Literature DB >> 3015377

DNA breakage in human lung carcinoma cells and nuclei that are naturally sensitive or resistant to etoposide and teniposide.

B H Long, S T Musial, M G Brattain.   

Abstract

Evidence suggests that the anticancer agents etoposide (VP16-213) and teniposide (VM26) produce DNA breaks and cytotoxicity by interaction with type II topoisomerase. Therefore, levels of type II topoisomerase may influence sensitivity to VP16-213 and VM26. We have characterized four lung carcinoma-derived cell lines for natural sensitivity or resistance to VP16-213 and VM26. Included in this study were two small cell lung carcinoma lines (SW900 and SW1271), an adenocarcinoma line (A549), and a large cell carcinoma (H157). SW1271 was the most sensitive line with a median inhibitory concentration for cell proliferation of 0.5 microM for VM26 and 2.7 microM for VP16-213, and SW900 was the most resistant with median inhibitory concentration values of 2.0 and 16 microM, respectively. A549 and H157 cells were intermediate in sensitivity to these drugs. Alkaline elution techniques were used to study in vivo formation and repair of single and double strand DNA breaks. Single strand DNA breaks were observed in SW1271 cells exposed to as little as 10 nM VM26 or 100 nM VP16-213 for 1 h, whereas SW900 cells required exposure to 10-fold higher concentrations of VM26 or VP16-213 to produce similar results. Single strand DNA breaks predominated only in SW1271 and A549 cells and then, only at low drug concentrations, whereas the ratios between single and double strand DNA breaks decreased at higher drug concentrations. Plots of cytotoxicity versus single and double strand DNA breakage revealed that cytotoxicity produced by both drugs was more closely related to double strand DNA break formation in all four cell lines. DNA breaks appeared rapidly upon addition of drug, reaching plateaus in DNA breaks within 30 min, and repair of both single and double strand DNA breaks occurred rapidly with time to repair one-half of the DNA breaks of 20 to 60 min in all four cell lines upon removal of drug, arguing against repair as a mechanism for drug resistance. DNA breakage was also observed in nuclei isolated from SW900 and SW1271 cells in similar magnitude to that observed in the respective cells. Results indicate that DNA breakage plateaus may reflect a steady-state equilibrium established between the drug and its nuclear target, possibly type II topoisomerase, and suggest that natural resistance to VP16-213 and VM26 may be due to different enzyme levels in sensitive and naturally resistant cells.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1986        PMID: 3015377

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Res        ISSN: 0008-5472            Impact factor:   12.701


  16 in total

1.  Detection of drug-induced cellular changes using confocal Raman spectroscopy on patterned single-cell biosensors.

Authors:  Ryan Buckmaster; Fareid Asphahani; Myo Thein; Jian Xu; Miqin Zhang
Journal:  Analyst       Date:  2009-04-30       Impact factor: 4.616

2.  Characterization of an etoposide-resistant human small-cell lung cancer cell line.

Authors:  K Minato; F Kanzawa; K Nishio; K Nakagawa; Y Fujiwara; N Saijo
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 3.333

Review 3.  Topoisomerases, new targets in cancer chemotherapy.

Authors:  J G Zijlstra; S de Jong; E G de Vries; N H Mulder
Journal:  Med Oncol Tumor Pharmacother       Date:  1990

4.  Transcription of adenovirus and HeLa cell genes in the presence of drugs that inhibit topoisomerase I and II function.

Authors:  J Schaak; P Schedl; T Shenk
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  1990-03-25       Impact factor: 16.971

5.  Etoposide (VP-16-213)-induced gene alterations: potential contribution to cell death.

Authors:  N A Berger; S Chatterjee; J A Schmotzer; S R Helms
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1991-10-01       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Two novel determinants of etoposide resistance in small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Malcolm H Lawson; Natalie M Cummings; Doris M Rassl; Roslin Russell; James D Brenton; Robert C Rintoul; Gillian Murphy
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2011-06-03       Impact factor: 12.701

Review 7.  Topoisomerase II in multiple drug resistance.

Authors:  G A Hofmann; M R Mattern
Journal:  Cytotechnology       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 2.058

8.  Etoposide-resistant human colon and lung adenocarcinoma cell lines exhibit sensitivity to homoharringtonine.

Authors:  L J Wilkoff; E A Dulmadge; G Vasanthakumar; J P Donahue
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 3.333

9.  Characterization of an etoposide-resistant human ovarian cancer cell line.

Authors:  N Kubota; K Nishio; Y Takeda; T Ohmori; Y Funayama; H Ogasawara; T Ohira; H Kunikane; Y Terashima; N Saijo
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 3.333

Review 10.  Utility of a next-generation framework for assessment of genomic damage: A case study using the pharmaceutical drug candidate etoposide.

Authors:  John Nicolette; Mirjam Luijten; Jennifer C Sasaki; Laura Custer; Michelle Embry; Roland Froetschl; George Johnson; Gladys Ouedraogo; Raja Settivari; Veronique Thybaud; Kerry L Dearfield
Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen       Date:  2021-11-22       Impact factor: 3.579

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.