Pang-ning Teng1, Nicholas W Bateman1, Kathleen M Darcy1, Chad A Hamilton2, George Larry Maxwell3, Christopher J Bakkenist4, Thomas P Conrads5. 1. Women's Health Integrated Research Center at Inova Health System, Department of Defense Gynecologic Cancer Center of Excellence, Annandale, VA 22003, USA. 2. Women's Health Integrated Research Center at Inova Health System, Department of Defense Gynecologic Cancer Center of Excellence, Annandale, VA 22003, USA; Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA. 3. Women's Health Integrated Research Center at Inova Health System, Department of Defense Gynecologic Cancer Center of Excellence, Annandale, VA 22003, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Inova Fairfax Hospital, Fairfax, VA, USA. 4. Department of Radiation Biology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA; Department of Pharmacology and Chemical Biology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA. 5. Women's Health Integrated Research Center at Inova Health System, Department of Defense Gynecologic Cancer Center of Excellence, Annandale, VA 22003, USA. Electronic address: conrads@whirc.org.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Significant reductions in gynecologic (GYN) cancer mortality and morbidity require treatments that prevent and reverse resistance to chemotherapy and radiation. The objective of this study was to determine if pharmacologic inhibition of key DNA damage response kinases in GYN cancers would enhance cell killing by platinum-based chemotherapy and radiation. METHODS: A panel of human ovarian, endometrial and cervical cancer cell lines were treated with platinum drugs or ionizing radiation (IR) along with small molecule pharmacological kinase inhibitors of Ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) and ATM and Rad-3-related (ATR). RESULTS: Pharmacologic inhibition of ATR significantly enhanced platinum drug response in all GYN cancer cell lines tested, whereas inhibition of ATM did not enhance the response to platinum drugs. Co-inhibition of ATM and ATR did not enhance platinum kill beyond that observed by inhibition of ATR alone. By contrast, inhibiting either ATR or ATM enhanced the response to IR in all GYN cancer cells, with further enhancement achieved with co-inhibition. CONCLUSIONS: These studies highlight actionable mechanisms operative in GYN cancer cells with potential to maximize response of platinum agents and radiation in newly diagnosed as well as recurrent gynecologic cancers.
OBJECTIVE: Significant reductions in gynecologic (GYN) cancer mortality and morbidity require treatments that prevent and reverse resistance to chemotherapy and radiation. The objective of this study was to determine if pharmacologic inhibition of key DNA damage response kinases in GYN cancers would enhance cell killing by platinum-based chemotherapy and radiation. METHODS: A panel of human ovarian, endometrial and cervical cancer cell lines were treated with platinum drugs or ionizing radiation (IR) along with small molecule pharmacological kinase inhibitors of Ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) and ATM and Rad-3-related (ATR). RESULTS: Pharmacologic inhibition of ATR significantly enhanced platinum drug response in all GYN cancer cell lines tested, whereas inhibition of ATM did not enhance the response to platinum drugs. Co-inhibition of ATM and ATR did not enhance platinum kill beyond that observed by inhibition of ATR alone. By contrast, inhibiting either ATR or ATM enhanced the response to IR in all GYN cancer cells, with further enhancement achieved with co-inhibition. CONCLUSIONS: These studies highlight actionable mechanisms operative in GYN cancer cells with potential to maximize response of platinum agents and radiation in newly diagnosed as well as recurrent gynecologic cancers.
Authors: Ian Hickson; Yan Zhao; Caroline J Richardson; Sharon J Green; Niall M B Martin; Alisdair I Orr; Philip M Reaper; Stephen P Jackson; Nicola J Curtin; Graeme C M Smith Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2004-12-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Ali Jazayeri; Jacob Falck; Claudia Lukas; Jiri Bartek; Graeme C M Smith; Jiri Lukas; Stephen P Jackson Journal: Nat Cell Biol Date: 2005-12-04 Impact factor: 28.824
Authors: Q Liu; S Guntuku; X S Cui; S Matsuoka; D Cortez; K Tamai; G Luo; S Carattini-Rivera; F DeMayo; A Bradley; L A Donehower; S J Elledge Journal: Genes Dev Date: 2000-06-15 Impact factor: 11.361
Authors: Matthew C Sapp; Varun K Krishnamurthy; Daniel S Puperi; Saheba Bhatnagar; Gabrielle Fatora; Neelesh Mutyala; K Jane Grande-Allen Journal: J R Soc Interface Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 4.118
Authors: Brandon C Leonard; Eliot D Lee; Neil E Bhola; Hua Li; Kristian K Sogaard; Christopher J Bakkenist; Jennifer R Grandis; Daniel E Johnson Journal: Oral Oncol Date: 2019-06-06 Impact factor: 5.337
Authors: Bernard Barlaam; Elaine Cadogan; Andrew Campbell; Nicola Colclough; Allan Dishington; Stephen Durant; Kristin Goldberg; Lorraine A Hassall; Gareth D Hughes; Philip A MacFaul; Thomas M McGuire; Martin Pass; Anil Patel; Stuart Pearson; Jens Petersen; Kurt G Pike; Graeme Robb; Natalie Stratton; Guohong Xin; Baochang Zhai Journal: ACS Med Chem Lett Date: 2018-07-13 Impact factor: 4.345
Authors: Pang-Ning Teng; Nicholas W Bateman; Guisong Wang; Tracy Litzi; Brian E Blanton; Brian L Hood; Kelly A Conrads; Wei Ao; Kate E Oliver; Kathleen M Darcy; William P McGuire; Keren Paz; David Sidransky; Chad A Hamilton; G Larry Maxwell; Thomas P Conrads Journal: Hum Cell Date: 2017-03-01 Impact factor: 4.174
Authors: Juncheng Cui; Dylan Dean; Francis J Hornicek; Raphael E Pollock; Robert M Hoffman; Zhenfeng Duan Journal: Am J Cancer Res Date: 2022-04-15 Impact factor: 5.942
Authors: Samuel J Klempner; Munveer S Bhangoo; Hubert Y Luu; Seung Tae Kim; Joseph Chao; Kyoung-Mee Kim; Jeeyun Lee Journal: J Gastrointest Oncol Date: 2018-12