Monjri M Shah1, Zachary C Dobbin1, Somaira Nowsheen2, Monica Wielgos2, Ashwini A Katre1, Ronald D Alvarez1, Panagiotis A Konstantinopoulos3, Eddy S Yang2, Charles N Landen4. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. 3. Department of Medicine, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. Electronic address: clanden@uabmc.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: BRCA-positive ovarian cancer patients derive benefit PARP inhibitors. Approximately 50% of ovarian cancer tumors have homologous recombination (HR) deficiencies and are therefore "BRCA-like," possibly rendering them sensitive to PARP inhibition. However, no predictive assay exists to identify these patients. We sought to determine if irradiation-induced Rad51 foci formation, a known marker of HR, correlated to PARP inhibitor response in an ovarian cancer model. METHODS: Ovarian cancer cell lines were exposed to PARP-inhibitor ABT-888 to determine effect on growth. Rad51 protein expression prior to irradiation was determined via Western blot. Cultured cells and patient-derived xenograft tumors (PDX) were irradiated and probed for Rad51 foci. In vivo PDX tumors were treated with ABT-888 and carboplatin; these results were correlated with the ex vivo ionizing radiation assay. RESULTS: Three of seven cell lines were sensitive to ABT-888. Sensitive lines had the lowest Rad51 foci formation rate after irradiation, indicating functional HR deficiency. Approximately 50% of the PDX samples had decreased Rad51 foci formation. Total Rad51 protein levels were consistently low, suggesting that DNA damage induction is required to characterize HR status. The ex vivo IR assay accurately predicted which PDX models were sensitive to PARP inhibition in vitro and in vivo. ABT-888 alone reduced orthotopic tumor growth by 51% in A2780ip2 cell line, predicted to respond by the ex vivo assay. Three PDX models' response also correlated with the assay. CONCLUSIONS: The ex vivo IR assay correlates with response to PARP inhibition. Analysis of total Rad51 protein is not a reliable substitute.
OBJECTIVE:BRCA-positive ovarian cancerpatients derive benefit PARP inhibitors. Approximately 50% of ovarian cancer tumors have homologous recombination (HR) deficiencies and are therefore "BRCA-like," possibly rendering them sensitive to PARP inhibition. However, no predictive assay exists to identify these patients. We sought to determine if irradiation-induced Rad51 foci formation, a known marker of HR, correlated to PARP inhibitor response in an ovarian cancer model. METHODS:Ovarian cancer cell lines were exposed to PARP-inhibitor ABT-888 to determine effect on growth. Rad51 protein expression prior to irradiation was determined via Western blot. Cultured cells and patient-derived xenograft tumors (PDX) were irradiated and probed for Rad51 foci. In vivo PDX tumors were treated with ABT-888 and carboplatin; these results were correlated with the ex vivo ionizing radiation assay. RESULTS: Three of seven cell lines were sensitive to ABT-888. Sensitive lines had the lowest Rad51 foci formation rate after irradiation, indicating functional HR deficiency. Approximately 50% of the PDX samples had decreased Rad51 foci formation. Total Rad51 protein levels were consistently low, suggesting that DNA damage induction is required to characterize HR status. The ex vivo IR assay accurately predicted which PDX models were sensitive to PARP inhibition in vitro and in vivo. ABT-888 alone reduced orthotopic tumor growth by 51% in A2780ip2 cell line, predicted to respond by the ex vivo assay. Three PDX models' response also correlated with the assay. CONCLUSIONS: The ex vivo IR assay correlates with response to PARP inhibition. Analysis of total Rad51 protein is not a reliable substitute.
Authors: Panagiotis A Konstantinopoulos; Dimitrios Spentzos; Beth Y Karlan; Toshiyasu Taniguchi; Elena Fountzilas; Nancy Francoeur; Douglas A Levine; Stephen A Cannistra Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-06-14 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Charles N Landen; Blake Goodman; Ashwini A Katre; Adam D Steg; Alpa M Nick; Rebecca L Stone; Lance D Miller; Pablo Vivas Mejia; Nicolas B Jennings; David M Gershenson; Robert C Bast; Robert L Coleman; Gabriel Lopez-Berestein; Anil K Sood Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2010-10-01 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: M William Audeh; James Carmichael; Richard T Penson; Michael Friedlander; Bethan Powell; Katherine M Bell-McGuinn; Clare Scott; Jeffrey N Weitzel; Ana Oaknin; Niklas Loman; Karen Lu; Rita K Schmutzler; Ursula Matulonis; Mark Wickens; Andrew Tutt Journal: Lancet Date: 2010-07-06 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Monika Graeser; Afshan McCarthy; Christopher J Lord; Kay Savage; Margaret Hills; Janine Salter; Nicholas Orr; Marina Parton; Ian E Smith; Jorge S Reis-Filho; Mitch Dowsett; Alan Ashworth; Nicholas C Turner Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2010-08-27 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Kriste A Lewis; Sally Mullany; Bijoy Thomas; Jeremy Chien; Ralitsa Loewen; Viji Shridhar; William A Cliby Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2005-08-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Peter C Fong; Timothy A Yap; David S Boss; Craig P Carden; Marja Mergui-Roelvink; Charlie Gourley; Jacques De Greve; Jan Lubinski; Susan Shanley; Christina Messiou; Roger A'Hern; Andrew Tutt; Alan Ashworth; John Stone; James Carmichael; Jan H M Schellens; Johann S de Bono; Stan B Kaye Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-04-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Norman Chan; Isabel M Pires; Zuzana Bencokova; Carla Coackley; Kaisa R Luoto; Nirmal Bhogal; Minalini Lakshman; Ponnari Gottipati; F Javier Oliver; Thomas Helleday; Ester M Hammond; Robert G Bristow Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2010-10-05 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Christopher D Willey; Ashley N Gilbert; Joshua C Anderson; George Yancey Gillespie Journal: Semin Radiat Oncol Date: 2015-05-14 Impact factor: 5.934
Authors: Mary M Mullen; Elena Lomonosova; Michael D Toboni; Alyssa Oplt; Emily Cybulla; Barbara Blachut; Peinan Zhao; Hollie Noia; Daniel Wilke; Erinn B Rankin; Lindsay M Kuroki; Andrea R Hagemann; Ian S Hagemann; Carolyn K McCourt; Premal H Thaker; David G Mutch; Matthew A Powell; Nima Mosammaparast; Alessandro Vindigni; Katherine C Fuh Journal: Mol Cancer Res Date: 2021-10-20 Impact factor: 6.333
Authors: Mariam M AlHilli; Marc A Becker; S John Weroha; Karen S Flatten; Rachel M Hurley; Maria I Harrell; Ann L Oberg; Matt J Maurer; Kieran M Hawthorne; Xiaonan Hou; Sean C Harrington; Sarah McKinstry; X Wei Meng; Keith M Wilcoxen; Kimberly R Kalli; Elizabeth M Swisher; Scott H Kaufmann; Paul Haluska Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2016-09-08 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Saeed Rafii; Charlie Gourley; Rajiv Kumar; Elena Geuna; Joo Ern Ang; Tzyvia Rye; Lee-May Chen; Ronnie Shapira-Frommer; Michael Friedlander; Ursula Matulonis; Jacques De Greve; Amit M Oza; Susana Banerjee; L Rhoda Molife; Martin E Gore; Stan B Kaye; Timothy A Yap Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2017-07-18