PURPOSE: Microtubule-stabilizing agents are an important class of anticancer compounds. Peloruside A and laulimalide bind to a different site on the microtubule to taxoid site drugs such as paclitaxel (Taxol(®)), docetaxel (Taxotere(®)), ixabepilone (Ixempra(®)), the epothilones, and discodermolide. The purpose of this study was to examine the synergistic interactions of these drugs when given in combination in relation to the differences in their binding sites on the microtubule. METHODS: Human ovarian carcinoma cells (1A9 cells) and murine T cells were treated with different combinations of microtubule-stabilizing or destabilizing agents. The compounds were given individually and in combination, and the antiproliferative activity was assessed to calculate a combination index (CI) from the equation: CI = D(1)/Dx(1) + D(2)/Dx(2) in which D(1) and D(2) are the concentrations of drug 1 and drug 2 that when given together give the same response as drug 1 and 2 alone (Dx(1) and Dx(2)). Thus, a CI value of less than 1.0 indicates a synergistic effect between the two drugs in which the response to the two drugs given together is greater than the additive response of the two drugs if given on their own. RESULTS: As anticipated from previous in vitro studies, peloruside A and laulimalide did not synergize with each other. They also failed to synergize with the microtubule-destabilizing agents vinblastine and 2-methoxyestradiol. Peloruside A and laulimalide did, however, synergize with the epothilones, as had been previously shown, but not with docetaxel or discodermolide. CONCLUSIONS: Combining two microtubule-targeting agents with different binding sites does not guarantee a synergistic interaction in cells, and additional factors are likely to be involved. This study highlights the importance of preclinical testing of actual combinations of drugs before proceeding into clinical trials.
PURPOSE: Microtubule-stabilizing agents are an important class of anticancer compounds. Peloruside A and laulimalide bind to a different site on the microtubule to taxoid site drugs such as paclitaxel (Taxol(®)), docetaxel (Taxotere(®)), ixabepilone (Ixempra(®)), the epothilones, and discodermolide. The purpose of this study was to examine the synergistic interactions of these drugs when given in combination in relation to the differences in their binding sites on the microtubule. METHODS:Humanovarian carcinoma cells (1A9 cells) and murine T cells were treated with different combinations of microtubule-stabilizing or destabilizing agents. The compounds were given individually and in combination, and the antiproliferative activity was assessed to calculate a combination index (CI) from the equation: CI = D(1)/Dx(1) + D(2)/Dx(2) in which D(1) and D(2) are the concentrations of drug 1 and drug 2 that when given together give the same response as drug 1 and 2 alone (Dx(1) and Dx(2)). Thus, a CI value of less than 1.0 indicates a synergistic effect between the two drugs in which the response to the two drugs given together is greater than the additive response of the two drugs if given on their own. RESULTS: As anticipated from previous in vitro studies, peloruside A and laulimalide did not synergize with each other. They also failed to synergize with the microtubule-destabilizing agents vinblastine and 2-methoxyestradiol. Peloruside A and laulimalide did, however, synergize with the epothilones, as had been previously shown, but not with docetaxel or discodermolide. CONCLUSIONS: Combining two microtubule-targeting agents with different binding sites does not guarantee a synergistic interaction in cells, and additional factors are likely to be involved. This study highlights the importance of preclinical testing of actual combinations of drugs before proceeding into clinical trials.
Authors: Carlo Ballatore; Kurt R Brunden; Donna M Huryn; John Q Trojanowski; Virginia M-Y Lee; Amos B Smith Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2012-09-28 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Adrian Begaye; Shana Trostel; Zhiming Zhao; Richard E Taylor; David C Schriemer; Dan L Sackett Journal: Cell Cycle Date: 2011-10-01 Impact factor: 4.534
Authors: Jessica J Field; Arun Kanakkanthara; Darby G Brooke; Saptarshi Sinha; Sushila D Pillai; William A Denny; Alison J Butt; John H Miller Journal: Invest New Drugs Date: 2016-03-12 Impact factor: 3.850
Authors: Weiwei Wang; Hangxiao Zhang; Xumin Wang; Jordan Patterson; Philip Winter; Kathryn Graham; Sunita Ghosh; John C Lee; Christos D Katsetos; John R Mackey; Jack A Tuszynski; Gane Ka-Shu Wong; Richard F Ludueña Journal: Protoplasma Date: 2016-12-09 Impact factor: 3.356
Authors: Elizabeth H Kellogg; Nisreen M A Hejab; Stuart Howes; Peter Northcote; John H Miller; J Fernando Díaz; Kenneth H Downing; Eva Nogales Journal: J Mol Biol Date: 2017-01-17 Impact factor: 5.469
Authors: Jessica J Field; Peter T Northcote; Ian Paterson; Karl-Heinz Altmann; J Fernando Díaz; John H Miller Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2017-05-03 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Chiara Trigili; Isabel Barasoain; Pedro A Sánchez-Murcia; Katja Bargsten; Mariano Redondo-Horcajo; Aurora Nogales; Nicola M Gardner; Arndt Meyer; Guy J Naylor; Elena Gómez-Rubio; Federico Gago; Michel O Steinmetz; Ian Paterson; Andrea E Prota; J Fernando Díaz Journal: ACS Omega Date: 2016-12-13