Mukundan Baskar Mannargudi1, Subrata Deb2. 1. Clinical Pharmacology Program, Medical Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA. 2. Department of Biopharmaceutical Sciences, Roosevelt University College of Pharmacy, 1400 N. Roosevelt Blvd., Schaumburg, IL, 60173, USA. sdeb@alumni.ubc.ca.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Ribonucleotide reductase (RR) enzymes (RR1 and RR2) play an important role in the reduction of ribonucleotides to deoxyribonucleotides which is involved in DNA replication and repair. Augmented RR activity has been ascribed to uncontrolled cell growth and tumorigenic transformation. METHODS: This review mainly focuses on several biological and chemical RR inhibitors (e.g., siRNA, GTI-2040, GTI-2501, triapine, gemcitabine, and clofarabine) that have been evaluated in clinical trials with promising anticancer activity from 1960's till 2016. A summary on whether their monotherapy or combination is still effective for further use is discussed. RESULTS: Among the RR2 inhibitors evaluated, GTI-2040, siRNA, gallium nitrate and didox were more efficacious as a monotherapy, whereas triapine was found to be more efficacious as combination agent. Hydroxyurea is currently used more in combination therapy, even though it is efficacious as a monotherapy. Gallium nitrate showed mixed results in combination therapy, while the combination activity of didox is yet to be evaluated. RR1 inhibitors that have long been used in chemotherapy such as gemcitabine, cladribine, fludarabine and clofarabine are currently used mostly as a combination therapy, but are equally efficacious as a monotherapy, except tezacitabine which did not progress beyond phase I trials. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of clinical trials, we conclude that RR inhibitors are viable treatment options, either as a monotherapy or as a combination in cancer chemotherapy. With the recent advances made in cancer biology, further development of RR inhibitors with improved efficacy and reduced toxicity is possible for treatment of variety of cancers.
PURPOSE: Ribonucleotide reductase (RR) enzymes (RR1 and RR2) play an important role in the reduction of ribonucleotides to deoxyribonucleotides which is involved in DNA replication and repair. Augmented RR activity has been ascribed to uncontrolled cell growth and tumorigenic transformation. METHODS: This review mainly focuses on several biological and chemical RR inhibitors (e.g., siRNA, GTI-2040, GTI-2501, triapine, gemcitabine, and clofarabine) that have been evaluated in clinical trials with promising anticancer activity from 1960's till 2016. A summary on whether their monotherapy or combination is still effective for further use is discussed. RESULTS: Among the RR2 inhibitors evaluated, GTI-2040, siRNA, gallium nitrate and didox were more efficacious as a monotherapy, whereas triapine was found to be more efficacious as combination agent. Hydroxyurea is currently used more in combination therapy, even though it is efficacious as a monotherapy. Gallium nitrate showed mixed results in combination therapy, while the combination activity of didox is yet to be evaluated. RR1 inhibitors that have long been used in chemotherapy such as gemcitabine, cladribine, fludarabine and clofarabine are currently used mostly as a combination therapy, but are equally efficacious as a monotherapy, except tezacitabine which did not progress beyond phase I trials. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of clinical trials, we conclude that RR inhibitors are viable treatment options, either as a monotherapy or as a combination in cancer chemotherapy. With the recent advances made in cancer biology, further development of RR inhibitors with improved efficacy and reduced toxicity is possible for treatment of variety of cancers.
Authors: M Hallek; K Fischer; G Fingerle-Rowson; A M Fink; R Busch; J Mayer; M Hensel; G Hopfinger; G Hess; U von Grünhagen; M Bergmann; J Catalano; P L Zinzani; F Caligaris-Cappio; J F Seymour; A Berrebi; U Jäger; B Cazin; M Trneny; A Westermann; C M Wendtner; B F Eichhorst; P Staib; A Bühler; D Winkler; T Zenz; S Böttcher; M Ritgen; M Mendila; M Kneba; H Döhner; S Stilgenbauer Journal: Lancet Date: 2010-10-02 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: R S Witte; S Lipsitz; T L Goodman; R F Asbury; G Wilding; C M Strnad; T J Smith; D G Haller Journal: Invest New Drugs Date: 1999 Impact factor: 3.850
Authors: K R Rai; B L Peterson; F R Appelbaum; J Kolitz; L Elias; L Shepherd; J Hines; G A Threatte; R A Larson; B D Cheson; C A Schiffer Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2000-12-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: R Hehlmann; U Berger; M Pfirrmann; A Hochhaus; G Metzgeroth; O Maywald; J Hasford; A Reiter; D K Hossfeld; H-J Kolb; H Löffler; H Pralle; W Queisser; M Griesshammer; C Nerl; R Kuse; A Tobler; H Eimermacher; A Tichelli; C Aul; M Wilhelm; J T Fischer; M Perker; C Scheid; M Schenk; J Weiss; C R Meier; S Kremers; L Labedzki; T Schmeiser; H-P Lohrmann; H Heimpel Journal: Leukemia Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: Christina A Meyers; Jennifer A Smith; Andrea Bezjak; Minesh P Mehta; James Liebmann; Tim Illidge; Ian Kunkler; Jean-Michel Caudrelier; Peter D Eisenberg; Jacobus Meerwaldt; Ross Siemers; Christian Carrie; Laurie E Gaspar; Walter Curran; See-Chun Phan; Richard A Miller; Markus F Renschler Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-01-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Viktor A Timoshnikov; Olga Yu Selyutina; Nikolay E Polyakov; Victoria Didichenko; George J Kontoghiorghes Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2022-01-23 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Iuliana Besleaga; Iryna Stepanenko; Tatsiana V Petrasheuskaya; Denisa Darvasiova; Martin Breza; Marta Hammerstad; Małgorzata A Marć; Alexander Prado-Roller; Gabriella Spengler; Ana Popović-Bijelić; Eva A Enyedy; Peter Rapta; Anatoly D Shutalev; Vladimir B Arion Journal: Inorg Chem Date: 2021-07-19 Impact factor: 5.165