Jiangnan Peng1, April L Risinger, Jing Li, Susan L Mooberry. 1. Department of Pharmacology, ‡Cancer Therapy & Research Center, and §Department of Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio , San Antonio, Texas 78229, United States.
Abstract
The taccalonolides are microtubule stabilizers isolated from plants of the genus Tacca. Taccalonolide AF is 231 times more potent than the major metabolite taccalonolide A and differs only by the oxidation of the C-22,23 double bond in A to an epoxy group in AF. In the current study, 10 other rare natural taccalonolides were epoxidized and in each case epoxidation improved potency. The epoxidation products of taccalonolide T and AI were the most potent, with IC50 values of 0.43 and 0.88 nM, respectively. These potent taccalonolides retained microtubule stabilizing effects, and T-epoxide demonstrated antitumor effects in a xenograft model of breast cancer. Additional reactions demonstrated that reduction of the C-6 ketone resulted in an inactive taccalonolide and that C-22,23 epoxidation restored its activity. These studies confirm the value of C-22,23 epoxidation as an effective strategy for increasing the potency of a wide range of structurally diverse taccalonolide microtubule stabilizers.
The taccalonolides are microtubule stabilizers isolated from plants of the genus Tacca. Taccalonolide AF is 231 times more potent than the major metabolite taccalonolide A and differs only by the oxidation of the C-22,23 double bond in A to an epoxy group in AF. In the current study, 10 other rare natural taccalonolides were epoxidized and in each case epoxidation improved potency. The epoxidation products of taccalonolide T and AI were the most potent, with IC50 values of 0.43 and 0.88 nM, respectively. These potent taccalonolides retained microtubule stabilizing effects, and T-epoxide demonstrated antitumor effects in a xenograft model of breast cancer. Additional reactions demonstrated that reduction of the C-6 ketone resulted in an inactive taccalonolide and that C-22,23 epoxidation restored its activity. These studies confirm the value of C-22,23 epoxidation as an effective strategy for increasing the potency of a wide range of structurally diverse taccalonolide microtubule stabilizers.
Microtubules remain
an important target for anticancer drug discovery.[1] Paclitaxel, the first microtubule stabilizer
identified from the Taxus brevifolia, is one of the
most successful anticancer drugs currently used in the clinic. Members
of a second class of plant-derived microtubule stabilizers, the taccalonolides,
have been isolated from a variety of Tacca species.[2−11] The taccalonolides are highly acetylated hexacyclic steroid lactones
that exhibit effects similar to other microtubule stabilizers in that
they increase the density of cellular microtubules, interrupt mitotic
progression, and consequentially lead to the apoptosis of cancer cells.[12] Despite their low antiproliferative potencies in vitro, taccalonolides A and E were found to be potent
and effective antitumor agents in vivo(13,14) with the ability to circumvent multiple mechanisms of drug resistance,
including mutations in the taxane binding site and the expression
of MRP7, βIII-tubulin, and P-glycoprotein (Pgp).[14,15] The recent isolation of taccalonolides with low nanomolar potency
facilitated biochemical and structural studies demonstrating that
the taccalonolides bind to tubulin covalently and impart unique interprotofilament
stability to microtubules.[16] The most potent
of these rare natural taccalonolides, AF (1), contains
an epoxy group at C-22,23 that results in a 231-fold increase in potency
compared with taccalonolide A (2), which contains a double
bond at this site.[17] Taccalonolide AF is
an effective antitumor agent that causes tumor regression in the MDA-MB-231breast cancer xenograft model, albeit with a narrow therapeutic window.[16] A simple and efficient method was developed
to semisynthetically epoxidize the C-22,23 double bond in taccalonolides
A and B (3) to generate taccalonolides AF and AJ (4), respectively.[17] Taccalonolide
AJ has an IC50 value of 4.2 nM, which is 734-fold more
potent than the parent molecule, taccalonolide B, suggesting that
epoxidation of the C-22,23 double bond is an effective way to increase
the potency of this class of molecules. In the current study, the
C-22,23 double bond in an additional 10 rare natural microtubule stabilizing
taccalonolides was epoxidized, including the newly isolated taccalonolide
AI (5). Our results demonstrate that this modification
increases the potency of each taccalonolide, in some cases leading
to subnanomolar potency. These new epoxidized taccalonolides retain
microtubule stabilizing activity and some have antitumor efficacy.
Results
and Discussion
A number of taccalonolides, designated A–Y,
were previously
isolated from various Tacca sp. by multiple investigators.[12] We have continued to search for additional rare
natural taccalonolides and conduct semisynthetic reactions to fully
understand the SAR of this class of compounds with the goal of identifying
taccalonolides with optimal properties for consideration for clinical
development.
Isolation and Structure Elucidation of 5
The potent semisynthetic 4 is the C-22,23 epoxidation
product of the naturally occurring 3.[17] In the process of isolating highly purified 3 from the roots and rhizomes of T. chantrieri, we
found a minor product with potent microtubule stabilizing activity.
This minor taccalonolide was purified and designated taccalonolide
AI (5).Compound 5 was obtained as
a white powder. Its molecular formula (C35H48O11) was determined by high resolution electrospray ionization
mass spectroscopy (HRESIMS), 645.3268 [M + H]+ (calcd for
C35H49O11 645.3269), and NMR data.
The 1H NMR spectrum of 5 showed characteristics
of the taccalonolide backbone, including four methyl singlets at δ
1.67 (s, 3H), 1.36 (s, 3H), 0.82 (s, 3H), and 0.76 (s, 3H), one methyl
doublet at δ 0.95 (d, J = 7.0 Hz, 3H, 21-CH3), one acetyl at δ 2.08 (s, 3H), epoxyl signals at δ
3.55 (t, J = 4.0 Hz, 1H, H-2) and 3.40 (br, 1H, H-3),
and an olefin singlet at δ 5.02 (br, 1H, H-22). The upfield
shift of H-15 at δ 4.38 (ddd, J = 9.5, 8.3,
2.5 Hz, 1H) indicated a 15-OH similar to 3 and 6. The only acetoxy group was assigned to C-12 due to the
chemical shift of H-12 at δ 4.99 (t, J = 2.8
Hz, 1H) and the HMBC correlation between H-12 and the acetoxy carbon
at δ 169.3. The downfield chemical shift of H-1 at δ 4.59
(d, J = 5.2 Hz, 1H) required an acyloxy substitution
at C-1. This acyloxy group was determined to be an isovaleryloxy by
the 1H NMR signals at δ 2.18 (m, 2H, H-2′),
2.14 (m, 1H, H-3′), 1.01 (d, J = 7.0 Hz, 3H,
H-4′), 1.00 (d, J = 6.0 Hz, 3H, H-5′),
and 2D NMR correlations. The HMBC correlations between H-1 and the
carbonyl carbon of the isovaleryloxy at δ 171.8 confirmed this
substitution. Thus, the structure of 5 was determined
as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1
Structures of taccalonolides
AF, A, B, AJ, AI, and N.
Structures of taccalonolidesAF, A, B, AJ, AI, and N.Compound 5 retains the microtubule stabilizing
activity
of other taccalonolides and has antiproliferative activity with an
IC50 of 47 nM in HeLa cells, which makes it one of the
most potent natural taccalonolides isolated to date (Table 1). The potency of this taccalonolide is consistent
with previously determined SAR, which indicates that a large bulky
group at C-1 is optimal for activity.[13,16] The bulky
isovaleryloxy group at C-1 is the only difference between 5 and 6, which has an acetoxy at this site and is approximately
200-fold less potent (Table 1). Additionally,
the only difference between 5 and taccalonolide AM[18] is the absence of the C-5 hydroxyl in 5, which confers a 42-fold increase in potency (Table 1). Therefore, the combination of modifications at
C-1 and C-5 appear to be important for the potency of 5.
Table 1
Antiproliferative Potencies of Natural
Taccalonolides and Their Corresponding C-22,23 Epoxides
IC50 values were determined
in HeLa cells.
The fold
increase in potency achieved
by C-22,23 expoxidation is shown in brackets in the last column.
Epoxidation of the Taccalonolides
There are many methods
for epoxidation of alkenes. Considering the multiple fragile functional
groups present in the taccalonolides and small quantity of natural
taccalonolides available (less than 1 mg in some cases), a mild and
efficient epoxidation method was needed. Dimethyldioxirane (DMDO)
can rapidly epoxidize alkenes under neutral and mild conditions, and
it is also well suited for the synthesis of sensitive epoxides of
enol esters and enol lactones, as are present in the taccalonolides.[19] The reaction is highly efficient, generally
furnishing the desired epoxides in almost quantitative yield. It is
also very convenient, and in most cases pure products are obtained
after evaporation of the solvent. Due to the dramatic increases in
potency conferred by the epoxidation of the C-22,23 double bond in 2 and 3 to generate 1 and 4, we applied this method to epoxidize a wide variety of other
natural taccalonolides: E (7, 1.15 mg), N (6, 1.75 mg), R (8, 1.44 mg), T (9, 2.1 mg),
Z (10, 0.74 mg), AA (11, 1.0 mg), AB (12, 0.94 mg), AD (13, 1.28 mg), AI (5, 0.62 mg), and AN (14, 0.65 mg) (see Scheme 1). Most of these natural taccalonolides are very
rare with estimated content in the plant at ppm levels or less. Only
the α epoxy was obtained as determined by the small coupling
constant between H20/H22. We hypothesize that this is a result of
spatial strains of the β, axial orientation of the 27-CH3.
Scheme 1
Epoxidation of Taccalonolides
The antiproliferative potency of each C-22,C23 epoxy-taccalonolide
was evaluated in HeLa cells and compared with the IC50 of
the parent compound (Table 1). In each case, C-22,23 epoxidation resulted in an increase
in potency with an over 200-fold improvement in potency observed for
5 of the 10 new epoxy-taccalonolides (Table 1). Remarkably, the C-22,23 epoxidation of 9 and 5 resulted in the generation of the first ever compounds of
this class with subnanomolar potencies of 0.45 and 0.88 nM, respectively.
This makes 18 and 23 more potent than paclitaxel,
which had an IC50 of 1.2 nM in this assay.IC50 values were determined
in HeLa cells.The fold
increase in potency achieved
by C-22,23 expoxidation is shown in brackets in the last column.
Microtubule Stabilizing
Effects of C-22,23 Epoxidized Taccalonolides
In addition
to their potent antiproliferative effects, each epoxidized
taccalonolide caused interphase microtubule bundling in HeLa cells.
These effects are depicted in Figure 2 for
the two most potent taccalonolides, 18 and 23, and representative images of the cellular microtubule stabilizing
effects of other, less potent epoxy taccalonolides are shown in the Supporting Information. In addition to their
microtubule stabilizing effects in cells, both 18 and 23 enhanced the polymerization of purified porcine brain tubulin
in turbidimetric assays (Figure 3). Similarly
to other potent taccalonolides, including 1 and 4,[17] they enhanced the extent of
tubulin polymerization compared with vehicle controls without affecting
the time required to initiate tubulin polymerization, a feature that
makes this class of microtubule stabilizers distinct from other microtubule
stabilizers that bind to the paclitaxel or laulimalide binding sites.[16]
Figure 2
Effect of potent epoxidized taccalonolides on cellular
microtubules.
Microtubules were visualized by immunofluorescence using a β-tubulin
antibody after treatment of HeLa cells for 18 h with (A) vehicle (EtOH),
(B) 4 nM 18, or (C) 10 nM 23.
Figure 3
Effect of potent epoxidized taccalonolides on purified
tubulin
polymerization. Purified porcine brain tubulin was incubated with
6 μM 23, 0.7 μM 18, or EtOH
vehicle, and microtubule polymerization was monitored turbidimetrically
after shift to 37 °C.
Effect of potent epoxidized taccalonolides on cellular
microtubules.
Microtubules were visualized by immunofluorescence using a β-tubulin
antibody after treatment of HeLa cells for 18 h with (A) vehicle (EtOH),
(B) 4 nM 18, or (C) 10 nM 23.Effect of potent epoxidized taccalonolides on purified
tubulin
polymerization. Purified porcine brain tubulin was incubated with
6 μM 23, 0.7 μM 18, or EtOH
vehicle, and microtubule polymerization was monitored turbidimetrically
after shift to 37 °C.
In Vivo Efficacy of Potent Epoxidized Taccalonolides
Despite the fact that 9 and 5 are rare
natural products, both semisynthetic C-22,23 epoxidation products 23 and 18 were generated in sufficient quantities
for in vivo antitumor analyses. Antitumor studies
could be performed with small quantities of material due to the exquisite
potency of the taccalonolides in vivo.(13,14,16) The ability of taccalonolides
to covalently bind to microtubules likely contributes to their in vivo potency.[16] The low doses
of taccalonolides needed to observe effects in vivo allow them to be diluted in aqueous solvents, in this case less
than 10% EtOH in phosphate buffered saline (PBS). This is in contrast
to paclitaxel, which requires administration in Cremophor. The antitumor
efficacies of 18 and 23 were compared with
nontreated tumors as a negative control and three doses of 15 mg/kg
paclitaxel administered on days 0, 3, and 7 as a positive control
for antitumor activity.Individual doses of 0.25 mg/kg 18 were administered twice in the first week (days 0, 3) based
on preliminary dose tolerance studies that showed a total dose of
0.5 mg/kg was acceptable. No additional drug was administered due
to an average 10% body weight loss observed on day 7. Despite the
low total dose administered (0.5 mg/kg), tumor growth was completely
inhibited through day 7 (Figure 4). During
days 7–14, the mice gradually recovered to 4% body weight loss
while significant antitumor effects were sustained for over a week
after the final dose was administered (Figure 4). By day 17, the mice had fully recovered from drug-induced weight
loss and some antitumor effects persisted. One lethality was encountered
on day 21, which was 18 days after the final dose and after a full
recovery of body weight loss; it is therefore unclear whether this
was a drug-related toxicity.
Figure 4
In vivo efficacy of a cumulative total dose of
2.25 mg/kg 23 or 0.5 mg/kg 18 in an MDA-MB-231
xenograft model of triple negative breast cancer compared with a cumulative
total dose of 45 mg/kg paclitaxel. Measurements are an average of
10 tumors with standard error.
As has been noted for other taccalonolides, 18 has
a narrow therapeutic window based on a concurrent study where two
doses of 0.375 mg/kg administered on days 0 and 3 (0.75 total dose)
resulted in an LC40 with 2 of the 5 mice succumbing 8–11
days after the final dose. Despite this narrow therapeutic window,
the ability of a total dose of 0.5 mg/kg 18 to produce
antitumor effects highlights the exceptional in vivo potency of the taccalonolides.Taccalonolide 23 was administered at 0.75 mg/kg on
days 0, 3, and 7 for a total dose of 2.25 mg/kg. Only slight antitumor
effects were observed, but dosing could not be increased due to a
limited amount of material, which was fully expended on day 7. Although 23 was only 2-fold less potent than 18in vitro, no significant antitumor effects or weight loss
were observed with 23 at a dose 3-fold higher than the
dose of 18 that produced antitumor effects. Although
we cannot rule out the possibility that 23 may have antitumor
efficacy at higher concentrations, these results highlight that in vitro potency cannot be used as a sole predictor of in vivo efficacy, even when drugs of the same class are
being compared. These results are consistent with studies showing
that 1 had excellent antitumor effects while 4 did not.[16]In vivo efficacy of a cumulative total dose of
2.25 mg/kg 23 or 0.5 mg/kg 18 in an MDA-MB-231
xenograft model of triple negative breast cancer compared with a cumulative
total dose of 45 mg/kg paclitaxel. Measurements are an average of
10 tumors with standard error.
Reduction of the Carbonyl Group in Taccalonolide A
Almost
all taccalonolides possess a carbonyl group at C-6. The role
of this carbonyl group in the microtubule stabilizing activity of
the taccalonolides is unknown. Reduction of this carbonyl group with
NaBH4 resulted in two new semisynthetic products, 25 and 26, that were isolated with respective
2% and 9% yields after HPLC purification (Scheme 2). Due to the spatial strain of the β orientation of
both 18-CH3 and 7-OH, we hypothesize that the hydride attached
to the carbonyl from the α face resulting in the 6β reduction
products of 25 and 26.
Scheme 2
Reduction of the
Carbonyl of 2
Compound 25 was obtained as white powder,
and a molecular
formula of C34H46O13 was deduced
from the HRMS, 663.3021 (calcd for C34H47O13 663.3011). The 1H NMR showed signals only for
three acetyl methyl groups, suggesting the loss of one acetyl group.
The chemical shift of H-15 at δ 4.39 (t, J =
8.7 Hz), ca. 1.1 ppm higher than that of taccalonolide A, indicated
that the acetyl group at 15-OH was lost. This is consistent with previous
studies showing that the C-15 acetoxy can easily be hydrolyzed.[14,18] The C-6 carbonyl signal was also lost, and instead, signals for
a hydroxymethine at δH 3.80 (br, H-6) and δC 73.5 (C-6) were observed, indicating the successful reduction
of the C-6 carbonyl group. The orientation of the 6-OH was determined
to be β (equatorial) due to the small coupling constant of H-6.
The rest of the molecule was found to be unchanged by 2D NMR. Thus, 25 is a product of the reduction of the C-6 carbonyl and the
hydrolysis of the C-15acetoxyl group.Compound 26 was obtained as white powder. The molecular
formula of C36H48O14 was determined
by HRMS, 705.3137 (calcd for C36H49O14 705.3168), corresponding to the reduction of a carbonyl group. The 1H NMR showed signals for four acetyl methyl groups. H-15 resonance
at δ 4.37, suggested the hydrolysis of this acetyl group to
give 15-OH. Interestingly, this acetyl group appears to shift to the
newly generated C-6 hydroxyl group based on the δH 5.07 (br, H-6), δC 76.7 (C-6), and COSY correlations
between H-6/H-5 (δ 2.05, m), H-6/H-7 (δ 3.79, dd, J = 9.5, 2.5 Hz), and H-7/H-8 (δ 1.94, m). The configuration
of 6-OAc was determined to be β (equatorial) due to the small
coupling constant of H-6. We hypothesize that the migration of the
acetyl group from 15-OH to 6-OH might have occurred through two steps
(See Scheme 3). The 15-acetyl group could have
first migrated to 7-OH since they are very close and the 15-acetoxy
is prone to loss of the acetyl group as demonstrated previously. Then
the newly formed alkoxide from the reduction of the 6-ketone could
have attached to the carbonyl carbon of the 7-OAc group to yield 26, the 6-OAc product.
Scheme 3
Proposed Mechanism of the Formation
of 26 from 2
Both 25 and 26 were found to
have no
antiproliferative effects at concentrations up to 50 μM, suggesting
the importance of the C-6 ketone for activity. However, 26 was generated in sufficient quantity to epoxidize at C-22,23. Similarly
to the results observed in Table 1, C-22,23
epoxidation of 26 resulted in an over 300-fold improvement
of potency to generate an active taccalonolide, 27, with
an IC50 of 163 ± 10 nM.
Structure–Activity
Relationships
The newly isolated
taccalonolide 5 and the known taccalonolide 9 showed relatively potent antiproliferative activities with IC50 values of 47 and 335 nM, respectively, which are 181- and
39-fold more potent than 6 and 8. The only
difference between taccalonolides 5/6 and 9/8 is that both 5 and 9 have an isovaleryloxy group at C-1, while 6 and 8 have an acetyloxy group at C-1. This result supports previous
assertions that a bulky substitution at C-1 is preferred for the antiproliferative
activity of the taccalonolides.[13]Epoxidation of the C-22,23 double bond significantly increased the
potency of every taccalonolide analyzed. Taking into account 1 and 4 (the epoxy products of 2 and 3, respectively), epoxidation of the C-22,23 double
bond resulted in an over 200-fold increase in potency for 7 of the
12 natural taccalonolides tested (Table 1).[17] Although these data show that a C-22,23 epoxide
is optimal for the potency of a wide range of taccalonolides, further
information can be gleaned from the relative effect that this epoxidation
has on activity. Two taccalonolides, 10 and 11, showed relatively modest 7- and 2-fold increases in potency, respectively,
after epoxidation. However, it is important to note that these two
taccalonolides were relatively potent before epoxidation (120 and
32 nM, respectively) and that their epoxidized forms are some of the
most potent taccalonolides identified to date (Table 1). Therefore, it appears that there may be a maximum potency
that can be conferred to some taccalonolides by epoxidation. The notable
outliers to this are the epoxidized forms of 9 and 5, which each contain a bulky isovaleryloxy group at C-1 and
are the first taccalonolides to show subnanomolar potency. Together,
these results suggest that the combination of a C-22,23 epoxide with
a bulky C-1 modification is optimal for taccalonolide potency.Taccalonolides 13 and 14 also showed
only modest increases of 2–4-fold in potency after C-22,23
epoxidation. These compounds differ from those previously mentioned
in that even the epoxidized forms, 22 and 24, have only moderate potencies, between 685–820 nM. Therefore,
although epoxidation increased the potency of these taccalonolides,
the resulting activities remained modest. Taccalonolide 13 contains a C-6,7 keto–enol tautomerization on the bottom
of the molecule. We hypothesize that these nonoptimal substituents
on C-6 and C-7 limit the potency of 13 even when epoxidized
at C-22,23. A similar limit in potency was conferred by the hydrolysis
of the C-1 group in 14.Both C-6 reductive products
of the major metabolite taccalonolide
A, 25 and 26, exhibited decreased potency,
further demonstrating the importance of the C-6 ketone for activity.
However, the finding that C-22,23 epoxidation of 26 leads
to an over 300-fold improvement in potency demonstrates that this
epoxidation can dramatically improve the activity even of taccalonolides
that otherwise have no detectable antiproliferative effects. Together,
these data provide more extensive SAR for the taccalonolides, including
the critical importance of C-22,23, C-1, and C-6 modifications as
well as the interplay between these substituents.
Conclusions
Each of the 11 taccalonolides epoxidized at C-22,23 in this study
exhibited increased potency compared with their precursors, the majority
showing over 200-fold improvement in activity. Two of these products, 18 and 23, are the first taccalonolides identified
with subnanomolar potency. These two epoxidized taccalonolides have
potent microtubule stabilizing activities in cells and with purified
tubulin, but only 18 demonstrated antitumor efficacy
at the dose and schedule tested. These results demonstrate that a
C-22,23 epoxy combined with a bulky C-1 isovaleryloxy group facilitates
optimal potency for the taccalonolide class of microtubule stabilizers
and further enhances our understanding of the structure–activity
relationship and antitumor efficacy for this group of microtubule
stabilizers. While both C-22,23 epoxidated and nonepoxidated taccalonolides
cause microtubule stabilization in cells, the recent finding that
some epoxy taccalonolides can covalently bind to microtubules leads
to a hypothesis that the C-22,23 epoxide may facilitate their irreversible
binding, which would be consistent with the increased potency afforded
by this modification. Additional studies to directly test this hypothesis
are ongoing.
Experimental Section
General
Experimental Procedures
NMR spectra were acquired
on Bruker Avance 500, 600, or 700 MHz instruments equipped with CryoProbes
using CDCl3 as solvent. All spectra were measured and reported
in ppm using trimethylsilane as an internal standard. 13C NMR data were obtained from HMQC and HMBC spectra. The HRMS data
were obtained on an Aglient Technologies 6224 TOFLC/MS mass spectrometer.
LC/MS was performed with a Waters Alliance 2695 HPLC module, 996 photodiode
array detector, and Micromass Quattro triple quadrupole mass spectrometer
equipped with ESI under the positive mode. TLC was performed on aluminum
sheets (silica gel 60 F254, Merck KGaA, Germany). Spots were visualized
by spraying with 20% sulfuric acid in ethanol followed by heating.
Final compounds were tested to be >95% pure by LC/MS.
Isolation of
Taccalonolides
Taccalonolides E (7), N (6), R (8), T (9), Z (10), AA (11), AB (12), AD (13), and AN (14) were obtained previously.[13−15,17,18] A taccalonolide B (3) enriched fraction[14] was further purified by reversed phase HPLC
(Phenomenex Luna, 5 μm C18 250 × 21.2 mm column)
eluting with a gradient of 40–100% acetonitrile in H2O in 50 min to yield highly pure 3 and the minor product,
taccalonolide AI (5).
Dimethyldioxirane was
prepared by reaction of oxone with acetone, and the concentration
of dimethyldioxirane was determined by UV.[20] Each taccalonolide (ca. 1–3 μmol) was dissolved in
500 μL of CH2Cl2 and cooled to −20
°C. DMDO (2–3 equiv) was added, and the mixture was stirred
at room temperature until the taccalonolide was completely epoxidized
(1–4 h). The epoxides were obtained after removal of the solvents
and reagent with no further purification required.
Compound 2 (10.2 mg) was dissolved in 2 mL
of MeOH and cooled in a
sodium chloride ice bath. Excess NaBH4 was added and reacted
for 10 min. After removal of MeOH, the residue was dissolved in CH2Cl2 at room temperature. The CH2Cl2 soluble material was subjected to HPLC separation to yield
compounds 25 (0.15 mg) and 26 (0.93 mg).
The antiproliferative
activities and IC50 values of the taccalonolides were determined
using the sulforhodamine B assay in HeLa cells as previously described.[14] The data are from an average of three experiments,
each performed in triplicate, with standard deviation.
Immunofluorescence
Microtubules in interphase HeLa
cells were visualized by immunofluorescence using a β-tubulin
antibody (Sigma no. 4026). Images were acquired 18 h after indicated
drug or vehicle treatment using a Nikon Eclipse 80i fluorescence microscope
and NIS Elements AR 3.0 software. Paclitaxel was used as a positive
control for microtubule stabilization.
Tubulin Polymerization
The ability of the taccalonolides 23 and 18 to enhance tubulin polymerization was
determined as previously described.[17] Briefly,
1 μL of a 100× stock solution of each compound in EtOH
was added to a final volume of 100 μL containing 2 mg/mL purified
porcine brain tubulin (Cytoskeleton) in GPEM buffer (80 mM Na-Pipes,
pH 6.9, 1 mM EGTA, 1 mM MgCl2, 1 mM GTP, and 10% glycerol),
and microtubule formation was monitored turbidimetrically at OD340 on a Spectramax 96-well plate reader.
In
Vivo Antitumor Testing
The antitumor
efficacy of the two most potent taccalonolides, 23 and 18, was evaluated in a MDA-MB-231 triple negative breast cancer
xenograft model. Tumor fragments were bilaterally implanted in female
nude (nu/nu) mice. Mice were randomly placed into separate treatment
groups (n = 5), and dosing was initiated when the
average tumor size was 134 mm3. Taccalonolides 23 and 18 were solubilized in 100% EtOH at 1 and 1.25
mg/mL, respectively, while paclitaxelstocks were solubilized in 50%
Cremophor/50% EtOH at 15 mg/mL. Drug stocks were diluted a minimum
of 1:10 in 200 μL of phosphate buffered saline immediately prior
to intraperitoneal injection. Dose and schedule were determined from
prior dose tolerance testing. Taccalonolide 23 was administered
at a concentration of 0.7 mg/kg on days 0, 3, and 7 after which dosing
was halted due to expenditure of all available material. Taccalonolide 18 was administered at a concentration of 0.25 mg/kg on days
0 and 3, after which dosing was halted due to an average 10% weight
loss. Paclitaxel was administered at 15 mg/kg on days 0, 3, and 7.
During the period of drug administration, mice were monitored daily,
and weight and tumor measurements were taken 2–3 times weekly.
Control treated mice were sacrificed on day 17 due to large tumor
size; all other mice were sacrificed on day 21. The mice were purchased
from Harlan Laboratories, housed in an AALAC-approved facility under
fully licensed veterinary care, and provided water and food ad libitum.
Authors: Jiangnan Peng; April L Risinger; Gary A Fest; Evelyn M Jackson; Gregory Helms; Lisa A Polin; Susan L Mooberry Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2011-08-11 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Jing Li; April L Risinger; Jiangnan Peng; Zhongliang Chen; Lihong Hu; Susan L Mooberry Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2011-11-08 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Tina L Tinley; Deborah A Randall-Hlubek; Rachel M Leal; Evelyn M Jackson; James W Cessac; James C Quada; Thomas K Hemscheidt; Susan L Mooberry Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2003-06-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: April L Risinger; Evelyn M Jackson; Lisa A Polin; Gregory L Helms; Desiree A LeBoeuf; Patrick A Joe; Elizabeth Hopper-Borge; Richard F Ludueña; Gary D Kruh; Susan L Mooberry Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2008-11-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Antonius R B Ola; April L Risinger; Lin Du; Cynthia L Zammiello; Jiangnan Peng; Robert H Cichewicz; Susan L Mooberry Journal: J Nat Prod Date: 2018-01-23 Impact factor: 4.050
Authors: Lin Du; April L Risinger; Samantha S Yee; Antonius R B Ola; Cynthia L Zammiello; Robert H Cichewicz; Susan L Mooberry Journal: J Nat Prod Date: 2019-02-25 Impact factor: 4.050
Authors: April L Risinger; Jing Li; Lin Du; Raymond Benavides; Andrew J Robles; Robert H Cichewicz; John G Kuhn; Susan L Mooberry Journal: J Nat Prod Date: 2017-01-23 Impact factor: 4.050