| Literature DB >> 25600295 |
Zongwei Wang1, Charlotta Dabrosin2, Xin Yin3, Mark M Fuster3, Alexandra Arreola4, W Kimryn Rathmell4, Daniele Generali5, Ganji P Nagaraju6, Bassel El-Rayes6, Domenico Ribatti7, Yi Charlie Chen8, Kanya Honoki9, Hiromasa Fujii9, Alexandros G Georgakilas10, Somaira Nowsheen11, Amedeo Amedei12, Elena Niccolai12, Amr Amin13, S Salman Ashraf14, Bill Helferich15, Xujuan Yang15, Gunjan Guha16, Dipita Bhakta16, Maria Rosa Ciriolo17, Katia Aquilano17, Sophie Chen18, Dorota Halicka19, Sulma I Mohammed20, Asfar S Azmi21, Alan Bilsland22, W Nicol Keith22, Lasse D Jensen23.
Abstract
Deregulation of angiogenesis--the growth of new blood vessels from an existing vasculature--is a main driving force in many severe human diseases including cancer. As such, tumor angiogenesis is important for delivering oxygen and nutrients to growing tumors, and therefore considered an essential pathologic feature of cancer, while also playing a key role in enabling other aspects of tumor pathology such as metabolic deregulation and tumor dissemination/metastasis. Recently, inhibition of tumor angiogenesis has become a clinical anti-cancer strategy in line with chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgery, which underscore the critical importance of the angiogenic switch during early tumor development. Unfortunately the clinically approved anti-angiogenic drugs in use today are only effective in a subset of the patients, and many who initially respond develop resistance over time. Also, some of the anti-angiogenic drugs are toxic and it would be of great importance to identify alternative compounds, which could overcome these drawbacks and limitations of the currently available therapy. Finding "the most important target" may, however, prove a very challenging approach as the tumor environment is highly diverse, consisting of many different cell types, all of which may contribute to tumor angiogenesis. Furthermore, the tumor cells themselves are genetically unstable, leading to a progressive increase in the number of different angiogenic factors produced as the cancer progresses to advanced stages. As an alternative approach to targeted therapy, options to broadly interfere with angiogenic signals by a mixture of non-toxic natural compound with pleiotropic actions were viewed by this team as an opportunity to develop a complementary anti-angiogenesis treatment option. As a part of the "Halifax Project" within the "Getting to know cancer" framework, we have here, based on a thorough review of the literature, identified 10 important aspects of tumor angiogenesis and the pathological tumor vasculature which would be well suited as targets for anti-angiogenic therapy: (1) endothelial cell migration/tip cell formation, (2) structural abnormalities of tumor vessels, (3) hypoxia, (4) lymphangiogenesis, (5) elevated interstitial fluid pressure, (6) poor perfusion, (7) disrupted circadian rhythms, (8) tumor promoting inflammation, (9) tumor promoting fibroblasts and (10) tumor cell metabolism/acidosis. Following this analysis, we scrutinized the available literature on broadly acting anti-angiogenic natural products, with a focus on finding qualitative information on phytochemicals which could inhibit these targets and came up with 10 prototypical phytochemical compounds: (1) oleanolic acid, (2) tripterine, (3) silibinin, (4) curcumin, (5) epigallocatechin-gallate, (6) kaempferol, (7) melatonin, (8) enterolactone, (9) withaferin A and (10) resveratrol. We suggest that these plant-derived compounds could be combined to constitute a broader acting and more effective inhibitory cocktail at doses that would not be likely to cause excessive toxicity. All the targets and phytochemical approaches were further cross-validated against their effects on other essential tumorigenic pathways (based on the "hallmarks" of cancer) in order to discover possible synergies or potentially harmful interactions, and were found to generally also have positive involvement in/effects on these other aspects of tumor biology. The aim is that this discussion could lead to the selection of combinations of such anti-angiogenic compounds which could be used in potent anti-tumor cocktails, for enhanced therapeutic efficacy, reduced toxicity and circumvention of single-agent anti-angiogenic resistance, as well as for possible use in primary or secondary cancer prevention strategies.Entities:
Keywords: Angiogenesis; Anti-angiogenic; Cancer; Phytochemicals; Treatment
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25600295 PMCID: PMC4737670 DOI: 10.1016/j.semcancer.2015.01.001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Semin Cancer Biol ISSN: 1044-579X Impact factor: 15.707
Fig. 1Molecular mechanisms behind HIF regulation and responses in cells. The cellular oxygen sensing response is tightly regulated by a family of prolyl hydroxylases (PHD) which under normal oxygen conditions (normoxia; blue arrows) are responsible for hydroxylating proline residues on hypoxia inducible factor (HIF) alpha subunits. These hydroxylated residues are recognized by a pVHL-E3 ubiquitin ligase complex, whereby HIFalpha subunits are marked for polyubiquitination and subsequent proteosomal degradation. When oxygen levels are low (hypoxia; red arrow) PHDs cannot hydroxylate HIFalphas thereby allowing them to escape pVHL-mediated degradation. HIFalpha subunits accumulate and bind to their heterodimeric partner, HIFbeta, translocate into the nucleus and activate a cascade of hypoxic signaling first by the transcription of various target genes including microRNAs that are important for tumor promoting pathways. Alternatively, c-Src is also capable of activating HIFs by indirectly inhibiting PHD activity via the NADPH oxidase/Rac pathway. mTOR can also promote stabilization and HIF transcriptional activity. Critical points for therapeutic intervention include the use of c-Src and mTOR inhibitors to prevent HIFalpha accumulation and activation.
Effects of the selected targets for anti-angiogenic cancer therapy on other cancer “hallmarks”.
| Other cancer hallmarks | Angiogenesis targets | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Inhibit) endothelial cell migra-tion/tip cell formation | (Reduce) structural abnormalities of tumor vessels | (Reduce) hypoxia | (Inhibit) lymphangiogenesis | (Reduce) elevated interstitial fluid pressure | (Reverse) poor perfusion | (Norma-ize) disrupted circadian rhythms | (Suppress) tumor promoting inflammation | (De-activate) tumor promoting fibroblasts | (Normalize) tumor cell metabolism/acidosis | |
| Genetic instability | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | + |
| Sustained proliferative signaling | 0 | 0 | + | +/− | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | 0 |
| Tumor-promoting inflammation | + | + | + | 0 | + | + | + | NA | + | + |
| Evasion of anti-growth signaling | + | 0 | +/− | 0 | + | +/− | +/− | + | + | + |
| Resistance to apoptosis | 0 | + | + | 0 | + | + | + | + | + | + |
| Replicative immortality | 0 | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | 0 | +/− | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dysregulated metabolism | + | + | + | 0 | + | + | + | 0 | + | + |
| Immune system evasion | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
| Invasion and metastasis | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
| Interactions in the tumor micro-environment | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
Our 10 identified targets of anti-angiogenesis therapy are presented in the top row. 10 other cancer “hallmarks” are listed in the column to the left. Positive interactions (i.e. if the anti-angiogenesis target could also be a target for the indicated “hallmark”) are denoted “+”, controversial interactions (i.e. if the anti-angiogenesis target could both promote and inhibit the indicated “hallmark”) are denoted “+/−” and no interaction (i.e. if we have not been able to find any interaction between the anti-angiogenesis target and the indicated “hallmark”) is denoted “0”.
Effects of phytochemical approaches in anti-angiogenic therapy as effective also against other cancer “hallmarks”.
| Other cancer hallmarks | Phytochemical approach | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oleanolic acid | Tripterine | Silibinin | Curcumin | Epigallo-catechin-gallate (EGCG) | Kaempferol | Melatonin | Enterolactone | Withaferin A | Resveratrol | |
| Genetic instability | + | 0 | + | + | +/− | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | + |
| Sustained proliferative signaling | 0 | 0 | +/− | 0 | + | 0 | + | + | + | + |
| Tumor-promoting inflammation | + | 0 | + | + | + | + | 0 | + | 0 | + |
| Evasion of anti-growth signaling | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
| Resistance to apoptosis | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
| Replicative immortality | + | 0 | + | + | + | 0 | + | 0 | 0 | + |
| Dysregulated metabolism | + | 0 | + | + | + | + | + | 0 | + | + |
| Immune system evasion | + | 0 | + | + | + | 0 | + | 0 | + | +/− |
| Invasion and metastasis | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | +/− |
| Interactions in the tumor micro-environment | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
Our 20 identified therapeutic approaches for anti-angiogenesis therapy are presented in the top row. 10 other cancer “hallmarks” are listed in the column to the left. Positive interactions (i.e. if the compound could also exhibit therapeutic potential against the indicated “hallmark”) are denoted “+”, controversial interactions (i.e. if the compound could both promote and inhibit the indicated “hallmark”) are denoted “+/−” and no interaction (i.e. if we have not been able to find any therapeutic activity of the compound against the indicated “hallmark”) is denoted “0”.