All the patients with VX-809 breast cancer were clinically

classified as stages I to IV. The patients with primary breast cancer were performed lumpectomy followed by chemotherapy. Thirteen of the 48 patients (27%) were found to have CK19+ cells in peripheral blood including 7 patients with primary breast cancer and 6 with metastatic breast cancer (Table 2). Table 1 Details of patients and CK19 expression in peripheral blood   Number of patients % Positive cases Pathology size       < 1 cm 5 10.4 1 1–2 cm 11 22.9 3 > 2 cm 32 66.7 9 Clinical stage       Benign tumor 7 14.6 0 I 4 8.3 0 II 23 47.9 2 III 7 14.6 5 IV 7 14.6 6 Histology XL184 nmr       Infiltrating ductal carcinoma 39 81.3 13 Fibroadenoma 1 2 0 Struma 6 12.5 0 Intraductal breast cancer 2 4.2 0 Distant metastasis       Metastasis 7 14.6 6 Without metastasis 41 85.4 7 Note: The patient age ranged from 28 to 82 years old. Table 2 Overview of CK19+ results in volunteers, benign tumor patients and stage I–IV breast cancer patients   Total number Positive Detection Rate Healthy control 25 0/25 (0%) Benign tumor 7 0/7 (0%) Stage I patients 4 0/4 (0%) Stage II patients 23 2/23 (9%) Stage

III patients 7 5/7 (70%) Stage IV patients Selleckchem JQEZ5 7 6/7 (86%) Detection of circulating breast cancer cells in peripheral blood of patients before surgery by flow cytometry Flow cytometric analyses showed that no CK19 was expressed in peripheral blood of healthy control (n = 25), benign tumor patients (n = 7) and breast cancer patients at stage I (n = 4) (Figures 4A, B, C). But there existed CK19+ cells in the peripheral blood samples of patients at stages II, III, and IV (Figure 4D, E, F),

with the median of each group of 0.15% (n = 2), 0.44% (n = 5) and 1.47% (n = 6) (Figure 5), respectively. There was significant difference in CK19 expression between patients at stage Dichloromethane dehalogenase III and stage IV (p = 0.0043). Figure 4 CK19 expression in peripheral blood of healthy controls and breast tumor patients. Peripheral white blood cells were isolated and stained with FITC-conjugated mouse anti-human CK19 antibody to examine CK19 expression. (A) Healthy volunteers; (B) Benign tumor patients; Breast cancer patients at stage I (C), stage II (D), stage III (E) and stage IV (F). Figure 5 The expression level of CK19 in peripheral blood of breast cancer patients is correlated with the disease stage. CK19 from each peripheral blood sample was detected by flow cytometry as described in methods. All the negative results were shown as number undetected. All 4 patients at stage I were CK19 negative. The median is marked as “”—”" in each group. Where the frequency of negative cases is > 50%, the median cannot be shown. p < 0.05 was considered significant. The change of CK19 expression in 15 patients with breast cancer during 3 month-chemotherapy The dynamic expressions of CK19 in peripheral blood lymphocytes were observed in 15 patients with primary breast cancer during 3 month-chemotherapy after lumpectomy.

Science 2009,326(5958):1399–1402.PubMedCrossRef 37. Zhou J, Deng Y, Luo F, He Z, Tu Q, Zhi X: Selleckchem BIRB 796 Functional molecular ecological networks. mBio 2010,1(4):e00169–10.PubMedCrossRef 38. Calvin M: Nobel prize for chemistry. Nature 1961, 192:799. 39. Evans MC, Buchanan BB, Arnon DI: A new ferredoxin-dependent carbon reduction cycle in a photosynthetic bacterium. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1966, 55:928–934.PubMedCrossRef 40. Herter S, Fuchs G, Bacher A, Eisenreich W: A bicyclic autotrophic CO 2 fixation pathway in chloroflexus aurantiacus. J Biol Chem 2002,277(23):20277–20283.PubMedCrossRef 41. Larimer FW, Chain P,

Hauser L, Lamerdin J, Malfatti S, Do L, Land ML, Pelletier DA, Beatty JT, Lang AS, et al.: Complete genome sequence of the metabolically versatile photosynthetic bacterium Rhodopseudomonas palustris . Nat Biotech 2004,22(1):55–61.CrossRef

42. Langley JA, McKinley PLK inhibitor DC, Wolf AA, Hungate CBL-0137 price BA, Drake BG, Megonigal JP: Priming depletes soil carbon and releases nitrogen in a scrub-oak ecosystem exposed to elevated CO 2 . Soil Biol Biochem 2009,41(1):54–60.CrossRef 43. Billings SA, Lichter J, Ziegler SE, Hungate BA, Richter DB: A call to investigate drivers of soil organic matter retention vs. mineralization in a high CO 2 world. Soil Biol Biochem 2010,42(4):665–668.CrossRef 44. Zak DR, Tilman D, Parmenter RR, Rice CW, Fisher FM, Vose J, Milchunas D, Martin CW: Plant production and soil microorganisms in late-successional ecosystems: A continental-scale study. Ecology 1994,75(8):2333–2347.CrossRef 45. Marschner P, Yang CH, Lieberei R, Crowley DE: Soil and plant specific effects on bacterial community composition in the rhizosphere. Soil Biol Biochem 2001,33(11):1437–1445.CrossRef 46. He Z, Xu M, Deng Y, Kang S, Kellogg L, Wu L, Van Nostrand JD, Hobbie SE, Reich PB, Zhou J: Metagenomic analysis reveals a marked divergence in the structure of belowground microbial communities

at elevated CO 2 . Ecol Lett 2010,13(5):564–575.PubMedCrossRef 47. Lauber CL, Hamady M, Cyclooxygenase (COX) Knight R, Fierer N: Pyrosequencing-based assessment of soil pH as a predictor of soil bacterial community structure at the continental scale. Appl Environ Microbiol 2009,75(15):5111–5120.PubMedCrossRef 48. Hill MO, Gauch HG: Deterended correspondence analysis, an improved ordination technique. Vegetatio 1980, 42:47–58.CrossRef 49. Ramette A: Multivariate analyses in microbial ecology. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2007,62(2):142–160.PubMedCrossRef Competing interests The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. Authors’ contributions Conceived and designed the experiments: MX, ZH, SEH, PBR and JZ. MX, LW, JDN performed the experiments. MX, ZH and DY analyzed the data. MX, ZH and JZ interpreted the data. MX and ZH drafted the manuscript. SEH, PBR and JZ were involved in editing and revising the manuscript critically in preparation for submission. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.