| Literature DB >> 25886314 |
Dawn Q Chong1, Xin Y Toh2, Ivy A W Ho3, Kian C Sia4, Jennifer P Newman5, Yulyana Yulyana6, Wai-Hoe Ng7, Siang H Lai8, Mac M F Ho9, Nivedh Dinesh10, Chee K Tham11, Paula Y P Lam12,13,14.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The treatment of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is an unmet clinical need. The 5-year survival rate of patients with GBM is less than 3%. Temozolomide (TMZ) remains the standard first-line treatment regimen for gliomas despite the fact that more than 90% of recurrent gliomas do not respond to TMZ after repeated exposure. We have also independently shown that many of the Asian-derived glioma cell lines and primary cells derived from Singaporean high-grade glioma patients are indeed resistant to TMZ. This issue highlights the need to develop new effective anti-cancer treatment strategies. In a recent study, wild-type epidermal growth factor receptor (wtEGFR) has been shown to phosphorylate a truncated EGFR (known as EGFRvIII), leading to the phosphorylation of STAT proteins and progression in gliomagenesis. Despite the fact that combination of EGFR targeting drugs and rapamycin has been used before, the effect of mono-treatment of Nimotuzumab, rapamycin and combination therapy in human glioma expressing different types of EGFR is not well-studied. Herein, we evaluated the efficacy of dual blockage using monoclonal antibody against EGFR (Nimotuzumab) and an mTOR inhibitor (rapamycin) in Caucasian patient-derived human glioma cell lines, Asian patient-derived human glioma cell lines, primary glioma cells derived from the Mayo GBM xenografts, and primary short-term glioma culture derived from high-grade glioma patients.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25886314 PMCID: PMC4408574 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-015-1191-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Figure 1Enhanced efficacy using rapamycin and Nimotuzumab was observed in EGFR-null cells. IC50 of (A) TMZ, (B) Nimotuzumab, and (C) rapamycin in iNHA cells was determined by subjecting the cells to a range of drug concentrations. Viability of cells was determined by CCK-8 assay. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. (D) Western blot analysis was carried in EGFR-null Gli36 cells to verify the absence of EGFR expression. A431 cells induced with EGF served as positive (+) control for wtEGFR expression. (E) IC50 of TMZ was determined in Gli36 cells (from 0 to 1000 μM) as described previously. (F) Percentage of cell viabilities of Gli36 cells upon single treatment with either rapamycin (0.1 mM) or Nimotuzumab (0.013 mM) and combination treatment of Nimotuzumab and rapamycin. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. Combination groups were compared to individual single drug treatments ***p < 0.001. (G) Western blot analysis of phospho-ERK1/2, total ERK1/2, phospho-AKT and total AKT in Gli36 cells treated with DMSO, TMZ, rapamycin and Nimotuzumab for 24 h. Pan actin served as loading control. The protein expression is normalized to their respective controls in the blots. The numbers below the blot are relative to the respective controls from arbitrary values generated from the MetaVue software, as described in methods.
Figure 2Nimotuzumab and rapamycin combination treatment enhanced therapeutic efficacy in Asian Glioma cell lines. (A) Western blot analysis was done to check the EGFR expression status in G5T/VGH, GBM8401 and GBM8901 Asian glioma cell lines with respective (+) controls. These cell lines were treated with TMZ (500 μM), rapamycin (0.1 mM) or Nimotuzumab (0.013 mM) as single treatments or combination of rapamycin and Nimotuzumab for 24 h and percentage of cell viabilities of G5T/VGH (B), GBM8401 (C) and GBM8901 (D) were determined. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. Combination groups were compared to each single drug treatments in individual cell line *p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001.
Figure 3EGFRvIII conferred enhanced sensitivity to drug treatment in isogenic human glioma cells. (A) Western blot analysis of EGFR expression in human glioma cells U87MG.EGFRvIII and U87MG.wtEGFR that were engineered to express EGFRvIII and wtEGFR proteins, respectively. Cell viability assay was carried out in (B) U87MG.wtEGFR (C) U87MG.EGFRvIII cells using CCK-8 assay after treatment with 500 μM of TMZ, 0.1 mM of rapamycin or 0.013 mM of Nimotuzumab and combination of rapamycin and Nimotuzumab. Percentage cell viabilities were measured at 24 h after respective treatments. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. Combination group was compared to Nimotuzumab single treatment for each cell line *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01. (D) Western blot analysis was performed to detect the expression levels of phospho-AKT (Ser473) and total AKT in U87MG. wtEGFR and U87MG.EGFRvIII cells untreated (UT) or after treatment with Nimotuzumab (N) for 24 h. Pan actin served as the loading control. Densitometry quantification of the AKT activated levels were determined as described before. The numbers below the blot are displayed as ratio of the total AKT proteins after normalizing with pan actin. (E) U87.wtEGFR cells were treated with TMZ (500 μM), rapamycin (0.1 mM) or Nimotuzumab (0.013 mM and 0.0065 mM) as single treatments and combination of rapamycin and Nimotuzumab for 24 h and percentage cell viabilities were determined by CCK-8 assay. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. Nimotuzumab treatment group at half the concentration (0.0065 mM) was compared to the original group (0.013 mM) in single treatments and in combination with rapamycin ***p < 0.001.
Figure 4EGFRvIII-expressing patient-derived glioma cells were more sensitive to Nimotuzumab. (A) Expression levels of wtEGFR (170 kDa) and EGFRvIII (145 kDa) were analyzed in primary GBM xenografts (GBM6 and 10) and in local patient-derived high grade primary GBMs, NNI37 and 41. Loading controls were performed with Hsp70. The primary GBM xenografts, GBM6 and 10 (B and C) and local patient-derived primary GBMs, NNI37 and 41 (D and E) were treated with TMZ (500 μM), rapamycin (0.1 mM), Nimotuzumab (0.013 mM) or a combination treatment of Nimotuzumab and rapamycin for 24 h and then cell viabilities were assessed by CCK-8 assay. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. Combination group was compared to Nimotuzumab single treatment for each cell type *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.