| Literature DB >> 32599707 |
Wangjie Yu1, Yunyun Chen2, Nagireddy Putluri3, Cristian Coarfa3,4,5, Matthew J Robertson5, Vasanta Putluri5, Fabio Stossi3,5,6, Julien Dubrulle3,5,6, Michael A Mancini3,5,6, Jonathan C Pang1, Trung Nguyen1, Dodge Baluya7, Jeffrey N Myers2, Stephen Y Lai2, Vlad C Sandulache1.
Abstract
Background: Cisplatin (CDDP) is commonly utilized in the treatment of advanced solid tumors including head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Cisplatin response remains highly variable among individual tumors and development of cisplatin resistance is common. We hypothesized that development of cisplatin resistance is partially driven by metabolic reprogramming.Entities:
Keywords: amino acid; cisplatin; fatty acid; ferroptosis; head and neck cancer; oxidative stress
Year: 2020 PMID: 32599707 PMCID: PMC7352569 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12061670
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.575
Figure 1Cisplatin toxicity is a function of oxidative stress generation. (A) Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) cells demonstrate differential cisplatin (CDDP) sensitivity as measured via surviving fraction in a clonogenic survival assay (CSA). (B) Cisplatin increases oxidative stress as measured via γH2ax fraction of positive cells in a dose dependent fashion across cell line backgrounds. (C,D) N-acetyl cysteine (NAC) reverses cisplatin induced increases in γH2ax (C; * denotes p < 0.05 for comparison of CDDP condition vs. control (CNT), # denotes p < 0.05 for comparison of CDDP+NAC vs. CDDP alone) and reverses cisplatin toxicity even when augmented by 2-deoxyglucose (2-DG). All data presented as averages, with error bars indicating standard error of the mean. * denotes p < 0.05.
Figure 2Conditioned cisplatin resistance generates cross-resistance to ferroptosis. (A) Exposure of HN30 cells to increasing concentrations of cisplatin (CDDP) resulted in generation of 2 resistant pooled populations (R4- cell line capable of proliferating in growth media containing 4 µM CDDP; R8- cell line capable of proliferating in growth media containing 8 µM CDDP). Both resistant pooled populations greatly surpassed the intrinsic cisplatin resistance demonstrated by HN31. (B) HN30R4 and HN30R8 demonstrated a significant decrease in sensitivity to RSL3 compared to the HN30 parental line. (C) Ferrostatin (FER) (1 μM) (blue bars) reversed the effects of RSL3, ERST and ML210 but not cisplatin on HN30 (72 h assay). NAC (3 mM) (green bars) reversed the effects of all 4 drugs (# indicates a statistically significant difference between drug alone and drug + ferrostatin using t-test, p-value <0.05; * indicates a statistically significant difference between drug alone and drug + NAC using t-test, p-value <0.05). (D) Sensitivity to both cisplatin and ferroptosis inducers was dramatically decreased in the HN30R4 pooled population compared to the parental HN30 cell line; ferrostatin (blue bars) and NAC reversal (green bars) of drug toxicity are partially abrogated (# indicates a statistically significant difference between drug alone and drug + ferrostatin using t-test, p-value <0.05; * indicates a statistically significant difference between drug alone and drug + NAC using t-test, p-value <0.05). Drug concentrations for HN30 are—CDDP 1µM, ML210 0.5 µM, RLS3 0.1 µM, ERST 2.0 µM. Drug concentrations for HN30R4 are—CDDP 16 µM, ML210 8 µM, RSL3 1.6 µM, ERST 16 µM. All data presented as averages, with error bars indicating standard error of the mean.
Figure 3Differential gene expression patterns in cisplatin resistant HN30 clones. (A) Differential single gene expression differentiates the clones from the HN30 parental line (genes were considered statistically significant if they had a Benjamini-Hochberg (BH) adjusted p-value less than or equal 0.05 when the clones were compared to the parental line). (B) Principal component analysis differentiates the clones from the HN30 parental line. (C) HALLMARK pathways differentially enriched in the clones compared to the parental line.
Figure 4Differential metabolomics profile of cisplatin resistant HN30 clones. (A) Differential metabolic pathways enrichment differentiates the clones from the HN30 parental line. (B) Two tier topology mapping of the metabolite data identifies a set of metabolites which are different between the clones and the HN30 parental line (C).
Figure 5Differential 13C flux in cisplatin resistant cell lines. HN30 and HN30R4e1 were exposed to 10 mM all carbon labeled glucose (13C) for 3, 16, 48, 72 and 96 h (h) in the absence of unlabeled glucose. Incorporation of 13C label was measured into the above metabolites at each time point. Data are shown as average absolute counts (n = 4) with * indicating p-value <0.05 comparing HN30 R4e1 to HN30 for individual time points. Ala- alanine, Ser- serine, Asp- aspartate.
Figure 6Acute metabolomic shifts secondary to cisplatin exposure. HN30 tumors were exposed to a single dose of cisplatin (CDDP) 5 mg/kg for 1 or 6 h (h); (control n = 4, CDDP n = 7). Heatmaps indicate metabolite levels which increased and/or decreased in CDDP treatment tumors compared to the control condition (FDR < 0.25). Tables summarize metabolites which demonstrated a statistically significant increase or decrease compared to the control condition. * indicates metabotoxin; MTA- S-methyl-5-thioadenosine.