Wei-Hsun Hsu1, Xiaoliang Zhao2, Jianquan Zhu2, In-Kyu Kim2, Guanhua Rao2, Justine McCutcheon2, Shuo-Tse Hsu2, Beverly Teicher3, Bhaskar Kallakury4, Afshin Dowlati5, Yu-Wen Zhang2, Giuseppe Giaccone6. 1. Department of Oncology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC; Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin, China. 2. Department of Oncology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC. 3. National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland. 4. Department of Pathology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC. 5. Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio. 6. Department of Oncology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC. Electronic address: gg496@georgetown.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Platinum-based chemotherapy remains the standard treatment for patients with SCLC, but the benefit of the treatment is often hampered by rapid development of drug resistance. Thus far, there is no targeted therapy available for SCLC. More than 90% of SCLC tumors harbor mutations in the tumor suppressor gene tumor protein p53 (p53), an important DNA damage checkpoint regulator, and these tumor cells rely predominantly on the checkpoint kinases to control DNA damage response. METHODS: We examined whether and how inhibition of checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) affects cisplatin cytotoxicity in SCLC cells with and without p53 mutations, and evaluated the effect of Chk1 inhibitor and cisplatin combination in cisplatin-sensitive and -resistant preclinical models. RESULTS: Inhibition of Chk1 synergized with cisplatin to induce mitotic cell death in the p53-deficeint SCLC cells. The effect was regulated in part through activation of caspase 2 and downregulation of E2F transcription factor 1 (E2F1). Furthermore, Chk1 inhibitors prexasertib and AZD7762 enhanced cisplatin antitumor activity and overcame cisplatin resistance in SCLC preclinical models in vitro an in vivo. We also observed that higher expression of Chk1 was associated with poorer overall survival of patients with SCLC. CONCLUSIONS: Our data account Chk1 as a potential therapeutic target in SCLC, and rationalize clinical development of Chk1 inhibitor and cisplatin combinational strategy for the treatment of SCLC.
INTRODUCTION:Platinum-based chemotherapy remains the standard treatment for patients with SCLC, but the benefit of the treatment is often hampered by rapid development of drug resistance. Thus far, there is no targeted therapy available for SCLC. More than 90% of SCLC tumors harbor mutations in the tumor suppressor gene tumor protein p53 (p53), an important DNA damage checkpoint regulator, and these tumor cells rely predominantly on the checkpoint kinases to control DNA damage response. METHODS: We examined whether and how inhibition of checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) affects cisplatincytotoxicity in SCLC cells with and without p53 mutations, and evaluated the effect of Chk1 inhibitor and cisplatin combination in cisplatin-sensitive and -resistant preclinical models. RESULTS: Inhibition of Chk1 synergized with cisplatin to induce mitotic cell death in the p53-deficeint SCLC cells. The effect was regulated in part through activation of caspase 2 and downregulation of E2F transcription factor 1 (E2F1). Furthermore, Chk1 inhibitors prexasertib and AZD7762 enhanced cisplatin antitumor activity and overcame cisplatin resistance in SCLC preclinical models in vitro an in vivo. We also observed that higher expression of Chk1 was associated with poorer overall survival of patients with SCLC. CONCLUSIONS: Our data account Chk1 as a potential therapeutic target in SCLC, and rationalize clinical development of Chk1 inhibitor and cisplatin combinational strategy for the treatment of SCLC.
Authors: Masaoki Kawasumi; James E Bradner; Nicola Tolliday; Renee Thibodeau; Heather Sloan; Kay M Brummond; Paul Nghiem Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2014-10-21 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Camilla L Christensen; Nicholas Kwiatkowski; Brian J Abraham; Julian Carretero; Fatima Al-Shahrour; Tinghu Zhang; Edmond Chipumuro; Grit S Herter-Sprie; Esra A Akbay; Abigail Altabef; Jianming Zhang; Takeshi Shimamura; Marzia Capelletti; Jakob B Reibel; Jillian D Cavanaugh; Peng Gao; Yan Liu; Signe R Michaelsen; Hans S Poulsen; Amir R Aref; David A Barbie; James E Bradner; Rani E George; Nathanael S Gray; Richard A Young; Kwok-Kin Wong Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2014-12-08 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Emiliano Calvo; Victor J Chen; Mark Marshall; Ute Ohnmacht; Scott M Hynes; Elizabeth Kumm; H Bruce Diaz; Darlene Barnard; Farhana F Merzoug; Lysiane Huber; Lisa Kays; Philip Iversen; Antonio Calles; Beatrice Voss; Aimee Bence Lin; Nicolas Dickgreber; Thomas Wehler; Martin Sebastian Journal: Invest New Drugs Date: 2014-06-20 Impact factor: 3.850
Authors: Charles M Rudin; Steffen Durinck; Eric W Stawiski; John T Poirier; Zora Modrusan; David S Shames; Emily A Bergbower; Yinghui Guan; James Shin; Joseph Guillory; Celina Sanchez Rivers; Catherine K Foo; Deepali Bhatt; Jeremy Stinson; Florian Gnad; Peter M Haverty; Robert Gentleman; Subhra Chaudhuri; Vasantharajan Janakiraman; Bijay S Jaiswal; Chaitali Parikh; Wenlin Yuan; Zemin Zhang; Hartmut Koeppen; Thomas D Wu; Howard M Stern; Robert L Yauch; Kenneth E Huffman; Diego D Paskulin; Peter B Illei; Marileila Varella-Garcia; Adi F Gazdar; Frederic J de Sauvage; Richard Bourgon; John D Minna; Malcolm V Brock; Somasekar Seshagiri Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2012-09-02 Impact factor: 38.330