RESUMO
The membranotropic peptide gH625 is able to transport different cargos (i.e., liposomes, quantum dots, polymeric nanoparticles) within and across cells in a very efficient manner. However, a clear understanding of the detailed uptake mechanism remains elusive. In this work, we investigate the journey of gH625-functionalized polystyrene nanoparticles in mouse-brain endothelial cells from their interaction with the cell membrane to their intracellular final destination. The aim is to elucidate how gH625 affects the behavior of the nanoparticles and their cytotoxic effect. The results indicate that the mechanism of translocation of gH625 dictates the fate of the nanoparticles, with a relevant impact on the nanotoxicological profile of positively charged nanoparticles.
Assuntos
Membrana Celular/metabolismo , Endossomos/metabolismo , Células Endoteliais/metabolismo , Lisossomos/metabolismo , Nanopartículas/toxicidade , Peptídeos/farmacocinética , Proteínas do Envelope Viral/farmacocinética , Animais , Linhagem Celular , Córtex Cerebral/citologia , Córtex Cerebral/metabolismo , Células Endoteliais/citologia , Camundongos , Nanopartículas/metabolismo , Peptídeos/toxicidade , Propriedades de Superfície , Proteínas do Envelope Viral/toxicidadeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients tend to have modest benefits from molecularly driven therapeutics. Patient-derived tumor organoids (PDTOs) represent an unmatched model to elucidate tumor resistance to therapy, due to their high capacity to resemble tumor characteristics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used viable tumor tissue from two cohorts of patients with mCRC, naïve or refractory to treatment, respectively, for generating PDTOs. The derived models were subjected to a 6-day drug screening assay (DSA) with a comprehensive pipeline of chemotherapy and targeted drugs against almost all the actionable mCRC molecular drivers. For the second cohort DSA data were matched with those from PDTO genotyping. RESULTS: A total of 40 PDTOs included in the two cohorts were derived from mCRC primary tumors or metastases. The first cohort included 31 PDTOs derived from patients treated in front line. For this cohort, DSA results were matched with patient responses. Moreover, RAS/BRAF mutational status was matched with DSA cetuximab response. Ten out of 12 (83.3%) RAS wild-type PDTOs responded to cetuximab, while all the mutant PDTOs, 8 out of 8 (100%), were resistant. For the second cohort (chemorefractory patients), we used part of tumor tissue for genotyping. Four out of nine DSA/genotyping data resulted applicable in the clinic. Two RAS-mutant mCRC patients have been treated with FOLFOX-bevacizumab and mitomycin-capecitabine in third line, respectively, based on DSA results, obtaining disease control. One patient was treated with nivolumab-second mitochondrial-derived activator of caspases mimetic (phase I trial) due to high tumor mutational burden at genotyping, experiencing stable disease. In one case, the presence of BRCA2 mutation correlated with DSA sensitivity to olaparib; however, the patient could not receive the therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Using CRC as a model, we have designed and validated a clinically applicable methodology to potentially inform clinical decisions with functional data. Undoubtedly, further larger analyses are needed to improve methodology success rates and propose suitable treatment strategies for mCRC patients.
Assuntos
Neoplasias do Colo , Neoplasias Colorretais , Humanos , Cetuximab/efeitos adversos , Neoplasias Colorretais/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Colorretais/genética , Neoplasias Colorretais/patologia , MutaçãoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Molecular mechanisms driving acquired resistance to anti-EGFR therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are complex but generally involve the activation of the downstream RAS-RAF-MEK-MAPK pathway. Nevertheless, even if inhibition of EGFR and MEK could be a strategy for overcoming anti-EGFR resistance, its use is limited by the development of MEK inhibitor (MEKi) resistance. METHODS: We have generated in vitro and in vivo different CRC models in order to underline the mechanisms of MEKi resistance. RESULTS: The three different in vitro MEKi resistant models, two generated by human CRC cells quadruple wild type for KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, PI3KCA genes (SW48-MR and LIM1215-MR) and one by human CRC cells harboring KRAS mutation (HCT116-MR) showed features related to the gene signature of colorectal cancer CMS4 with up-regulation of immune pathway as confirmed by microarray and western blot analysis. In particular, the MEKi phenotype was associated with the loss of epithelial features and acquisition of mesenchymal markers and morphology. The change in morphology was accompanied by up-regulation of PD-L1 expression and activation of EGFR and its downstream pathway, independently to RAS mutation status. To extend these in vitro findings, we have obtained mouse colon cancer MC38- and CT26-MEKi resistant syngeneic models (MC38-MR and CT26-MR). Combined treatment with MEKi, EGFR inhibitor (EGFRi) and PD-L1 inhibitor (PD-L1i) resulted in a marked inhibition of tumor growth in both models. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest a strategy to potentially improve the efficacy of MEK inhibition by co-treatment with EGFR and PD-L1 inhibitors via modulation of host immune responses.