Alyson G Weidmann1, Jacqueline K Barton. 1. Division of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, California Institute of Technology , Pasadena, California 91125, United States.
Abstract
We report the synthesis and characterization of a bimetallic conjugate (RhPt) in which an oxaliplatin derivative is tethered to a rhodium metalloinsertor through an aminomalonate leaving group ligand. The complex interacts with DNA through metalloinsertion at a base pair mismatch followed by formation of a covalent Pt-DNA adduct. Characterization of RhPt in mismatch repair-deficient HCT116O cells reveals increased cytotoxicity compared to cisplatin and oxaliplatin as well as relative to the unconjugated rhodium and platinum counterparts. Caspase and poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibition assays indicate that RhPt induces apoptotic cell death. Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) experiments reveal that RhPt exhibits enhanced cellular uptake properties that contribute to its increased efficacy.
We report the synthesis and characterization of a bimetallic conjugate (RhPt) in which an oxaliplatin derivative is tethered to a rhodium metalloinsertor through an aminomalonate leaving group ligand. The complex interacts with DNA through metalloinsertion at a base pair mismatch followed by formation of a covalent Pt-DNA adduct. Characterization of RhPt in mismatch repair-deficient HCT116O cells reveals increased cytotoxicity compared to cisplatin and oxaliplatin as well as relative to the unconjugated rhodium and platinum counterparts. Caspase and poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibition assays indicate that RhPt induces apoptotic cell death. Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) experiments reveal that RhPt exhibits enhanced cellular uptake properties that contribute to its increased efficacy.
Platinum anticancer compounds are among
the most successful and most widely used chemotherapeutics to date.[1] However, cancers that exhibit deficiencies in
the DNA mismatch repair (MMR) pathway, including 15% of sporadic colorectal
cancer cases and 18% of all solid tumors, have encountered limited
success in treatment with classical platinum therapeutics.[2,3] Such cancers are largely resistant to cisplatin and only marginally
responsive to oxaliplatin.[4,5]Rhodium metalloinsertors
may offer a promising strategy in the development of new therapies
for such cancers. These bulky, octahedral complexes bind specifically
to DNA base pair mismatches,[6] which are
amplified in cells with defective MMR machinery.[2,3] Metalloinsertors
exhibit cytotoxicity preferentially in MMR-deficient cells, and the
extent of this selectivity correlates with mismatch binding affinity
and localization to the nucleus, where they target mismatches in genomic
DNA.[7,8]The design of bifunctional drug conjugates
is a burgeoning field in chemotherapy, especially as a strategy to
circumvent resistance.[9] Here, we present
a bimetallic oxaliplatin–metalloinsertor conjugate (RhPt) that
displays dual DNA binding behavior. Additionally, RhPt exhibits enhanced
cytotoxicity and cellular uptake in MMR-deficient HCT116O cancer cells
compared to first-line platinum therapeutics as well as its unconjugated
subunits. The cytotoxicity of RhPt appears to be triggered by an apoptotic
cell death pathway, and its potency is attributed to the improved
cellular uptake of the complex.The RhPt conjugate, shown in
Figure 1, consists of a trisheteroleptic Rh(III)
scaffold tethered to an oxaliplatin derivative by an aminomalonate
leaving group ligand. RhPt was constructed via a linear synthesis
in which the rhodium scaffold was first functionalized with the aminomalonate,
followed by complexation to platinum (see the Supporting Information).[10] The
platinum unit employs the same (1R,2R)-1,2-diaminocyclohexane nonleaving group ligand as oxaliplatin and,
therefore, is expected to form the same DNA adducts.[11] The rhodium unit contains a sterically expansive 5,6-chrysene
diimine ligand (chrysi), which is responsible for the recognition
of DNA mismatches.[12] Too wide to intercalate
into well-matched DNA, the chrysi complexes instead target thermodynamically
destabilized mismatches from the minor groove, ejecting the bases
from the duplex in a binding mode known as metalloinsertion.[13] The aminomalonate linker is tethered to one
of the noninserting ancillary ligands, which allows the conjugate
to remain intact temporarily but ultimately enables the release of
platinum, via hydrolysis, for DNA binding. The biological activity
of RhPt was compared to several complexes, including cisplatin and
oxaliplatin (Figure 1). The rhodium hydrolysis
product, Rh(Amal), was included as a control to test whether the biological
activity of RhPt may be attributed to the intact conjugate and not
premature hydrolysis of the subunits. The unconjugated platinum complex,
Pt(Amal) was included to explore the effects of the aminomalonate
ligand on activity.
Figure 1
Chemical structures of complexes studied.
Chemical structures of complexes studied.DNA binding of RhPt. Left: Competition titration of increasing
concentrations of RhPt (0–50 μM) with 1 μM rac-[Rh(bpy)2chrysi]3+ on 1 μM
5′-[32P] labeled 17mer duplex DNA with a CC mismatch.
Controls without irradiation (Øhν), and
without Rh (ØRh) were included. RhPt inhibits photocleavage by
[Rh(bpy)2chrysi]3+ at the mismatched site. Right:
DMS footprinting of duplex DNA containing a CC mismatch. Lanes (left
to right): Maxam–Gilbert sequencing (C+T; A+G); 3, DMS alone; 4, oxaliplatin (1 μM); 5, RhPt (1 μM); 6, RhPt (50 μM). Bands of
high electrophoretic mobility indicate cleavage at guanine residues;
covalent binding of platinum to guanine inhibits cleavage.DNA binding studies were performed with RhPt and radiolabeled duplex
DNA containing a CC mismatch (Figure 2). As
RhPt does not cleave DNA upon irradiation, a competition titration
was carried out using rac-[Rh(bpy)2chrysi]3+, which does photocleave DNA at the site of a mismatch.[6] RhPt inhibits photocleavage by rac-[Rh(bpy)2chrysi]3+ at the mismatched site;
this indicates that RhPt binds specifically to the mismatch via metalloinsertion.
The binding affinity of RhPt for a CC mismatch was determined to be
1.1 × 107 M–1 (Figure S1, Supporting Information), comparable to that of
monomeric metalloinsertors.[8] DNA binding
by the conjugate also involves the formation of covalent adducts.
Platination of the DNA is indicated by the appearance of bands with
reduced electrophoretic mobility, located above the unmodified parent
bands (Figures 2 and S2, Supporting Information).[14] Platinum
binding to DNA was further characterized by dimethyl sulfate (DMS)
footprinting. DMS methylates the N7 position of guanine,
resulting in cleavage at those sites upon treatment with piperidine.[15] At a 1:1 molar ratio of DNA and RhPt (Figure 2), the guanine residues on the labeled strand are
protected from cleavage, signifying the formation of platinum 1,2-intrastrand
adducts at the N7 positions of the d(GpG) site, as
is the case for oxaliplatin.[16,17] That RhPt performs
noncovalent metalloinsertion and covalent platinum binding establishes
the bifunctionality of the conjugate. The lack of interplay between
the rhodium and platinum binding modes suggests that each subunit
functions independently and without inhibition of the other; that
is, platinum binding does not alter the apparent equilibrium of metalloinsertion
in the minor groove, nor does rhodium binding impede DNA platination.
Figure 2
DNA binding of RhPt. Left: Competition titration of increasing
concentrations of RhPt (0–50 μM) with 1 μM rac-[Rh(bpy)2chrysi]3+ on 1 μM
5′-[32P] labeled 17mer duplex DNA with a CC mismatch.
Controls without irradiation (Øhν), and
without Rh (ØRh) were included. RhPt inhibits photocleavage by
[Rh(bpy)2chrysi]3+ at the mismatched site. Right:
DMS footprinting of duplex DNA containing a CC mismatch. Lanes (left
to right): Maxam–Gilbert sequencing (C+T; A+G); 3, DMS alone; 4, oxaliplatin (1 μM); 5, RhPt (1 μM); 6, RhPt (50 μM). Bands of
high electrophoretic mobility indicate cleavage at guanine residues;
covalent binding of platinum to guanine inhibits cleavage.
The antiproliferative effects of RhPt were explored in the isogenic
humancolorectal carcinoma cell lines HCT116N (MMR-proficient) and
HCT116O (MMR-deficient) using an antibody assay for DNA synthesis.[18] RhPt exhibits antiproliferative activity similar
to that of oxaliplatin and considerably outperforms cisplatin, which
preferentially targets HCT116N cells (Figure S3, Supporting Information). RhPt does not preferentially target
either cell line. However, it is active at submicromolar concentrations
and, in fact, is more potent than either of its unconjugated subunits
(Figure S4, Supporting Information). Furthermore,
RhPt exhibits enhanced cytotoxicity (LC50 = 9 μM)
over cisplatin (30 μM) and oxaliplatin (28 μM) in MMR-deficient
cells and is also substantially more potent than Rh(Amal) (43 μM)
and Pt(Amal) (57 μM) (Table S1 and Figure S5, Supporting Information).Cellular accumulation of metal complexes
in HCT116O cells. Rh and Pt counts were normalized to cellular protein:
(left) whole-cell uptake of Pt complexes as a function of time; (right)
whole-cell uptake of Rh for RhPt and hydrolysis product Rh(Amal).Cellular uptake was examined via
inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) (Figure 3). The cellular uptake of both rhodium and platinum
for RhPt generally exceeds that of the monomeric complexes, with RhPt
displaying high initial uptake that decreases over time, possibly
due to an efflux mechanism.[19] Furthermore,
the differences in uptake between RhPt and hydrolysis product Rh(Amal)
suggest that the conjugate does not hydrolyze prior to entry into
the cell and is taken up in its intact form. Overall, it would appear
that RhPt possesses enhanced cellular uptake properties not inherent
to either subunit alone. The localization of each complex was also
examined (Table S1, Supporting Information). Little differentiation is observed in the subcellular distribution
of the complexes, with the notable exception of a substantial increase
in the nuclear rhodium concentration of RhPt compared to Rh(Amal). Curiously, this enhanced
nuclear targeting of rhodium does not result in cell-selective activity.
Figure 3
Cellular accumulation of metal complexes
in HCT116O cells. Rh and Pt counts were normalized to cellular protein:
(left) whole-cell uptake of Pt complexes as a function of time; (right)
whole-cell uptake of Rh for RhPt and hydrolysis product Rh(Amal).
To further understand the biological activity of RhPt, we examined
the mechanism of cell death. It has been previously established that
rhodium metalloinsertors trigger necrosis dependent upon DNA repair
protein poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP).[7] Cytotoxicity studies revealed that the viability of cells treated
with RhPt does not increase in the presence of PARP inhibitor DPQ,[20] suggesting PARP-independent cell death (Figure 4).[21] The assay was also
performed with the caspase inhibitor Z-VAD-FMK.[22] The viability of RhPt-treated cells increases in the presence
of Z-VAD-FMK, signifying that RhPt triggers caspase-dependent death
(Figure 4). This is consistent with studies
of platinumcytotoxicity generally; it is well established that cisplatin
and oxaliplatin typically trigger apoptosis.[23] This result may, in part, explain the lack of cell-selectivity observed
for RhPt. By initiating apoptosis, rather than necrosis, it is possible
that the highly selective biological response to mismatch recognition
by rhodium is overridden by the effects of high concentrations of
platinum in the cell.
Figure 4
Cell viability in HCT116O cells after 72 h with PARP and
caspase inhibitors. Viability is normalized to untreated controls.
Left (gray): PARP inhibition assay. Cells were treated with 0 or 20
μM RhPt and 0, 25, or 50 μM DPQ. DPQ does not increase
the viability of cells treated with RhPt. Right (blue): Caspase inhibition
assay. Cells were treated with 0, 10, or 20 μM RhPt and 0 or
20 μM Z-VAD-FMK. Z-VAD-FMK increases viability in RhPt-treated
cells. Addition of either inhibitor alone does not affect viability.
*p < 0.0001(unpaired two-tailed t test).
Cell viability in HCT116O cells after 72 h with PARP and
caspase inhibitors. Viability is normalized to untreated controls.
Left (gray): PARP inhibition assay. Cells were treated with 0 or 20
μM RhPt and 0, 25, or 50 μM DPQ. DPQ does not increase
the viability of cells treated with RhPt. Right (blue): Caspase inhibition
assay. Cells were treated with 0, 10, or 20 μM RhPt and 0 or
20 μM Z-VAD-FMK. Z-VAD-FMK increases viability in RhPt-treated
cells. Addition of either inhibitor alone does not affect viability.
*p < 0.0001(unpaired two-tailed t test).In this work, we examined the
biological effects of conjugation of a DNA metalloinsertor with a
platinum drug. In vitro, the complex successfully
exhibits bifunctionality via dual DNA binding. In MMR-deficient cells,
this strategy affords enhanced cellular uptake and potency over the
individual subunits as well as versus traditional chemotherapeutics.
However, RhPt is not without its limitations. The platinum subunit
appears to dominate the cellular response, resulting in a loss of
cell selectivity. Nevertheless, the biological analysis of RhPt provides
insight into the behavior of bifunctional DNA targeting agents as
well as a foundation for the design of future conjugates that are
both potent and selective in their cellular targeting.
Authors: J M Woynarowski; S Faivre; M C Herzig; B Arnett; W G Chapman; A V Trevino; E Raymond; S G Chaney; A Vaisman; M Varchenko; P E Juniewicz Journal: Mol Pharmacol Date: 2000-11 Impact factor: 4.436
Authors: Simon P Wisnovsky; Justin J Wilson; Robert J Radford; Mark P Pereira; Maria R Chan; Rebecca R Laposa; Stephen J Lippard; Shana O Kelley Journal: Chem Biol Date: 2013-10-31
Authors: Rachel E Doherty; Igor V Sazanovich; Luke K McKenzie; Alexander S Stasheuski; Rachel Coyle; Elizabeth Baggaley; Sarah Bottomley; Julia A Weinstein; Helen E Bryant Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2016-03-04 Impact factor: 4.379