| Literature DB >> 16880791 |
M K L Fung1, H-W Cheung, M-T Ling, A L M Cheung, Y-C Wong, X Wang.
Abstract
Testicular germ cell tumour (TGCT) is the most common malignancy in young males. Although most TGCTs are sensitive to cisplatin-based chemotherapy, significant numbers of TGCT patients still relapse and die each year because of the development of resistance to cisplatin. Previously, we first reported that a key regulator of the mitotic checkpoint, mitotic arrest deficient-2 (MAD2), was a mediator of cisplatin sensitivity in human cancer cells. In this study, we investigated whether MAD2 played a role in cellular sensitivity to cisplatin in TGCT cells and the underlying molecular mechanisms responsible. Using 10 TGCT cell lines, we found that increased MAD2 expression was correlated with cellular sensitivity to cisplatin, which was associated with activation of the MEK pathway. Treatment of cells expressing high levels of MAD2 with an MEK inhibitor, U0126, led to cellular protection against cisplatin-induced apoptosis. Inactivation of MAD2 by transfecting a dominant-negative construct in TGCT cells with high levels of MAD2 resulted in the suppression of MEK pathway and resistance to cisplatin-induced cell death. These results support previous suggestion on the involvement of mitotic checkpoint in DNA damage response in human cancer cells and demonstrate a possible molecular mechanism responsible for the MAD2-mediated sensitivity to cisplatin in TGCT cells. Our results also suggest that downregulation of MAD2 may be an indicator for identification of TGCT cancer cells that are potentially resistant to cisplatin-based therapy.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2006 PMID: 16880791 PMCID: PMC2360662 DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603284
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Cancer ISSN: 0007-0920 Impact factor: 7.640
Characteristics of TGCT cell lines
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GH | Primary | NSGCT | EC |
|
| GCT27 | Primary | NSGCT | EC |
|
| GCT27R | Primary | NSGCT | EC |
|
| NCCIT | Primary mediastinal | NSGCT | EC, S |
|
| NT2/D1 | Lung metastasis | NSGCT | Pluripotent EC |
|
| SuSa | Primary | NSGCT | EC, T |
|
| SuSa-CP | Primary | NSGCT | EC, T |
|
| 833K | Abdominal metastasis | NSGCT | EC, T |
|
| 1411HP | Primary | NSGCT | EC, Y |
|
| 2102EP | Primary | NSGCT | EC |
|
EC=embryonal carcinoma; NSGCT=non-seminomatous germ cell tumour; S=seminoma; T=teratoma; Y=yolk sac tumour.
Acquired resistance cell line derived from GCT27.
Acquired resistance cell line derived from SuSa.
Figure 1Correlation of MAD2 expression and sensitivity to cisplatin and taxol. (A) MAD2 expression in 10 TGCT cell lines GH, 833K, 1411HP, NT2/D1, 2102EP, SuSa, SuSa-CP, GCT27, GCT27R and NCCIT analysed by Western blotting. A human cervical carcinoma cell line HeLa was used as a positive control. (B) Representative results of immunohistochemical staining of MAD2 in HeLa, GH, 833K, 1411HP, NT2/D1, 2102EP, SuSa, SuSa-CP, GCT27, GCT27R, NCCIT cells and a negative control with primary antibody omitted. Photographs were taken under × 400 magnifications. (C) Colony-forming ability of TGCT cell lines with high (solid lines) and low (dotted lines) levels of MAD2 protein after exposure to cisplatin (left panel) and taxol (right panel). Note that cells with high levels of MAD2 (solid lines) were more sensitive to cisplatin but not to taxol. Results represented means of three independent experiments and error bars indicated standard deviation. (D) Colony-forming assay of acquired cisplatin-resistant cell lines and their parental lines. Results represented means of three independent experiments and error bars indicated standard deviation. (E) Terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase-mediated nick end labelling staining of the 10 TGCT cell lines after treatment with three doses of cisplatin for 4 days. Note that the percentage of TUNEL-positive cells was higher in cell lines with high level of MAD2 (NCCIT, NT2/D1, GH, 833K and SuSa) than cell lines with low levels of MAD2 (GCT27, 2102EP and 1411HP). Results represented means of three independent experiments and error bars indicated standard deviation.
Summary of IC50 and IC90 doses of cisplatin and taxol in 10 TGCT cell lines
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| GH | 31.0±12.8 | 69.4±6.8 | 0.45±0.02 | 0.86±0.04 |
| GCT27 | 69.2±10.4 | 162.1±18.3 | 0.82±0.02 | 1.66±0.11 |
| GCT27R | 242.8±8.5 | 665.6±21.4 | 0.71±0.01 | 1.29±0.12 |
| NCCIT | 38.80±5.0 | 99.6±15.1 | 0.85±0.08 | 1.67±0.29 |
| NT2/D1 | 23.4±1.34 | 49.8±5.8 | 0.46±0.06 | 0.94±0.21 |
| SuSa | 17.1±0.4 | 57.3±3.4 | 0.62±0.01 | 1.05±0.04 |
| SuSa-CP | 139.0±13.1 | 345.5±29.5 | 0.65±0.02 | 1.29±0.12 |
| 833K | 36.3±4.7 | 90.3±12.2 | 0.38±0.04 | 0.75±0.03 |
| 1411HP | 189.4±21.9 | 471.7±41.9 | 0.75±0.03 | 1.50±0.22 |
| 2102EP | 90.2±5.8 | 205.4±14.4 | 0.63±0.05 | 1.08±0.06 |
Figure 2Effect of cisplatin on the expression of MEK pathway-related proteins and PARP. Two TGCT cell lines expressing relatively high (NCCIT, GH) and low levels of MAD2 (2102EP and 1411HP) were examined by Western blotting. Expression of MEK pathway-related proteins and PARP was analysed after treatment with 100 ng ml−1 (A) and 500 ng ml−1 (B) of cisplatin. Note that the phosphorylation of MEK pathway-related proteins as well as cleaved PARP were suppressed in relatively resistant cells compared to the sensitive lines.
Figure 3Effect of MEK1/2 inactivation on cisplatin sensitivity in GH cells. GH cells were treated with two doses (10 and 20 μM) of an MEK1/2 inhibitor, U0126, for indicated time points. Western blotting and MTT assay were performed. (A) Western blotting analysis of p-ERK1/2 expression before (lanes 1–3) and after exposure to U0126 alone (lanes 7–9; 13–15) and in combination with cisplatin (lanes 10–12; 16–18). The cisplatin- and solvent-treated cells (lanes 4–6) were also tested as an internal control. Note that the expression of p-ERK was lower after exposure to both concentrations of U0126 compared with solvent control in response to cisplatin. (B–D) Cell viability after exposure to five concentrations of cisplatin for 4 days (B), 5 days (C) and 6 days (D) in the presence of 20 μM U0126 (filled columns) and absence of U0126 (open columns). Note that after exposure to both cisplatin and U0126, cell viability was higher than that treated with cisplatin alone. Results represented means of three independent experiments and error bars indicated standard deviation.
Figure 4Effect of MAD2 inactivation on MEK pathway and cellular sensitivity to cisplatin in GH cells. GH cells were transiently transfected with a HA-tagged MAD2 dominant-negative construct (MAD2ΔC) and the expression of p-MEK and p-Elk, the percentage of TUNEL-positive cells and cell viability were examined after exposure to cisplatin. (A) MAD2 and HA protein expression in MAD2ΔC and vector transfected GH cells 48 h after transfection (arrow indicates the size of HA protein). (B and C) Expression of p-MEK1/2 and p-Elk-1 and PARP in GH cells expressing MAD2ΔC and the control vector after exposure to 100 ng ml−1 (B) and 500 ng ml−1 (C) cisplatin. Note that after exposure to cisplatin, the expression of p-MEK1/2 and p-Elk-1 was lower in the MAD2ΔC-transfected cells especially at 48 h post-exposure time compared to the vector control. (D) Terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase-mediated nick end labelling staining of MAD2ΔC transfectants (filled columns) and control vector transfectants (open columns) after exposure to three doses of cisplatin for 4 days. Note that the percentage of TUNEL-positive cells in MAD2ΔC transfectants was lower than the control vector transfectants after cisplatin treatment. Results represented means of three independent experiments and error bars indicated standard deviation. (E–G) Cell viability of MAD2ΔC transfectants (filled columns) and control vector transfectants (open columns) after exposure to three concentrations of cisplatin for indicated time points. Note that the cell viability of MAD2ΔC transfectants was higher than that of control vector transfectants after treatment with same doses of cisplatin. Results represented means of three independent experiments and error bars indicated standard deviation.
Figure 5A schematic model of MAD2-mediated cisplatin sensitivity in TGCT cells.