Joshua E Lewis1, Francesco Costantini2, Jade Mims3, Xiaofei Chen3, Cristina M Furdui3, David A Boothman4, Melissa L Kemp1. 1. 1 The Wallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory University , Atlanta, Georgia . 2. 2 School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology , Atlanta, Georgia . 3. 3 Section on Molecular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine , Winston-Salem, North Carolina. 4. 4 Department of Pharmacology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center , Dallas, Texas.
Abstract
AIMS: The purpose of this study was to investigate differential nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate, reduced (NADPH) production between radiation-sensitive and -resistant head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) cell lines and whether these differences are predictive of sensitivity to the chemotherapeutic β-lapachone. RESULTS: We have developed a novel human genome-scale metabolic modeling platform that combines transcriptomic, kinetic, thermodynamic, and metabolite concentration data. Upon incorporation of this information into cell line-specific models, we observed that the radiation-resistant HNSCC model redistributed flux through several major NADPH-producing reactions. Upon RNA interference of canonical NADPH-producing genes, the metabolic network can further reroute flux through alternate NADPH biosynthesis pathways in a cell line-specific manner. Model predictions of perturbations in cellular NADPH production after gene knockdown match well with experimentally verified effects of β-lapachone treatment on NADPH/NADP+ ratio and cell viability. This computational approach accurately predicts HNSCC-specific oxidoreductase genes that differentially affect cell viability between radiation-responsive and radiation-resistant cancer cells upon β-lapachone treatment. INNOVATION: Quantitative genome-scale metabolic models that incorporate multiple levels of biological data are applied to provide accurate predictions of responses to a NADPH-dependent redox cycling chemotherapeutic drug under a variety of perturbations. CONCLUSION: Our modeling approach suggests differences in metabolism and β-lapachone redox cycling that underlie phenotypic differences in radiation-sensitive and -resistant cancer cells. This approach can be extended to investigate the synergistic action of NAD(P)H: quinone oxidoreductase 1 bioactivatable drugs and radiation therapy. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 29, 937-952.
AIMS: The purpose of this study was to investigate differential nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate, reduced (NADPH) production between radiation-sensitive and -resistant head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) cell lines and whether these differences are predictive of sensitivity to the chemotherapeutic β-lapachone. RESULTS: We have developed a novel human genome-scale metabolic modeling platform that combines transcriptomic, kinetic, thermodynamic, and metabolite concentration data. Upon incorporation of this information into cell line-specific models, we observed that the radiation-resistant HNSCC model redistributed flux through several major NADPH-producing reactions. Upon RNA interference of canonical NADPH-producing genes, the metabolic network can further reroute flux through alternate NADPH biosynthesis pathways in a cell line-specific manner. Model predictions of perturbations in cellular NADPH production after gene knockdown match well with experimentally verified effects of β-lapachone treatment on NADPH/NADP+ ratio and cell viability. This computational approach accurately predicts HNSCC-specific oxidoreductase genes that differentially affect cell viability between radiation-responsive and radiation-resistant cancer cells upon β-lapachone treatment. INNOVATION: Quantitative genome-scale metabolic models that incorporate multiple levels of biological data are applied to provide accurate predictions of responses to a NADPH-dependent redox cycling chemotherapeutic drug under a variety of perturbations. CONCLUSION: Our modeling approach suggests differences in metabolism and β-lapachone redox cycling that underlie phenotypic differences in radiation-sensitive and -resistant cancer cells. This approach can be extended to investigate the synergistic action of NAD(P)H: quinone oxidoreductase 1 bioactivatable drugs and radiation therapy. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 29, 937-952.
Entities:
Keywords:
NADPH; flux balance analysis; head and neck cancer; redox cycling; β-lapachone
Authors: Mathias Uhlén; Linn Fagerberg; Björn M Hallström; Cecilia Lindskog; Per Oksvold; Adil Mardinoglu; Åsa Sivertsson; Caroline Kampf; Evelina Sjöstedt; Anna Asplund; IngMarie Olsson; Karolina Edlund; Emma Lundberg; Sanjay Navani; Cristina Al-Khalili Szigyarto; Jacob Odeberg; Dijana Djureinovic; Jenny Ottosson Takanen; Sophia Hober; Tove Alm; Per-Henrik Edqvist; Holger Berling; Hanna Tegel; Jan Mulder; Johan Rockberg; Peter Nilsson; Jochen M Schwenk; Marica Hamsten; Kalle von Feilitzen; Mattias Forsberg; Lukas Persson; Fredric Johansson; Martin Zwahlen; Gunnar von Heijne; Jens Nielsen; Fredrik Pontén Journal: Science Date: 2015-01-23 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Xiumei Huang; Ying Dong; Erik A Bey; Jessica A Kilgore; Joseph S Bair; Long-Shan Li; Malina Patel; Elizabeth I Parkinson; Yiguang Wang; Noelle S Williams; Jinming Gao; Paul J Hergenrother; David A Boothman Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2012-04-24 Impact factor: 13.312
Authors: David S Wishart; Dan Tzur; Craig Knox; Roman Eisner; An Chi Guo; Nelson Young; Dean Cheng; Kevin Jewell; David Arndt; Summit Sawhney; Chris Fung; Lisa Nikolai; Mike Lewis; Marie-Aude Coutouly; Ian Forsythe; Peter Tang; Savita Shrivastava; Kevin Jeroncic; Paul Stothard; Godwin Amegbey; David Block; David D Hau; James Wagner; Jessica Miniaci; Melisa Clements; Mulu Gebremedhin; Natalie Guo; Ying Zhang; Gavin E Duggan; Glen D Macinnis; Alim M Weljie; Reza Dowlatabadi; Fiona Bamforth; Derrick Clive; Russ Greiner; Liang Li; Tom Marrie; Brian D Sykes; Hans J Vogel; Lori Querengesser Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Gaurab Chakrabarti; Zachary R Moore; Xiuquan Luo; Mariya Ilcheva; Aktar Ali; Mahesh Padanad; Yunyun Zhou; Yang Xie; Sandeep Burma; Pier P Scaglioni; Lewis C Cantley; Ralph J DeBerardinis; Alec C Kimmelman; Costas A Lyssiotis; David A Boothman Journal: Cancer Metab Date: 2015-10-12
Authors: Erik A Bey; Melissa S Bentle; Kathryn E Reinicke; Ying Dong; Chin-Rang Yang; Luc Girard; John D Minna; William G Bornmann; Jinming Gao; David A Boothman Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2007-07-03 Impact factor: 12.779
Authors: Joshua E Lewis; Naveen Singh; Reetta J Holmila; Baran D Sumer; Noelle S Williams; Cristina M Furdui; Melissa L Kemp; David A Boothman Journal: Semin Radiat Oncol Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 5.934
Authors: Kirtikar Shukla; Naveen Singh; Joshua E Lewis; Allen W Tsang; David A Boothman; Melissa L Kemp; Cristina M Furdui Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2020-11-11 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Rachel H Ng; Jihoon W Lee; Priyanka Baloni; Christian Diener; James R Heath; Yapeng Su Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-07-07 Impact factor: 5.738
Authors: Kiran Kumar Solingapuram Sai; Xiaofei Chen; Zhe Li; Caigang Zhu; Kirtikar Shukla; Tom E Forshaw; Hanzhi Wu; Stephen A Vance; Buddhika Liyana Pathirannahel; Megan Madonna; Mark W Dewhirst; Allen W Tsang; Leslie B Poole; Nimmi Ramanujam; S Bruce King; Cristina M Furdui Journal: Redox Biol Date: 2021-12-18 Impact factor: 11.799