Cargando…

Determining the Potential of DNA Damage Response (DDR) Inhibitors in Cervical Cancer Therapy

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Cervical cancer (CC) is the fourth most common cause of cancer deaths in women. For patients where surgery is not an option, they are treated with cisplatin and radiotherapy (RT) that acts by damaging DNA. However, response is poor, and cisplatin causes kidney injury. The DNA damage...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Saha, Santu, Rundle, Stuart, Kotsopoulos, Ioannis C., Begbie, Jacob, Howarth, Rachel, Pappworth, Isabel Y., Mukhopadhyay, Asima, Kucukmetin, Ali, Marchbank, Kevin J., Curtin, Nicola
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9454916/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36077823
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers14174288
_version_ 1784785464952094720
author Saha, Santu
Rundle, Stuart
Kotsopoulos, Ioannis C.
Begbie, Jacob
Howarth, Rachel
Pappworth, Isabel Y.
Mukhopadhyay, Asima
Kucukmetin, Ali
Marchbank, Kevin J.
Curtin, Nicola
author_facet Saha, Santu
Rundle, Stuart
Kotsopoulos, Ioannis C.
Begbie, Jacob
Howarth, Rachel
Pappworth, Isabel Y.
Mukhopadhyay, Asima
Kucukmetin, Ali
Marchbank, Kevin J.
Curtin, Nicola
author_sort Saha, Santu
collection PubMed
description SIMPLE SUMMARY: Cervical cancer (CC) is the fourth most common cause of cancer deaths in women. For patients where surgery is not an option, they are treated with cisplatin and radiotherapy (RT) that acts by damaging DNA. However, response is poor, and cisplatin causes kidney injury. The DNA damage response (DDR) consists of coordinated action of proteins that signal DNA damage to stop cell proliferation and promote repair. In this study, we show four different DDR inhibitors targeting PARP, ATR, CHK1 and WEE1 that kill CC cells. These inhibitors also increase the ability of RT and cisplatin to kill CC cells to varying degrees. Additionally, we show that cisplatin-induced kidney injury is due to over-activation of PARP and can be reduced by co-administration of a PARP inhibitor. DDR inhibition is therefore a promising strategy to both increase the effectiveness of current treatment and to protect kidneys from cisplatin-induced toxicity. ABSTRACT: Cisplatin-based chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) is the standard treatment for advanced cervical cancer (CC) but the response rate is poor (46–72%) and cisplatin is nephrotoxic. Therefore, better treatment of CC is urgently needed. We have directly compared, for the first time, the cytotoxicity of four DDR inhibitors (rucaparib/PARPi, VE-821/ATRi, PF-477736/CHK1i and MK-1775/WEE1i) as single agents, and in combination with cisplatin and radiotherapy (RT) in a panel of CC cells. All inhibitors alone caused concentration-dependent cytotoxicity. Low ATM and DNA-PKcs levels were associated with greater VE-821 cytotoxicity. Cisplatin induced ATR, CHK1 and WEE1 activity in all of the cell lines. Cisplatin only activated PARP in S-phase cells, but RT activated PARP in the entire population. Rucaparib was the most potent radiosensitiser and VE-821 was the most potent chemosensitiser. VE-821, PF-47736 and MK-1775 attenuated cisplatin-induced S-phase arrest but tended to increase G2 phase accumulation. In mice, cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury was associated with oxidative stress and PARP activation and was prevented by rucaparib. Therefore, while all inhibitors investigated may increase the efficacy of CRT, the greatest clinical potential of rucaparib may be in limiting kidney damage, which is dose-limiting.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9454916
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94549162022-09-09 Determining the Potential of DNA Damage Response (DDR) Inhibitors in Cervical Cancer Therapy Saha, Santu Rundle, Stuart Kotsopoulos, Ioannis C. Begbie, Jacob Howarth, Rachel Pappworth, Isabel Y. Mukhopadhyay, Asima Kucukmetin, Ali Marchbank, Kevin J. Curtin, Nicola Cancers (Basel) Article SIMPLE SUMMARY: Cervical cancer (CC) is the fourth most common cause of cancer deaths in women. For patients where surgery is not an option, they are treated with cisplatin and radiotherapy (RT) that acts by damaging DNA. However, response is poor, and cisplatin causes kidney injury. The DNA damage response (DDR) consists of coordinated action of proteins that signal DNA damage to stop cell proliferation and promote repair. In this study, we show four different DDR inhibitors targeting PARP, ATR, CHK1 and WEE1 that kill CC cells. These inhibitors also increase the ability of RT and cisplatin to kill CC cells to varying degrees. Additionally, we show that cisplatin-induced kidney injury is due to over-activation of PARP and can be reduced by co-administration of a PARP inhibitor. DDR inhibition is therefore a promising strategy to both increase the effectiveness of current treatment and to protect kidneys from cisplatin-induced toxicity. ABSTRACT: Cisplatin-based chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) is the standard treatment for advanced cervical cancer (CC) but the response rate is poor (46–72%) and cisplatin is nephrotoxic. Therefore, better treatment of CC is urgently needed. We have directly compared, for the first time, the cytotoxicity of four DDR inhibitors (rucaparib/PARPi, VE-821/ATRi, PF-477736/CHK1i and MK-1775/WEE1i) as single agents, and in combination with cisplatin and radiotherapy (RT) in a panel of CC cells. All inhibitors alone caused concentration-dependent cytotoxicity. Low ATM and DNA-PKcs levels were associated with greater VE-821 cytotoxicity. Cisplatin induced ATR, CHK1 and WEE1 activity in all of the cell lines. Cisplatin only activated PARP in S-phase cells, but RT activated PARP in the entire population. Rucaparib was the most potent radiosensitiser and VE-821 was the most potent chemosensitiser. VE-821, PF-47736 and MK-1775 attenuated cisplatin-induced S-phase arrest but tended to increase G2 phase accumulation. In mice, cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury was associated with oxidative stress and PARP activation and was prevented by rucaparib. Therefore, while all inhibitors investigated may increase the efficacy of CRT, the greatest clinical potential of rucaparib may be in limiting kidney damage, which is dose-limiting. MDPI 2022-09-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9454916/ /pubmed/36077823 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers14174288 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Saha, Santu
Rundle, Stuart
Kotsopoulos, Ioannis C.
Begbie, Jacob
Howarth, Rachel
Pappworth, Isabel Y.
Mukhopadhyay, Asima
Kucukmetin, Ali
Marchbank, Kevin J.
Curtin, Nicola
Determining the Potential of DNA Damage Response (DDR) Inhibitors in Cervical Cancer Therapy
title Determining the Potential of DNA Damage Response (DDR) Inhibitors in Cervical Cancer Therapy
title_full Determining the Potential of DNA Damage Response (DDR) Inhibitors in Cervical Cancer Therapy
title_fullStr Determining the Potential of DNA Damage Response (DDR) Inhibitors in Cervical Cancer Therapy
title_full_unstemmed Determining the Potential of DNA Damage Response (DDR) Inhibitors in Cervical Cancer Therapy
title_short Determining the Potential of DNA Damage Response (DDR) Inhibitors in Cervical Cancer Therapy
title_sort determining the potential of dna damage response (ddr) inhibitors in cervical cancer therapy
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9454916/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36077823
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers14174288
work_keys_str_mv AT sahasantu determiningthepotentialofdnadamageresponseddrinhibitorsincervicalcancertherapy
AT rundlestuart determiningthepotentialofdnadamageresponseddrinhibitorsincervicalcancertherapy
AT kotsopoulosioannisc determiningthepotentialofdnadamageresponseddrinhibitorsincervicalcancertherapy
AT begbiejacob determiningthepotentialofdnadamageresponseddrinhibitorsincervicalcancertherapy
AT howarthrachel determiningthepotentialofdnadamageresponseddrinhibitorsincervicalcancertherapy
AT pappworthisabely determiningthepotentialofdnadamageresponseddrinhibitorsincervicalcancertherapy
AT mukhopadhyayasima determiningthepotentialofdnadamageresponseddrinhibitorsincervicalcancertherapy
AT kucukmetinali determiningthepotentialofdnadamageresponseddrinhibitorsincervicalcancertherapy
AT marchbankkevinj determiningthepotentialofdnadamageresponseddrinhibitorsincervicalcancertherapy
AT curtinnicola determiningthepotentialofdnadamageresponseddrinhibitorsincervicalcancertherapy