PURPOSE: Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is a devastating disease. Recent studies suggest that the stem cell properties of GBM contribute to the development of therapy resistance. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The expression of Survivin and Ran was evaluated by immunohistochemistry with GBM tissues, and quantitative reverse transcriptase (qRT)-PCR and immunocytochemistry with patient-derived GBM sphere cultures. With a computational structure-based drug design, 11 small-molecule compounds were designed, synthesized, and evaluated as inhibitor candidates for the molecular interaction of Survivin protein. The molecular mechanism of the lead compound, LLP-3, was determined by Western blot, ELISA, in situ proximity ligation assay, and immunocytochemistry. The effects of LLP-3 treatment on GSCs were evaluated both in vitro and in vivo. Quantitative immunohistochemistry was carried out to compare Survivin expression in tissues from 44 newly diagnosed and 31 recurrent post-chemoradiation GBM patients. Lastly, the sensitivities of temozolomide-resistant GBM spheres to LLP-3 were evaluated in vitro. RESULTS: Survivin and Ran were strongly expressed in GBM tissues, particularly in the perivasculature, and also in patient-derived GSC cultures. LLP-3 treatment disrupted the Survivin-Ran protein complex in cancer cells and abolished the growth of patient-derived GBM spheres in vitro and in vivo. This inhibition was dependent on caspase activity and associated with p53 status of cells. Immunohistochemistry showed that Survivin expression is significantly increased in recurrent GBM compared with newly diagnosed tumors, and temozolomide-resistant GBM spheres exhibited high sensitivities to LLP-3 treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Disruption of the Survivin-Ran complex by LLP-3 abolishes survival and growth of GSCs both in vitro and in vivo, indicating an attractive novel therapeutic approach for GBM.
PURPOSE:Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is a devastating disease. Recent studies suggest that the stem cell properties of GBM contribute to the development of therapy resistance. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The expression of Survivin and Ran was evaluated by immunohistochemistry with GBM tissues, and quantitative reverse transcriptase (qRT)-PCR and immunocytochemistry with patient-derived GBM sphere cultures. With a computational structure-based drug design, 11 small-molecule compounds were designed, synthesized, and evaluated as inhibitor candidates for the molecular interaction of Survivin protein. The molecular mechanism of the lead compound, LLP-3, was determined by Western blot, ELISA, in situ proximity ligation assay, and immunocytochemistry. The effects of LLP-3 treatment on GSCs were evaluated both in vitro and in vivo. Quantitative immunohistochemistry was carried out to compare Survivin expression in tissues from 44 newly diagnosed and 31 recurrent post-chemoradiation GBM patients. Lastly, the sensitivities of temozolomide-resistant GBM spheres to LLP-3 were evaluated in vitro. RESULTS: Survivin and Ran were strongly expressed in GBM tissues, particularly in the perivasculature, and also in patient-derived GSC cultures. LLP-3 treatment disrupted the Survivin-Ran protein complex in cancer cells and abolished the growth of patient-derived GBM spheres in vitro and in vivo. This inhibition was dependent on caspase activity and associated with p53 status of cells. Immunohistochemistry showed that Survivin expression is significantly increased in recurrent GBM compared with newly diagnosed tumors, and temozolomide-resistant GBM spheres exhibited high sensitivities to LLP-3 treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Disruption of the Survivin-Ran complex by LLP-3 abolishes survival and growth of GSCs both in vitro and in vivo, indicating an attractive novel therapeutic approach for GBM.
Authors: Véronique Ouellet; Marie-Claude Guyot; Cécile Le Page; Abdelali Filali-Mouhim; Christian Lussier; Patricia N Tonin; Diane M Provencher; Anne-Marie Mes-Masson Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2006-08-01 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Kenneth E Hung; Vitor Faca; Kenneth Song; David A Sarracino; Larissa Georgeon Richard; Bryan Krastins; Sara Forrester; Andrew Porter; Alexandra Kunin; Umar Mahmood; Brian B Haab; Samir M Hanash; Raju Kucherlapati Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2009-02-24
Authors: Ping Mao; Kaushal Joshi; Jianfeng Li; Sung-Hak Kim; Peipei Li; Lucas Santana-Santos; Soumya Luthra; Uma R Chandran; Panayiotis V Benos; Luke Smith; Maode Wang; Bo Hu; Shi-Yuan Cheng; Robert W Sobol; Ichiro Nakano Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2013-05-06 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: G Renner; H Janouskova; F Noulet; V Koenig; E Guerin; S Bär; J Nuesch; F Rechenmacher; S Neubauer; H Kessler; A-F Blandin; L Choulier; N Etienne-Selloum; M Lehmann; I Lelong-Rebel; S Martin; M Dontenwill Journal: Cell Death Differ Date: 2015-10-16 Impact factor: 15.828
Authors: Robert W Schnepp; Priya Khurana; Edward F Attiyeh; Pichai Raman; Sara E Chodosh; Derek A Oldridge; Maria E Gagliardi; Karina L Conkrite; Shahab Asgharzadeh; Robert C Seeger; Blair B Madison; Anil K Rustgi; John M Maris; Sharon J Diskin Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2015-10-17 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Mary K Burdette; Ragini Jenkins; Yuriy P Bandera; Haley Jones; Isabell K Foulger; Ashley Dickey; Anna-Liisa Nieminen; Stephen H Foulger Journal: ACS Appl Bio Mater Date: 2019-07-01