Proteasome inhibition potentiates antitumor effects of photodynamic therapy in mice through induction of endoplasmic reticulum stress and unfolded protein response.

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is an approved therapeutic procedure that exerts cytotoxic activity toward tumor cells by inducing production of reactive oxygen species such as singlet oxygen. PDT leads to oxidative damage of cellular macromolecules, including proteins that undergo multiple modifications such as fragmentation, cross-linking, and carbonylation that result in protein unfolding and aggregation. Because the major mechanism for elimination of carbonylated proteins is their degradation by proteasomes, we hypothesized that a combination of PDT with proteasome inhibitors might lead to accumulation of carbonylated proteins in endoplasmic reticulum (ER), aggravated ER stress, and potentiated cytotoxicity toward tumor cells. We observed that Photofrin-mediated PDT leads to robust carbonylation of cellular proteins and induction of unfolded protein response. Pretreatment of tumor cells with three different proteasome inhibitors, including bortezomib, MG132, and PSI, gave increased accumulation of carbonylated and ubiquitinated proteins in PDT-treated cells. Proteasome inhibitors effectively sensitized tumor cells of murine (EMT6 and C-26) as well as human (HeLa) origin to PDT-mediated cytotoxicity. Significant retardation of tumor growth with 60% to 100% complete responses was observed in vivo in two different murine tumor models (EMT6 and C-26) when PDT was combined with either bortezomib or PSI. Altogether, these observations indicate that combination of PDT with proteasome inhibitors leads to potentiated antitumor effects. The results of these studies are of immediate clinical application because bortezomib is a clinically approved drug that undergoes extensive clinical evaluations for the treatment of solid tumors.

Statins impair antitumor effects of rituximab by inducing conformational changes of CD20.

BACKGROUND: Rituximab is used in the treatment of CD20+ B cell lymphomas and other B cell lymphoproliferative disorders. Its clinical efficacy might be further improved by combinations with other drugs such as statins that inhibit cholesterol synthesis and show promising antilymphoma effects. The objective of this study was to evaluate the influence of statins on rituximab-induced killing of B cell lymphomas. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) was assessed by MTT and Alamar blue assays as well as trypan blue staining, and antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) was assessed by a 51Cr release assay. Statins were found to significantly decrease rituximab-mediated CDC and ADCC of B cell lymphoma cells. Incubation of B cell lymphoma cells with statins decreased CD20 immunostaining in flow cytometry studies but did not affect total cellular levels of CD20 as measured with RT-PCR and Western blotting. Similar effects are exerted by other cholesterol-depleting agents (methyl-beta-cyclodextrin and berberine), but not filipin III, indicating that the presence of plasma membrane cholesterol and not lipid rafts is required for rituximab-mediated CDC. Immunofluorescence microscopy using double staining with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) directed against a conformational epitope and a linear cytoplasmic epitope revealed that CD20 is present in the plasma membrane in comparable amounts in control and statin-treated cells. Atomic force microscopy and limited proteolysis indicated that statins, through cholesterol depletion, induce conformational changes in CD20 that result in impaired binding of anti-CD20 mAb. An in vivo reduction of cholesterol induced by short-term treatment of five patients with hypercholesterolemia with atorvastatin resulted in reduced anti-CD20 binding to freshly isolated B cells. CONCLUSIONS: Statins were shown to interfere with both detection of CD20 and antilymphoma activity of rituximab. These studies have significant clinical implications, as impaired binding of mAbs to conformational epitopes of CD20 elicited by statins could delay diagnosis, postpone effective treatment, or impair anti-lymphoma activity of rituximab.

Pioglitazone, a PPAR-gamma ligand, exerts cytostatic/cytotoxic effects against cancer cells, that do not result from inhibition of proteasome.

Thiazolidinediones are oral antidiabetic agents that activate peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma (PPAR-gamma) and exert potent antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. It has also been shown that PPAR-gamma agonists induce G0/G1 arrest and apoptosis of malignant cells. Some of these effects have been suggested to result from inhibition of proteasome activity in target cells. The aim of our studies was to critically evaluate the cytostatic/cytotoxic effects of one of thiazolidinediones (pioglitazone) and its influence on proteasome activity. Pioglitazone exerted dose-dependent cytostatic/cytotoxic effects in MIA PaCa-2 cells. Incubation of tumor cells with pioglitazone resulted in increased levels of p53 and p27 and decreased levels of cyclin D1. Accumulation of polyubiquitinated proteins within cells incubated with pioglitazone suggested dysfunction of proteasome activity. However, we did not observe any influence of pioglitazone on the activity of isolated proteasome and on the proteolytic activity in lysates of pioglitazone-treated MIA PaCa-2 cells. Further, treatment with pioglitazone did not cause an accumulation of fluorescent proteasome substrates in transfected HeLa cells expressing unstable GFP variants. Our results indicate that pioglitazone does not act as a direct or indirect proteasome inhibitor.

Ciglitazone, an agonist of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma, exerts potentiated cytostatic/cytotoxic effects against tumor cells when combined with lovastatin.

Thiazolidinediones are ligands of PPAR-gamma, a member of the nuclear receptor family. These drugs have shown promising pre-clinical activity in tumor models but clinical studies failed to confirm their beneficial effect. We have studied the in vitro antitumor effects of a combination of ciglitazone, a thiazolidinedione drug, and lovastatin, an inhibitor of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase. We observed a marked synergism in several different tumor cell lines resulting from both inhibition of cell proliferation and induction of apoptosis. These results strongly suggest that combining PPAR-gamma agonists with statins can produce significant antitumor effects.

[Comparison of the present and previously used protocol of risk stratification in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia]. / Porównanie aktualnego i wczesniej uzywanego protokolu stratyfikacji ryzyka w ostrej bialaczce limfoblastycznej u dzieci.

INTRODUCTION: Acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) is one of the most common cancers in children. In Poland, since November 2002 a new protocol of risk stratification has been recommended for assessment of risk factors and for choosing therapy regimens. AIM OF STUDY: assessment of accuracy of protocol ALL-IC 2002 in comparison to previously used risk stratification protocols. MATERIALS AND METHODS: ALL was diagnosed in 100 children (44 girls, 56 boys; 1-18 years of age) in the Department of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, Warsaw Medical University, over the period from November 2002 to November 2006. According to the ALL-IC 2002 protocol the patients were divided into three risk groups: SR-standard, IR-intermediate and HR-high. The stratification was by age, leukocyte count, cytogenetic changes, early response to prednisone therapy and bone marrow remission. In the previously used risk stratification protocols-BFM-90, only hepatosplenomegaly and the number of blasts in peripheral blood (PB) were considered, and the patients were divided into three risk groups: low (LRG<0.8), medium (MRG) and high (HRG>1.2). RESULTS: out of the 100 patients qualified for treatment regimens according to the ALL-IC 2002 protocol, 97 entered remission, 11 died and 3 had a relapse. Under the ALL-IC 2002 protocol these children were stratified into the following groups: SR-31%, IR-44% and HR-25%. In the previously used stratification, there would be 26% children in low, 46% in the medium and 28% in the high risk group. According to the BFM-90 protocol 18/31 (58%) and 16/44 (36%) patients from the SR and IR groups respectively would be given more intensive treatment. On the other hand 11/44 (25%) and 14/25 (56%) patients from the IR and HR groups respectively would be given less intensive treatment. CONCLUSIONS: 1. ALL-IC 2002 protocol in comparison with the previously used protocol BFM-90, changes the qualification of children with ALL for the SR, IR and HR risk groups. This is linked to basic change of treatment protocol, adequate to severity of disease. 2. Children with ALL qualified according to protocol BFM-90 for moderate risk group (IR) constitute a mixed group in the ALL-IC 2002 classification. Part of the children was moved to the standard risk group (SR), part to high risk group (HR), and the rest remains in the intermediate risk category (IR). 3. Further studies are needed on stratification validity according to ALL-IL 2002 and on the need of further modification (eg assessment of additional factors) in order to decide on the best treatment, adequate to severity of disease.