
Cytokine treatment increases wound closure rate in PANC-1 cells. Pancreatic cancer cells (PANC-1) were treated with either TGFβ-1 (4.0 × 10−3 μg/mL), IL-6 (4.1 × 10−5 μg/mL), or HGF (5.97 × 10−4 μg/mL), or media with FBS (control). A scratch wound was created using a sterile pipette tip, and the wound closure rate was measured hourly for 6 h, then subsequently at 12 h following the creation of the wound. (A) Imaging was taken with a Nikon Eclipse Ti2 microscope (4× magnification) every hour for the first 6 h, and 12 h after the creation of the scratch wound. The wound width was measured at 6–8 points per image using the microscope NIS-Elements AR software, version 5.21.00, and the results were analyzed to create a simple linear regression (red dashed line) (B). To determine the significance of the wound closure rate of the cytokine-treated cells compared to untreated controls, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used (C), with each bar representing the mean ± SEM (obtained from B) (p < 0.0001), F (3, 182) = 22.66, p < 0.0001. (D) A normal QQ plot assesses the normality of a dataset and is expected to follow a normal distribution. (E) The addition of 300 μg/mL OP to cytokine-treated cells significantly reduces the rate of wound closure. (F) The addition of OP 15 min prior to cytokine treatment significantly decreases wound closure rate and alters the morphology of colorectal cancer cells (G). Comparison of cytokine-treated cells with cells treated with cytokine and OP is a representation of one of three separate experiments with similar results, using the mean ± SEM (obtained from F); F (6, 317) = 15.55, p < 0.0001. As indicated by asterisks, statistical significance was calculated with ANOVA and Fisher’s uncorrected LSD post hoc test at a confidence level of 95%, **** p < 0.0001, ** p < 0.01. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) shows a significant decrease in wound-healing rate across all treatment groups (p < 0.0001). (H) A normal QQ plot assesses the normality of a dataset and is expected to follow a normal distribution.
![Biomolecules 16 00292 g004 Biomolecules 16 00292 g004]()
Figure 5.
SW620 cells were treated with either TGFβ-1 (4.0 × 10−3 μg/mL), IL-6 (4.1 × 10−5 μg/mL), or HGF (5.97 × 10−4 μg/mL), or media with FBS (control). A scratch wound was created using a sterile pipette tip, and the wound closure rate was measured hourly for 6 h, then subsequently at 12 h following the creation of the wound. (A) Imaging of the wound using a Nikon Eclipse Ti2 microscope (4× objective magnification) shows the wound width at hours 0 and 12. The rate of wound closure (μm/h) was quantified using simple linear regression for untreated cells, TGFβ-1-Treated Cells, IL-6-treated cells, and HGF-treated cells (B). (C) Comparison of cytokine-treated cells with untreated control cells is shown as the mean ± SEM (obtained from B), and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) shows no significant difference, except for HFG, F (3, 182) = 2.867, p = 0.0380. (D) A normal QQ plot assesses the normality of a dataset, assuming it follows a normal distribution. (E) The addition of 300 μg/mL OP to cytokine-treated cells significantly reduces the rate of wound closure. (F) The addition of OP 15 min prior to cytokine treatment significantly decreases wound closure rate and alters the morphology of colorectal cancer cells (G). Comparison of the rates of cytokine-treated cells compared to cells treated with cytokine and OP is a representation of one out of three separate experiments with similar results using the mean ± SEM (obtained from F), and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) demonstrates a significant decrease in wound healing rate in all treatment groups (p < 0.0001), F (6, 314) = 26.39, p < 0.0001. (H) A normal QQ plot assesses the normality of a dataset, assuming it follows a normal distribution. As indicated by asterisks, statistical significance was calculated with ANOVA and Fisher’s uncorrected LSD post hoc test at a confidence level of 95%. ns = non-significant, **** p < 0.0001, and * p < 0.05.
Figure 5.
SW620 cells were treated with either TGFβ-1 (4.0 × 10−3 μg/mL), IL-6 (4.1 × 10−5 μg/mL), or HGF (5.97 × 10−4 μg/mL), or media with FBS (control). A scratch wound was created using a sterile pipette tip, and the wound closure rate was measured hourly for 6 h, then subsequently at 12 h following the creation of the wound. (A) Imaging of the wound using a Nikon Eclipse Ti2 microscope (4× objective magnification) shows the wound width at hours 0 and 12. The rate of wound closure (μm/h) was quantified using simple linear regression for untreated cells, TGFβ-1-Treated Cells, IL-6-treated cells, and HGF-treated cells (B). (C) Comparison of cytokine-treated cells with untreated control cells is shown as the mean ± SEM (obtained from B), and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) shows no significant difference, except for HFG, F (3, 182) = 2.867, p = 0.0380. (D) A normal QQ plot assesses the normality of a dataset, assuming it follows a normal distribution. (E) The addition of 300 μg/mL OP to cytokine-treated cells significantly reduces the rate of wound closure. (F) The addition of OP 15 min prior to cytokine treatment significantly decreases wound closure rate and alters the morphology of colorectal cancer cells (G). Comparison of the rates of cytokine-treated cells compared to cells treated with cytokine and OP is a representation of one out of three separate experiments with similar results using the mean ± SEM (obtained from F), and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) demonstrates a significant decrease in wound healing rate in all treatment groups (p < 0.0001), F (6, 314) = 26.39, p < 0.0001. (H) A normal QQ plot assesses the normality of a dataset, assuming it follows a normal distribution. As indicated by asterisks, statistical significance was calculated with ANOVA and Fisher’s uncorrected LSD post hoc test at a confidence level of 95%. ns = non-significant, **** p < 0.0001, and * p < 0.05.
![Biomolecules 16 00292 g005a Biomolecules 16 00292 g005a]()
![Biomolecules 16 00292 g005b Biomolecules 16 00292 g005b]()
Figure 6.
MCF-7 cells were treated with either TGFβ-1 (4.0 × 10−3 μg/mL), IL-6 (4.1 × 10−5 μg/mL), or HGF (5.97 × 10−4 μg/mL), or media with FBS (control). A scratch wound was created using a sterile pipette tip, and the wound closure rate was measured hourly for 6 h, then subsequently at 12 h following the creation of the wound. (A) Imaging of the wound using a Nikon Eclipse Ti2 microscope (4× objective magnification) shows the wound width at hours 0 and 12. The rate of wound closure (μm/h) was quantified using simple linear regression for untreated cells, TGFβ-1-Treated Cells, IL-6-treated cells, and HGF-treated cells (B). (C) Comparison of cytokine-treated cells with untreated control cells is shown as the mean ± SEM (obtained from B), and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) shows no significant difference, F (3, 181) = 1.115, p = 0.3445. (D) A normal QQ plot assesses the normality of a dataset and is expected to follow a normal distribution. (E) The addition of 300 μg/mL of OP to cyto-kine-treated cells significantly decreases the wound closure rate. (F) The addition of OP 15 min prior to cytokine treatment significantly decreases wound closure rate and alters the morphology of colorectal cancer cells (G). Comparison of the rates of cytokine-treated cells compared to cells treated with cytokine and OP is a representation of one out of three separate experiments with similar results using the mean ± SEM (obtained from F), and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) demonstrates a significant decrease in wound healing rate in all treatment groups (p < 0.0001), F (6, 310) = 9.215, p < 0.0001. (H) A normal QQ plot assesses the normality of a dataset and is expected to follow a normal distribution. As indicated by asterisks, statistical significance was calculated with ANOVA and Fisher’s uncorrected LSD post hoc test at a confidence level of 95%. ns = non-significant, **** p < 0.0001, and ** p < 0.01.
Figure 6.
MCF-7 cells were treated with either TGFβ-1 (4.0 × 10−3 μg/mL), IL-6 (4.1 × 10−5 μg/mL), or HGF (5.97 × 10−4 μg/mL), or media with FBS (control). A scratch wound was created using a sterile pipette tip, and the wound closure rate was measured hourly for 6 h, then subsequently at 12 h following the creation of the wound. (A) Imaging of the wound using a Nikon Eclipse Ti2 microscope (4× objective magnification) shows the wound width at hours 0 and 12. The rate of wound closure (μm/h) was quantified using simple linear regression for untreated cells, TGFβ-1-Treated Cells, IL-6-treated cells, and HGF-treated cells (B). (C) Comparison of cytokine-treated cells with untreated control cells is shown as the mean ± SEM (obtained from B), and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) shows no significant difference, F (3, 181) = 1.115, p = 0.3445. (D) A normal QQ plot assesses the normality of a dataset and is expected to follow a normal distribution. (E) The addition of 300 μg/mL of OP to cyto-kine-treated cells significantly decreases the wound closure rate. (F) The addition of OP 15 min prior to cytokine treatment significantly decreases wound closure rate and alters the morphology of colorectal cancer cells (G). Comparison of the rates of cytokine-treated cells compared to cells treated with cytokine and OP is a representation of one out of three separate experiments with similar results using the mean ± SEM (obtained from F), and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) demonstrates a significant decrease in wound healing rate in all treatment groups (p < 0.0001), F (6, 310) = 9.215, p < 0.0001. (H) A normal QQ plot assesses the normality of a dataset and is expected to follow a normal distribution. As indicated by asterisks, statistical significance was calculated with ANOVA and Fisher’s uncorrected LSD post hoc test at a confidence level of 95%. ns = non-significant, **** p < 0.0001, and ** p < 0.01.
![Biomolecules 16 00292 g006 Biomolecules 16 00292 g006]()