| Literature DB >> 30931956 |
Lina Sabatino1, Pamela Ziccardi1, Carmen Cerchia2, Livio Muccillo1, Luca Piemontese3, Fulvio Loiodice3, Vittorio Colantuoni1, Angelo Lupo4, Antonio Lavecchia5.
Abstract
<span class="Gene">Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor γ (<class="Chemical">span class="Gene">PPARγ) is an important sensor at the crossroad of diabetes, obesity, immunity and cancer as it regulates adipogenesis, metabolism, inflammation and proliferation. PPARγ exerts its pleiotropic functions upon binding of natural or synthetic ligands. The molecular mechanisms through which PPARγ controls cancer initiation/progression depend on the different mode of binding of distinctive ligands. Here, we analyzed a series of chiral phenoxyacetic acid analogues for their ability to inhibit colorectal cancer (CRC) cells growth by binding PPARγ as partial agonists as assessed in transactivation assays of a PPARG-reporter gene. We further investigated compounds (R,S)-3, (S)-3 and (R,S)-7 because they combine the best antiproliferative activity and a limited transactivation potential and found that they induce cell cycle arrest mainly via upregulation of p21waf1/cip1. Interestingly, they also counteract the β-catenin/TCF pathway by repressing c-Myc and cyclin D1, supporting their antiproliferative effect. Docking experiments provided insight into the binding mode of the most active compound (S)-3, suggesting that its partial agonism could be related to a better stabilization of H3 rather than H11 and H12. In conclusion, we identified a series of PPARγ partial agonists affecting distinct pathways all leading to strong antiproliferative effects. These findings may pave the way for novel therapeutic strategies in CRC.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30931956 PMCID: PMC6443668 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-41765-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Structures of compounds 1–7.
|
| ||
|---|---|---|
| compd | X | R |
| ( | (CH2)2 | H |
| ( | (CH2)3 | H |
| ( | (CH2)3 | Cl |
| ( | (CH2)3 | Cl |
| ( | (CH2)4 | H |
| ( | (CH2)2O | Cl |
| ( | (CH2)2O | Cl |
| ( | (CH2)4O | Cl |
| ( | (CH2)5O | Cl |
PPARγ transactivation and cell viability activity of chiral phenoxyacetic acid analogues 1–7.
| Compounds | EC50 (µM) | Efficacy (%) | Proliferation IC50 (µM) | Residual viability (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | 0.64 ± 0.06 | 45 ± 1.3 | 19.7 ± 1.7 | 77 ± 3.1 |
| ( | 0.54 ± 0.1 | 48 ± 2.1 | 12.1 ± 1.2 | 70 ± 2.5 |
| ( | 0.35 ± 0.04 | 65 ± 2.4 | 7.3 ± 0.5 | 47 ± 2.3 |
| ( | 0.4 ± 0.05 | 55 ± 1.2 | 4.8 ± 0.35 | 31 ± 1.3 |
| ( | 0.35 ± 0.07 | 60 ± 1.1 | 10.1 ± 0.4 | 60 ± 0.5 |
| ( | 0.65 ± 0.03 | 65 ± 2.5 | 18.7 ± 0.6 | 76 ± 1.5 |
| ( | 0.75 ± 0.05 | 48 ± 2.7 | 25.1 ± 1.8 | 82 ± 2.3 |
| ( | 0.71 ± 0.02 | 40 ± 2.2 | 8.8 ± 0.7 | 40 ± 2.7 |
| ( | 0.51 ± 0.05 | 62 ± 2.3 | 7.8 ± 0.8 | 35 ± 2.5 |
| RGZ | 0.24 ± 0.07 | 100 ± 0.2 | 9.8 ± 0.4 | 57 ± 3.1 |
Figure 1Cell cycle analysis of HT-29 cells treated with increasing amounts of RGZ, (R,S)-3, (S)-3 or (R,S)-7 and p21waf1/cip1 expression evaluation by Western blotting. (A) Flow cytometric assay carried out on HT-29 cells treated or not with the indicated compounds at different concentrations ranging from 1 to 25 µM for 48 hs. HT-29 cells exposed or not to these compounds were harvested, permeabilized and stained with propidium iodide and analyzed by FACS. Data are means ± SD of two independent experiments. *p ≤ 0.05, **p ≤ 0.01 compared to the control. (B) Proliferating HT-29 cells were treated or not for 48 hs with 10 µM of the indicated compounds. Protein extracts were prepared and assessed for p21waf1/cip1 expression in Western blotting analysis. β-Actin was used for protein load normalization. The bar graphs are the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. **p ≤ 0.01 compared to the control.
Figure 2Effects of RGZ, (R,S)-3, (S)-3 and (R,S)-7 on the expression of different protein markers. Proliferating HT-29 cells were treated for 48 hs with 10 µM of the indicated compounds. Specific antibodies against cyclin D1 (A), c-Myc (B), β-catenin (C) and PPARγ (D) respectively, were used in Western blotting analysis. An anti-β-actin antibody was used as a control for protein loading. The graphs of (A) and (B) represent the means ± SD of three independent experiments. **p ≤ 0.01, ***p ≤ 0.005 compared to the control. The bar graphs of (C,D) are the means ± SD of three independent experiments. *p ≤ 0.05 compared to the control. (E) Top-FLASH luciferase assay performed in HEK-293 cells transiently transfected with the Top-FLASH reporter plasmid and exposed to 20 mM LiCl alone or in combination with 1 µM RGZ, (R,S)-3, (S)-3, (R,S)-7 or the vehicle alone (DMSO) for 24 hs is shown. Luciferase activity is reported as fold induction after normalization to β-galactosidase activity used as control of transfection efficiency. The graph represents the mean ± SD of two independent experiments performed in triplicate. *p ≤ 0.05 compared to LiCl exposure.
Figure 3Effects of RGZ, (R,S)-3, (S)-3 and (R,S)-7 on HT-29 cell apoptosis and caspase-3 activation analysis. (A) HT-29 cells were treated for 48 hs with 10 µM of RGZ, (R,S)-3, (S)-3 and (R,S)-7, respectively, stained by Annexin V-propidium iodide and analyzed by flow cytometry. (B) Early (Ann+/PI−) and late (Ann+/PI+) apoptotic cell populations were evaluated and reported in the graphic representation. The bar graphs are the means ± SD of three independent experiments. *p ≤ 0.05, **p ≤ 0.01, ***p ≤ 0.005 compared to the control. (C) Total protein extracts from proliferating HT-29 cells, treated or not with 10 µM RGZ, (R,S)-3, (S)-3 and (R,S)-7, respectively, for 48 hs were analyzed by Western blotting with an anti-caspase 3 antibody. An anti-β-actin antibody was used as a control for protein loading. Significance is indicated as *p ≤ 0.05 compared to only vehicle.
Figure 4PPARγ-dependent antiproliferative effect in CRC-derived RKO cells. Western blotting analysis of p21waf1/cip1 expression in total protein extracts from CRC-derived RKO cells (A) and its derived clone overexpressing an ectopic PPARγ1 (B) using an anti-p21waf1/cip1 antibody. An anti-β-actin antibody was used as a control for protein loading. The bar graphs represent the mean ± SD of PPARγ/β-actin of at least 3 independent experiments. *p ≤ 0.05, **p ≤ 0.01 compared to the control.
Figure 5Docking of compound (S)-3 into the PPARγ binding pocket. (A) Binding mode of representative compound (S)-3 (a partial agonist, yellow sticks) into the PPARγ LBD represented as a limegreen ribbon model. Only amino acids located within 4 Å of the bound ligand are displayed and labeled. H-bonds discussed in the text are depicted as dashed deep-purple lines. (B) 2D ligand-interaction diagram of (S)-3 into the PPARγ LBD generated by the MOE software package. Green spheres = “greasy” residues; spheres with red outline = acidic residues; spheres with blue outline = basic residues; spheres with black outline = polar residues; blue background spheres = receptor exposure to solvent; blue spheres on ligand atoms = ligand exposure to solvent. Green dotted lines = side chain donors/acceptors; blue dotted lines = halogen contact; grey dotted line = proximity contour.