Xiaojun Liu1, Yingjun Jiang1, Billie Nowak1, Bethany Qiang1, Nancy Cheng1, Yuling Chen1, William Plunkett2,3. 1. Department of Experimental Therapeutics, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1901 East Road, 77054, Houston, TX, USA. 2. Department of Experimental Therapeutics, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1901 East Road, 77054, Houston, TX, USA. wplunket@mdanderson.org. 3. Department of Leukemia, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, 77030, Houston, TX, USA. wplunket@mdanderson.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The mechanism of action of CNDAC (2'-C-cyano-2'-deoxy-1-β-D-arabino-pentofuranosyl-cytosine) is unique among deoxycytidine analogs because upon incorporation into DNA it causes a single strand break which is converted to a double strand break after DNA replication. This lesion requires homologous recombination (HR) for repair. CNDAC, as the parent nucleoside, DFP10917, and as an oral prodrug, sapacitabine, are undergoing clinical trials for hematological malignancies and solid tumors. The purpose of this study is to investigate the potential of CNDAC for the therapy of ovarian cancer (OC). METHODS: Drug sensitivity was evaluated using a clonogenic survival assay. Drug combination effects were quantified by median effect analysis. RESULTS: OC cells lacking function of the key HR genes, BRCA1 or BRCA2, were more sensitive to CNDAC than corresponding HR proficient cells. The sensitization was associated with greater levels of DNA damage in response to CNDAC at clinically achievable concentrations, manifested as chromosomal aberrations. Three classes of CNDAC-based drug combinations were investigated. First, the PARP1 inhibitors, rucaparib and talazoparib, were selectively synergistic with CNDAC in BRCA1/2 deficient OC cells (combination index < 1) at a relatively low concentration range. Second, cisplatin and oxaliplatin had additive combination effects with CNDAC (combination index ~ 1). Finally, paclitaxel and docetaxel achieved additive cell-killing effects with CNDAC at concentration ranges of the taxanes similar for both BRCA1/2 deficient and proficient OC cells. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides mechanistic rationales for combining CNDAC with PARP inhibitors, platinum compounds and taxanes in ovarian cancer lacking BRCA1/2 function.
PURPOSE: The mechanism of action of CNDAC (2'-C-cyano-2'-deoxy-1-β-D-arabino-pentofuranosyl-cytosine) is unique among deoxycytidine analogs because upon incorporation into DNA it causes a single strand break which is converted to a double strand break after DNA replication. This lesion requires homologous recombination (HR) for repair. CNDAC, as the parent nucleoside, DFP10917, and as an oral prodrug, sapacitabine, are undergoing clinical trials for hematological malignancies and solid tumors. The purpose of this study is to investigate the potential of CNDAC for the therapy of ovarian cancer (OC). METHODS: Drug sensitivity was evaluated using a clonogenic survival assay. Drug combination effects were quantified by median effect analysis. RESULTS: OC cells lacking function of the key HR genes, BRCA1 or BRCA2, were more sensitive to CNDAC than corresponding HR proficient cells. The sensitization was associated with greater levels of DNA damage in response to CNDAC at clinically achievable concentrations, manifested as chromosomal aberrations. Three classes of CNDAC-based drug combinations were investigated. First, the PARP1 inhibitors, rucaparib and talazoparib, were selectively synergistic with CNDAC in BRCA1/2 deficient OC cells (combination index < 1) at a relatively low concentration range. Second, cisplatin and oxaliplatin had additive combination effects with CNDAC (combination index ~ 1). Finally, paclitaxel and docetaxel achieved additive cell-killing effects with CNDAC at concentration ranges of the taxanes similar for both BRCA1/2 deficient and proficient OC cells. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides mechanistic rationales for combining CNDAC with PARP inhibitors, platinum compounds and taxanes in ovarian cancer lacking BRCA1/2 function.
Authors: Stephanie Lheureux; Jeff P Bruce; Julia V Burnier; Katherine Karakasis; Patricia A Shaw; Blaise A Clarke; S Y Cindy Yang; Rene Quevedo; Tiantian Li; Mark Dowar; Valerie Bowering; Trevor J Pugh; Amit M Oza Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2017-02-21 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Junko Murai; Shar-yin N Huang; Benu Brata Das; Amelie Renaud; Yiping Zhang; James H Doroshow; Jiuping Ji; Shunichi Takeda; Yves Pommier Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2012-11-01 Impact factor: 13.312
Authors: Xiaojun Liu; Yingjun Jiang; Kei-Ichi Takata; Billie Nowak; Chaomei Liu; Richard D Wood; Walter N Hittelman; William Plunkett Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2019-09-09 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Sally L George; Federica Lorenzi; David King; Sabine Hartlieb; James Campbell; Helen Pemberton; Umut H Toprak; Karen Barker; Jennifer Tall; Barbara Martins da Costa; Marlinde L van den Boogaard; M Emmy M Dolman; Jan J Molenaar; Helen E Bryant; Frank Westermann; Christopher J Lord; Louis Chesler Journal: EBioMedicine Date: 2020-08-23 Impact factor: 8.143