Literature DB >> 1313234

Effects of the modulating agent WR2721 and its main metabolites on the formation and stability of cisplatin-DNA adducts in vitro in comparison to the effects of thiosulphate and diethyldithiocarbamate.

M Treskes1, L G Nijtmans, A M Fichtinger-Schepman, W J van der Vijgh.   

Abstract

The influence of the modulating agent WR2721, its active thiol-metabolite WR1065 and the symmetrical disulphide WR33278 on the in vitro formation and stability of cis-diamminedichloroplatinum(II) (cisplatin, CDDP)-DNA adducts was investigated and compared with the effects of the highly nucleophilic modulating agents diethyldithiocarbamate (DDTC) and thiosulphate (TS). Salmon sperm DNA (0.5 mg/mL) was incubated with 25 micrograms/mL (83 microM) cisplatin for 1 hr in 50 mM phosphate buffer, pH 7.2 at 37 degrees in the absence or presence of modulating agent. DDTC and TS were potent inhibitors of the platination of the DNA (95 and 89%, respectively, with 4.2 mM of modulating agent). The WR-compounds were also remarkably active in the inhibition of DNA platination. Prevention of adduct formation in the presence of 4.2 mM WR-compound decreased in the order WR1065 (74%) greater than WR33278 (63%) greater than WR2721 (51%). The prevention of CDDP-DNA adduct formation by WR1065 was strongly concentration-dependent up to 4.2 mM but at higher concentrations this protection hardly increased at all. In the presence of the modulating agents, increased levels of CDDP monofunctionally bound to a guanine residue were observed with a simultaneous decrease in the relative abundance of bifunctional adducts. All modulators were also able to reverse part of the CDDP-DNA adducts formed. After a 2-hr incubation of already platinated salmon sperm DNA with 4.2 mM of modulating agent, the removal of Pt from DNA amounted to about 43% with DDTC, 28% with WR1065 and 13-14% with TS, WR2721 and WR33278. Even CDDP bifunctionally bound to two adjacent guanines in the same DNA strand, which is considered to be a very stable adduct, was partly reversed. Our observations suggest that WR2721, especially when administered prior to or concomitantly with CDDP, can be expected to protect those tissues from CDDP-induced damage to DNA that are able to efficiently dephosphorylate WR2721 followed by uptake of the thiol metabolite WR1065. This stresses the importance of a selective formation and uptake of WR1065 by non-tumour tissues for the successful use of WR2721 as a protective agent in combination with platinum-based cancer chemotherapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1313234     DOI: 10.1016/0006-2952(92)90607-k

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biochem Pharmacol        ISSN: 0006-2952            Impact factor:   5.858


  17 in total

1.  Development of Second-Generation CDK2 Inhibitors for the Prevention of Cisplatin-Induced Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Robert A Hazlitt; Tal Teitz; Justine D Bonga; Jie Fang; Shiyong Diao; Luigi Iconaru; Lei Yang; Asli N Goktug; Duane G Currier; Taosheng Chen; Zoran Rankovic; Jaeki Min; Jian Zuo
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2018-08-24       Impact factor: 7.446

2.  In vitro protection from cisplatin-induced neurotoxicity by amifostine and its metabolite WR1065.

Authors:  C C Verstappen; A A Geldof; T J Postma; J J Heimans
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 4.130

Review 3.  Clinical and preclinical modulation of chemotherapy-induced toxicity in patients with cancer.

Authors:  K Hoekman; W J van der Vijgh; J B Vermorken
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 9.546

4.  Effects of amifostine on cisplatin induced DNA adduct formation and toxicity in malignant glioma and normal tissues in rat.

Authors:  P Bergström; A Johnsson; T Bergenheim; R Henriksson
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 4.130

5.  Radiation damage and radioprotectants: new concepts in the era of molecular medicine.

Authors:  M I Koukourakis
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-01-31       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 6.  A risk-benefit assessment of amifostine in cytoprotection.

Authors:  M Mabro; S Faivre; E Raymond
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 5.606

Review 7.  Amifostine: an update on its clinical status as a cytoprotectant in patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy and its potential therapeutic application in myelodysplastic syndrome.

Authors:  C R Culy; C M Spencer
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 9.546

8.  Protective effect of L-carnitine versus amifostine against cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity in rats.

Authors:  Sernaz Uzunoglu; Hakan Karagol; Fulya Ozpuyan; Rusen Cosar; Irfan Cicin; Vuslat Yurutcaloglu; Bengü Denizli; Özgür Tanriverdi; Necdet Sut; Zafer Kocak
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2010-12-08       Impact factor: 3.064

Review 9.  Amifostine: potential for clinically useful cytoprotection.

Authors:  G T Budd; V Lorenzi; R Ganapathi; D Adelstein; R Pelley; T Olencki; D McLain; R M Bukowski
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 10.  WR2721 as a modulator of cisplatin- and carboplatin-induced side effects in comparison with other chemoprotective agents: a molecular approach.

Authors:  M Treskes; W J van der Vijgh
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 3.333

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.