Subcutaneous xenografts represent a popular approach to evaluate efficacy of prospective molecular therapeutics in vivo. In the present study, the C-14 labeled radioactive pyrrole-imidazole (Py-Im) polyamide 1, targeted to the 5'-WGWWCW-3' DNA sequence, was evaluated with regard to its uptake properties in subcutaneous xenografts, derived from the human tumor cell lines LNCaP (prostate), A549 (lung), and U251 (brain), respectively. Significant variation in compound tumor concentrations was seen in xenografts derived from these three cell lines. Influence of cell line grafted on systemic polyamide elimination was established. With A549, a marked variation in localization of 1 was determined between Matrigel-negative and -positive xenografts. An extensive tissue distribution analysis of 1 in wild-type animals was conducted, enabling the comparison between the xenografts and the corresponding host organs of origin.
Subcutaneous xenografts represent a popular approach to evaluate efficacy of prospective molecular therapeutics in vivo. In the present study, the C-14 labeled radioactive pyrrole-imidazole (Py-Im) polyamide 1, targeted to the 5'-WGWWCW-3' DNA sequence, was evaluated with regard to its uptake properties in subcutaneous xenografts, derived from the humantumor cell lines LNCaP (prostate), A549 (lung), and U251 (brain), respectively. Significant variation in compound tumor concentrations was seen in xenografts derived from these three cell lines. Influence of cell line grafted on systemic polyamide elimination was established. With A549, a marked variation in localization of 1 was determined between Matrigel-negative and -positive xenografts. An extensive tissue distribution analysis of 1 in wild-type animals was conducted, enabling the comparison between the xenografts and the corresponding host organs of origin.
Cancer represents a
major worldwide health problem, with nearly
1.6 million new cases estimated to occur in 2014 in the U.S. alone.[1] The past 40 years of research and development
of therapeutics brought improved patients’ survival;[2] however, malignant neoplasias remain the second
most common cause of death in the U.S., accounting for over 20% of
all deaths.[3] Consequentially, major efforts
are being put into the development of novel therapeutic approaches.[4] Treatment strategies of various classes are currently
available in the clinic. Classical approaches comprise surgery, chemotherapy,
radiation therapy, and immunotherapy, the method of choice depending
on tumor type and progression stage.[5] Cancer
chemotherapy has recently seen important conceptual advances, such
as tumor-specific tissue targeting,[6] prodrug
modifications,[7] and development of small
molecule inhibitors of aberrant signaling nodes in cancer.[8] A significant drawback of molecules targeted
to tumor-specific features is the introduction of evolutionary pressure
upon the cancer cells, which often results in the emergence of resistant
clones.[9] Broadly cytotoxic chemotherapeutics
(e.g., cis-platin or doxorubicin) on the other hand
commonly exhibit severe side effects, such as cardiotoxicity,[10] neurotoxicity,[11] and
neutropenia.[12]Pyrrole–imidazole
(Py-Im) polyamides are a modular class
of DNA-binding small molecules capable of binding defined sequences
with affinities and specificities comparable to those of DNA-binding
proteins.[13] They are cell-permeable scaffolds[14] and have been shown to displace various transcription
factors from cognate binding sites,[15] leading
to altered gene expression profiles. Inhibition of RNA pol II elongation
was observed, accompanied by degradation of the large RNA pol II subunit
and induction of the p53 stress response, without concomitant DNA
damage.[16] Most recently, our laboratory
has transitioned to in vivo experimentation, demonstrating bioavailability[17] and efficacy of varying Py-Im polyamides in
tumor xenografts models in mouse.[16,18] Antitumor
effects with limited systemic toxicity were observed with the subcutaneous
LNCaPprostate cancer model.[16] Our recent
C-14 based quantitation study established significant enrichment of
a Py-Im polyamide in the LNCaPtumor xenograft tissue over lung and
kidney.[19] The present investigation evaluates
the biodistribution of the C-14 radioactively labeled Py-Im polyamide 1 (Figure 1A) in a range of tumor xenografts,
addresses the influence of xenografted cell line on systemic polyamide
elimination, and provides an extended biodistribution profile of the
molecule.
Figure 1
(A) C-14 radiolabeled
Py-Im polyamide 1, targeted
to the DNA sequence 5′-WGWWCW-3′. (B) Compound levels
of 1 in LNCaP and A549 tumor xenografts, compared against
major host organs (kidney, liver, lung). Statistical comparison performed
against the LNCaP tumor concentration of 1. (C) Calibration
of the dual xenograft experiment against the respective single-tumor
versions. All injections were performed intraperitoneally at 20 nmol
per animal (NSG male mouse, N = 10) and tissues harvested
24 h following administration. Each data point represents an individual
organ/tumor analyzed.
Results
C-14 Radioactively Labeled Py-Im Polyamide 1 Exhibits
Differential Uptake between Tumor Xenografts of Varying Cellular Origin
Initial experiments compared the accumulation of compound 1 in LNCaP and A549 subcutaneous tumor xenografts (Figure 1A). In order to minimize the injection-associated
experimental error, both tumors were grafted on the opposing flanks
of the same host animal, following the schedule displayed in Figure SI 1 (see Experimental
Section for experimental details). A mean compound concentration
of 1.04 mg/kg (0.74 μM) was measured for the LNCaP xenograft
tissue, comparable with liver-associated levels of 1.12 mg/kg (Figure 1B). Strikingly, A549 tumors were found to uptake
substantially lower amounts of polyamide 1 (average of
0.23 mg/kg), closely resembling the values obtained for the kidney
(0.27 mg/kg) and approximately 2-fold higher than lung tissue (0.15
mg/kg). Comparisons with the corresponding single-xenograft versions
of the experiment were conducted for both tumor types (Figure 1C). The LNCaP single tumor experiment revealed a
mildly elevated concentration with respect to the double xenograft
counterpart (42%, p < 0.05),[19] whereas the values obtained for A549 were not distinguishable
between the two experiment types. Overall, Py-Im polyamide 1 localized to LNCaP (prostate) tumors at concentrations 5- to 7-fold
higher than those measured with A549 (lung).(A) C-14 radiolabeled
Py-Im polyamide 1, targeted
to the DNA sequence 5′-WGWWCW-3′. (B) Compound levels
of 1 in LNCaP and A549 tumor xenografts, compared against
major host organs (kidney, liver, lung). Statistical comparison performed
against the LNCaPtumor concentration of 1. (C) Calibration
of the dual xenograft experiment against the respective single-tumor
versions. All injections were performed intraperitoneally at 20 nmol
per animal (NSG male mouse, N = 10) and tissues harvested
24 h following administration. Each data point represents an individual
organ/tumor analyzed.To gain deeper understanding of the phenomenon, immunohistochemical
analyses were conducted, assaying for tumor-associated microvessels
(Figures SI 2 and SI 3). Microvessel
densities were indistinguishable between the two tumor types. However,
LNCaP xenografts were hemorrhagic and exhibited vascular spaces with
extravasated red blood cells at the microscopic level, which were
absent with A549. In order to broaden the scope of the investigation,
the U251 (brain) cell line was additionally evaluated in the xenograft
setting with regard to uptake of 1 (Figure 2). A mean value of 0.65 mg/kg (0.47 μM) was measured.
The U251-associated xenograft uptake profile was found to be distinct
from both LNCaP and A549-derived tissues, which were 2.3-fold higher
and 2.8-fold lower, respectively.
Figure 2
Tumor levels of Py-Im polyamide 1 as a function of
cell line engrafted. All injections were performed intraperitoneally
at 20 nmol per animal (NSG male mouse, N = 10) and
tissues harvested 24 h following administration. Each data point represents
an individual tumor analyzed. Statistical comparison was performed
against the U251 tumor concentration of 1.
Tumor levels of Py-Im polyamide 1 as a function of
cell line engrafted. All injections were performed intraperitoneally
at 20 nmol per animal (NSG male mouse, N = 10) and
tissues harvested 24 h following administration. Each data point represents
an individual tumor analyzed. Statistical comparison was performed
against the U251 tumor concentration of 1.None of the tumor-associated levels of Py-Im polyamide 1, discussed above, exhibited a correlation with tumor size
over the
window analyzed (Figure SI 4A–D,F).
Host Organ Levels of Py-Im Polyamide 1 as a Function
of the Subcutaneously Grafted Cell Line
The major host organs
kidney, liver, and lung were interrogated with regard to concentrations
of 1 for all xenograft experiments and benchmarked against
the naive background control (Figure 3). Kidney
concentrations spanned a range from 0.22 mg/kg (naive control and
A549 xenograft animals) to 0.27 mg/kg (double xenograft experiment).
Lung tissue showed similar variance in concentration of 1 as a function of xenografted cell line (0.12–0.15 mg/kg).
A more significant difference was noted for the liver-associated compound
levels. Whereas naive reference animals were indistinguishable from
U251- or A549-xenograft bearers, grafting of the LNCaP cell line resulted
in liver values that were about 2-fold higher (1.04 mg/kg vs 0.57
mg/kg; p < 0.001).
Figure 3
Concentrations of polyamide 1 in the host organs kidney
(A), liver (B), and lung (C) as a function of cell line engrafted.
Naive indicates reference host animals devoid of tumor graft. All
injections were performed intraperitoneally at 20 nmol per animal
(NSG male mouse, N = 10) and tissues harvested 24
h following administration. Each data point represents an individual
organ analyzed.
Concentrations of polyamide 1 in the host organs kidney
(A), liver (B), and lung (C) as a function of cell line engrafted.
Naive indicates reference host animals devoid of tumor graft. All
injections were performed intraperitoneally at 20 nmol per animal
(NSG male mouse, N = 10) and tissues harvested 24
h following administration. Each data point represents an individual
organ analyzed.
Matrigel Affects Uptake
of Py-Im Polyamide 1 into
A549 Xenografts
We chose to evaluate the influence of Matrigel
on uptake of 1 for xenografts derived from the A549 cell
line. Systematic analysis of tumorpolyamide concentration as a function
of size revealed that larger tumors accumulated substantially higher
quantities of compound 1 when Matrigel was employed during
engraftment (Figure SI 4F). This was
in striking contrast with the observations made for the same cell
line grafted without Matrigel (Figure SI 4A,C). Plotting of tumor-associated levels of 1 as a function
of postengraftment time revealed a clear trend (Figure 4). At 3 or 4 weeks past engraftment, there was no statistically
significant difference measurable between the A549 xenografts produced
with or without Matrigel, with an averaged concentration of 0.23 mg/kg
(0.16 μM). Five weeks past engraftment, however, a divergence
became apparent. Whereas Matrigel-negative tumors showed levels of
compound 1 indistinguishable from earlier time points
(0.25 mg/kg), a marked increase was noted for the Matrigel-positive
xenografts. A mean concentration of 0.59 mg/kg was measured (p < 0.001), with the highest value amounting to 0.89
mg/kg, therewith reaching values comparable to those obtained for
LNCaP tumors (cf. Figures 1 and 2).
Figure 4
A549 tumor levels of Py-Im polyamide 1 as a function
of time (3–5 weeks), presence of the LNCaP tumor on the opposite
flank (denoted as d.f.), and Matrigel used to engraft (±MG).
All injections were performed intraperitoneally at 20 nmol per animal
(NSG male mouse) and tumors harvested 24 h following administration.
Each data point represents an individual tumor analyzed: |(∗∗∗) p < 0.001|.
A549 tumor levels of Py-Im polyamide 1 as a function
of time (3–5 weeks), presence of the LNCaPtumor on the opposite
flank (denoted as d.f.), and Matrigel used to engraft (±MG).
All injections were performed intraperitoneally at 20 nmol per animal
(NSG male mouse) and tumors harvested 24 h following administration.
Each data point represents an individual tumor analyzed: |(∗∗∗) p < 0.001|.
Extended Tissue Distribution Analysis of 1 in Wild-Type
Mice
In order to obtain a more complete picture of biodistribution
of Py-Im polyamide 1, a comprehensive tissue analysis
following administration of 1 was conducted in the balb/cmouse strain. Blood, bone marrow (BM), brain, fat tissue, intestinal
tissue, heart, kidney, liver, lung, muscle, pancreas, prostate, and
spleen were interrogated independently (Figure 5 and Table SI 1). Because the balb/c
male mouse of comparable age possesses a body weight that is reduced
by some 25% with regard to its NSG counterpart, compound 1 was administered at 15 nmol per animal here, as opposed to 20 nmol
per animal employed with NSG mice.
Figure 5
Extended tissue distribution analysis
of Py-Im polyamide 1 in wild-type mice. Injections were
performed intraperitoneally
at 15 nmol per animal (balb/c male mouse) and organs harvested 24
h following administration. Error bars represent standard deviations
(N = 5). BM denotes bone marrow. Dashed line indicates
the 0.1 mg/kg threshold.
Extended tissue distribution analysis
of Py-Im polyamide 1 in wild-type mice. Injections were
performed intraperitoneally
at 15 nmol per animal (balb/c male mouse) and organs harvested 24
h following administration. Error bars represent standard deviations
(N = 5). BM denotes bone marrow. Dashed line indicates
the 0.1 mg/kg threshold.The majority of tissues exhibited concentrations of 1 below 0.1 mg/kg, with the brain not showing any significant
evidence
of polyamide uptake. Kidney and liver were found to contain comparable
compound levels to those determined for the NSG strain (0.23 mg/kg
vs 0.22 mg/kg and 0.57 mg/kg vs 0.49 mg/kg for kidney and liver, respectively).
Interestingly, bone marrow concentration of 1 amounted
to 0.24 mg/kg, therewith being over 10-fold higher than blood. The
spleen exhibited a concentration of 1 of 0.32 mg/kg,
whereas the pancreas contained compound 1 at 0.15 mg/kg.
The majority of organs contained the Py-Im polyamide 1 at concentrations that were significantly lower than those determined
for any of the tumor xenografts examined above.
Discussion
The xenograft approach is a popular method to interrogate a prospective
antitumor agent in vivo.[20] It can be subdivided
into two main categories, namely, subcutaneous (ectopic) and orthotopic
xenografts. Orthotopic inoculation is considered to recapitulate the
tumor setting more closely than the subcutaneous approach because
cancer cells are grafted into the host organ of tumor origin. With
the exception of lung and blood cancer, for which orthotopic xenografts
are readily achievable by tail vein injection, the approach is experimentally
demanding and requires sophisticated survival surgery. Genetically
engineered animal tumor models represent an attractive alternative
to xenograft experimentation, since they tend to recapitulate certain
aspects of disease progression, such as tumor vascularization, tumor–stroma
interactions, and metastasis formation, more accurately.[21] They furthermore allow conducting experiments
in immunocompetent animals. The studies are, however, elaborate to perform, requiring extended
experimentation time frames and large animal group sizes. Furthermore,
xenografts allow the assessment of efficacy against humancancer cell
lines and primary cells, whereas genetically engineered animal models
are limited to neoplasias of the species employed. Given the above,
subcutaneous xenografts remain an attractive method to generate initial
estimates of efficacy for molecules of interest.[22]The present study was initiated to rationalize the
apparent discrepancy
between cell culture results and the corresponding xenograft experiments
that we observed in preceding investigations.[16b,18a] Specifically, in vitro cytotoxicity evaluation for the nonradioactive
analogue of 1 revealed A549 and LNCaP to possess comparable
sensitivities toward polyamide treatment (IC50 values of
1.5 ± 0.2 μM and 2.1 ± 0.3 μM,[16b] respectively). This contrasted with the outcome of our
in vivo investigations, with LNCaP xenografts exhibiting tumor burden
reduction in response to treatment with 1 in the xenograft
setting,[16b] while related studies with
the A549 cell line were unsuccessful.[18a] The present investigation demonstrates this unanticipated result
to be rooted, at least in part, in the pronounced difference in polyamide
uptake between the two xenograft types, LNCaP tumors accumulating
the compound at 5- to 7-fold higher levels than their A549 counterparts
(Figure 1) in both the dual and the single
xenograft experiments conducted with A549 and LNCaP,[19] respectively. Additional discrepancy may stem from the
difference in the time frame employed for in vitro cytotoxicity measurement
(3 days) and in vivo antitumor evaluation (at least 7 days) and the
fact that the polyamide concentration is kept constant over the course
of the experiment in vitro but not in vivo.[19]Comparison with U251 xenografts revealed an uptake profile
that
was distinct from both LNCaP- and A549-derived tumors (Figure 2). This leads to the important realization that
neither LNCaP nor A549 could be considered an outlier. Each cell line
examined yielded tumors with characteristic uptake features, which,
while clearly dependent on the cell line grafted, could not have been
predicted from in vitro experiments. The U251-derived xenografts exhibited
higher microvessel densities than both A549 and LNCaP tumors, without
however possessing the vascular spaces characteristic of LNCaP.[23] This likely gave rise to distinct characteristics
of U251 tumors.It was surprising to find that liver accumulation
of 1 was dependent on the cell line grafted. Whereas
the grafting of
A549 or U251 cells showed no influence, the presence of LNCaP-derived
tumors resulted in levels that were elevated by about 2-fold (Figure 3). This was possibly due to the increased leakiness
of the tumor vasculature in LNCaP xenografts, as compared with A549
(Figure SI 2) and U251.[23] Matrigel-positive xenografts did not result in increased
liver compound values as compared to their Matrigel-negative counterparts
(0.65 mg/kg vs 0.55 mg/kg, p = 0.17). It is possible
that the leaky LNCaPtumor vasculature creates liver stress, which
in turn could result in impeded clearance of Py-Im polyamide 1. This phenomenon is likely to operate with other types of
small molecule therapeutics, although the magnitude of the effect
will be dependent on specifics, which could lead to alternative clearance
mechanisms.The influence of Matrigel on uptake of 1 by A549 xenografts
was of interest due to the common use of Matrigel to facilitate engraftment
of tumor cells in vivo.[24] An effect indeed
became manifest, albeit only at the most advanced postengraftment
time points (Figure 4 and Figure SI 4E). It appears likely that the A549tumor architecture diverges at advanced time points, as a function
of Matrigel. Supporting this, slightly higher weights were noticed
in the Matrigel-positive group than in the Matrigel-negative control
at the point of divergence (average of 409 mg vs 271 mg; p < 0.05). Influence of Matrigel employment on tumor proliferation,
vascularization, and metastasis has been previously documented.[24] The xenograft host–tumor interface being
artificial a priori, it is unclear whether the Matrigel-positive or
-negative tumors give rise to more accurate models.Comparisons
of uptake between tumors and the corresponding healthy
host tissues were of interest in order to probe for potential enrichment
in cancer lesions. Organ tissues were derived from wild-type mice
of the balb/c strain. This strain is likely to offer a superior representation
of healthy organs than its heavily immunosuppressed NSG counterpart.
The LNCaP xenografts exhibited concentrations ranging from 0.5 to
2.0 mg/kg, thus being an order of magnitude higher than what was determined
for mouse prostate, which possessed an averaged value below 0.1 mg/kg.
It is therefore possible that the compound quantities measured in
LNCaP subcutaneous xenografts provide optimistic estimates. However,
tumor formation does perturb organ integrity, and it therefore appears
likely that diseased prostate tissue should exhibit values different
from the healthy organ in both the orthotopic and the genetically
induced disease model setting. It should furthermore be noted that
LNCaP was derived from a metastatic lymph node lesion, which, although
having originated from a prostate tumor, likely possessed a distinct
architecture. Tumors derived from the A549 cell line (nonsmall lung
carcinoma) can be compared with lung tissue concentrations of 1. With exception of the elevated values that were determined
in Matrigel-positive tumors at extended time points, they averaged
at approximately 0.2 mg/kg, whereas healthy lung tissue exhibited
concentrations of 1 of around 0.1 mg/kg. Whether this
is a coincidence or indeed evidence that A549 xenografts mimic the
lung tissue setting more adequately remains unclear. Lung colonization
experiments may be useful to shed further light onto this question
in future studies. U251 is a glioblastoma-derived cell line, and the
healthy organ of origin is the brain. The corresponding comparison
between tumor and tissue of origin lacks substance, since the subcutaneous
xenograft cannot be expected to recapitulate the blood–brain
barrier. Overall, and keeping the above-mentioned caveats in mind,
tumors generally accumulated higher amounts of compound 1 than the corresponding healthy tissues of origin.
Conclusions
Our investigation gave insight into the intricacies of various
important aspects of tumor xenograft experimentation. The present
study identified a marked difference in xenograft uptake levels of
Py-Im polyamide 1 in the three cell lines tested. LNCaP-derived
tumors exhibited a mean concentration of the polyamide that was over
5-fold higher than the corresponding A549-associated value. Compound 1 was found to localize to U251 xenografts at a concentration
that was substantially lower than what was found for LNCaP but significantly
higher than A549. This demonstrates the necessity to examine uptake
into tumor xenografts on a case by case basis in order to rationalize
outcomes of antitumor studies and to identify viable cell lines for
future xenograft experiments. Unexpectedly, elimination of 1 from the liver was impaired in LNCaP xenograft-bearing animals.
Matrigel was found to influence uptake of 1, resulting
in a 2-fold elevation at longer postengraftment time points with A549-derived
tumors. Comparison with the corresponding healthy tissues revealed
that higher concentrations of 1 were associated with
xenografts, animal prostate tissue exhibiting order of magnitude lower
values than those measured with LNCaP tumors.
Experimental
Section
Polyamide Synthesis and Characterization
The synthesis
of polyamide 1 has been previously reported.[19] The compound was confirmed by analytical HPLC
to possess a purity of >99% and coeluted with its nonradioactive
analog.
Polyamide 1 was quantitated employing liquid scintillation
with the activity constant of 55 mCi/mmol, which was provided by the
vendor (ARC). Quench correction was conducted against a standard curve
that was reported by our laboratory in a preceding account.[19]
Cell Culture Maintenance and Xenograft Establishment
The cell lines A549, LNCaP, and U251 were obtained from ATCC and
cultured following provider’s recommendations, not exceeding
passage number 25. Cells were only employed for xenograft experimentation
where a viability of 95% or higher was recorded (trypan blue stain).
Nod-SCID-Gamma (NSG) male mice were purchased at 8 weeks of age from
JAX and housed in an immunocompromised facility (level A) in accordance
with IACUC regulations. They were taken forward for experiments after
an acclimatization period of at least 3 days. All engraftments were
conducted subcutaneously with 2.5 M cells per inoculation in 200 μL
vehicle (either media or 1:1 mixture with Matrigel). Animals were
monitored weekly for signs of pain and distress. Male balb/cmice
were obtained from JAX and housed in a level B animal facility.
Administration of Polyamide 1 and Tissue Harvest
Compound 1 was quantitated by liquid scintillation
counting prior to injection and administered intraperitoneally at
either 20 nmol (NSG) or 15 nmol (balb/c) per animal in a fume hood
dedicated exclusively to C-14 in vivo radioexperimentation. Animals
were housed in disposable cages and euthanized by CO2 asphyxiation.
Disposable cages were destroyed at the end of the experiment. Tissues
were harvested, placed into scintillation vials, and solubilized at
+65 °C for at least 12 h employing the proprietary dissolution
agent SOLVABLE (PerkinElmer). The resultant solutions were decolorized
with 2 × 200 μL hydrogen peroxide (30%, Sigma-Aldrich)
at ambient temperature for at least 2 h, followed by heating to +65
°C for 30 min. Samples were treated with 10 mL of the scintillation
cocktail HIONIC-FLUOR (PerkinElmer), vortexed and the amounts of C-14
quantitated by liquid scintillation counting at the Beckman Coulter
LS6500 multipurpose scintillation counter. All reported values have
been quench-corrected and normalized against organ weight. Bone marrow
weights were calculated as the difference between the femur and tibia
bones subjected to tissue solubilization and the insoluble residue,
which was isolated subsequent to C-14 quantitation. In order to obtain
dry bone residues, the scintillation fluid was decanted and the solids
were triturated (twice with ethanol, then three times with MeOH) and
dried at +65 °C overnight. Two-tailed t-tests
assuming unequal variance were applied to all data sets.
Authors: Jevgenij A Raskatov; Nicholas G Nickols; Amanda E Hargrove; Georgi K Marinov; Barbara Wold; Peter B Dervan Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2012-09-17 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Nicholas G Nickols; Jerzy O Szablowski; Amanda E Hargrove; Benjamin C Li; Jevgenij A Raskatov; Peter B Dervan Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2013-02-26 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Carey F Hsu; John W Phillips; John W Trauger; Michelle E Farkas; Jason M Belitsky; Alexander Heckel; Bogdan Z Olenyuk; James W Puckett; Clay C C Wang; Peter B Dervan Journal: Tetrahedron Date: 2007-07-02 Impact factor: 2.457