Eunjeong Ko1, Seungjae Baek1, Jiwon Kim2, Deokbae Park2, Youngki Lee2. 1. Dept. of Medicine, Jeju National University School of Medicine, Jeju 63243, Korea. 2. Histology, Jeju National University School of Medicine, Jeju 63243, Korea.
Lung cancer is the major common cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. In 2018,
there were over 1.76 million deaths globally due to lung cancer, amounting to about
18.4% of all cancer-related deaths, and new lung cancer cases account for
11.6% of all new cancer cases (WHO,
2020). Tobacco smoking is the most significant risk factor for
development of lung cancer. Compared with never-smokers, those who smoke tobacco
have about 20-fold higher relative risk of developing lung cancer. Most lung cancers
are known as carcinomas, and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) comprises of
approximately 85% of all lung cancers, with about 60% diagnosed at
advanced metastatic stage when therapeutic option is no longer available (Planchard et al., 2018).Most cancer cells, including NSCLC, exhibit diverse genetic alterations, which define
as driver mutations contributing to the molecular pathogenesis of cancer. Over
60% of NSCLC harbor various oncogenic driver mutations, and these mutations
in membrane receptors and downstream effector proteins lead to uncontrolled cell
growth, proliferation and survival via a complex cascade of cell signaling pathways
such as RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK or PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway (Chan & Hughes, 2015). Activating mutations in epidermal growth
factor receptor (EGFR), anaplastic lymphoma kinas (ALK), v-ros avian UR2 sarcoma
virus oncogene homolog 1 (ROS1), Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS),
and v-RAF murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B (BRAF) have been found as
oncogenic driver mutations in NSCLC (Ding et al.,
2008; Govindan et al., 2012;
Collisson et al., 2014). Thereafter,
significant progress has been made to develop molecularly targeted agents for more
personalized treatment of NSCLCpatients, and several small molecule inhibitors,
such as erlotinib and gefitinib targeting mutated EGFR, have been developed and used
as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy (Schrank et al., 2018).Metformin belongs to biguanide derivative that has been widely used as a first-line
medication for type II diabetes mellitus for over 60 years and now prescribed to
about 120 million diabeticpatients worldwide. Metformindecreases blood glucose
levels by inhibiting gluconeogenesis in liver and increasing uptake and utilization
of glucose by skeletal muscle (Shaw et al.,
2005). A retrospective study by Evans et
al. (2005) suggested for the first time that metformin treatment is
associated with the reduced risk of all cancers compared with other antidiabetic
treatments in diabeticpatients. Following studies showed that diabeticpatients
using metformindecrease lung cancer risk at the magnitude of 39%–45%,
compared with those not using metformin (Hall et
al., 2005; Lai et al., 2012).
Several in vitro or in vivo preclinical studies
also revealed diverse anticancer effects, in which metformin treatment results in a
significant decrease in cell proliferation, tumor growth and colony formation, and
induces apoptosis and cell cycle arrest in various humanlung cancer cell lines
(Ashinuma et al., 2012). In addition to
monotherapy, combination of metformin with other chemotherapeutic or molecular
targeted agents was shown to potentiate synergistically the antitumor effect (Morgillo et al., 2013; Tseng et al., 2013). Moreover, clinical trial also showed
promising results, in which metformin treatment in combination with
gemcitabine/cisplatin in non-diabetic and metastatic NSCLCpatients significantly
improves the objective response rate, overall survival and media progression free
survival without significant increase in toxicity (Sayed et al., 2015).The molecular mechanisms for the antitumor effect of metformin have been suggested
but revealed as a much more complex nature (Vancura et al., 2018). The most well-known effect of metformin is the
inhibition of complex I in the mitochondrial electron transport chain, which leads
to increasing the intracellular AMP/ATP ratio. The high AMP/ATP ratio in turn
phosphorylates and activates adenosine monophosphate activated protein kinase
(AMPK), a heterotrimeric serine/ threonine protein kinase which regulates the
multiple signaling pathways involved in cancer cell proliferation, including the
suppression of PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway (Griss et
al., 2015). Metformin-mediated AMPK activation and mTOR inhibition
suppress cell proliferation through reducing phosphorylation of its major downstream
targets, the 70 kDa ribosomal protein kinase S6 (p70S6K) and eukaryotic initiation
factor 4E-binding protein1 (4E-BP1) (Shaw et al.,
2005). In contrast to metformin-induced inhibition of PI3K/AKT/mTOR
pathway, there is contradictory effect of metformin on RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK pathway in
NSCLC cells. Several studies showed that metformin inhibited ERK activation (Do et al., 2013; Ko et al., 2019), while activation of ERK in response to
metformin was also reported (Morgillo et al.,
2013). Considering the presence of compensatory loops that activate one
pathway following the blockade of the other signaling cascade especially in cancer
cells with RAS mutation (De Luca et al.,
2012), the activation of ERK could result from inhibition of
PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway in response to metformin treatment, requiring blockade of both
pathways for more efficient antitumor effect.The present study, therefore, undertook to determine the combined effect of metformin
and trametinib, a MEK inhibitor, on cell viability in NSCLC cell line NCI-H2087 with
coexistent mutations of BRAF and NRAS. Here, we show that metformin induces the
activation of ERK, and the combination of metformin and trametinib gives synergistic
effect on cell survival in treatment with low doses, and antagonistic effect when
treated two drugs with high doses.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Reagents and cell culture
The humanNSCLC cell line NCI-H2087 was purchased from Korean Cell Line Bank
(Seoul, Korea). The cells were cultured in RPMI 1640 (Sigma-Aldrich, Gillingham,
UK) supplemented with 10% (vol/vol) heat inactivated fetal bovine serum
(Gibco BRL, Grand Island, NY, USA) and 1% streptomycin/penicillin at
37°C in a humidified atmosphere consisting of 5% CO2
and 95% air. Cells were maintained mycoplasma free by treating 5
μg/mL of Plasmocin (InvivoGen, California, CA, USA). Trametinib was
obtained from LC Laboratories. The compound was initially dissolved in dimethyl
sulfoxide (DMSO, Sigma-Aldrich) to a concentration of 1 mM and further diluted
in RPMI 1640 media. Metformin (also known as 1,1-dimethylbiguanide
hydrochloride) was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich and dissolved in RPMI 1640 media
to a working concentration of 100 mM.
Cell viability assay
MTT assay was applied to measure cell viability as described previously (Kim et al., 2018). Briefly, cells were
harvested and seeded in 24-well plates at a concentration of
5×104 cells/well for 24 h. Then, cells were treated with
increasing concentrations of trametinib (2.5–40 nM), metformin (0.25–4 mM),
their combinations or vehicle control for 72 h. Experiments were performed in
triplicate, each conducted in quadruplicate. The IC50 values
(concentrations of drugs resulting in 50% decrease in cell viability
relative to controls), combination index (CI) and drug reduction index (DRI)
were calculated using CompuSyn software (ComboSyn). The CI value is a
quantitative measure of the degree of drugs interaction. According to the
recommendation of Chou-Talalay (Chou &
Talalay, 1981), CI<1 indicates synergistic effects of drugs;
CI=1 indicates additive effect; CI>1 indicates antagonism. DRI denotes
how many folds of dose reduction are allowed for each drug due to synergism as
compared to the dose of each drug alone.
Western blotting
Western blotting assays were carried out as previously described (Kim et al., 2018). Primary antibodies
included pERK1/2 (Tyr204), ERK1/2, cyclin D1, β-actin
(all from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Dallas, TX, USA), and p4E-BP1 (Ser65),
4E-BP1, pS6 (Ser240/244), pS6 (Ser235/236), S6, pAMPKα
(Tyr172), AMPKα1/2 (all from Cell Signaling). Following
incubation with secondary antibodies conjugated to horseradish peroxidase (Cell
Signaling), immunoreactivity was detected with enhanced chemiluminescence method
(Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
Colony formation assay
Cells were plated in 6-well culture dishes at a density of 600 cells per well.
After 24 h, cells were treated with metformin, trametinib and their combination.
Every three days, medium was changed with fresh medium containing the
corresponding concentration of the drugs. Following 15-day treatment, cell
colonies were washed with cold PBS and then fixed with ice-cold 100%
methanol. Cells were stained with 0.1% crystal violet in 20%
methanol for 10 min and pictures were taken with a digital camera (Olympus).
RESULTS
Effects of metformin and trametinib on signaling pathways
To delineate whether single agent metformin and trametinib could affect the
activity of cell signaling pathways in NCI-H2087 NSCLC cells, we first analyzed
the alterations of main downstream effector proteins of PI3K/AKT/mTOR and
RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK pathways following treatment of metformin and trametinib for 24
h. As shown in Fig. 1, metformin suppressed
the levels of p4E-BP1, pS6 (Ser235/236), pS6 (Ser240/244) in a dose-dependent
manner, and increased the phosphorylation of AMPK. Interestingly, metformin
increased the levels of pERK especially at high doses of 2 mM and 4 mM. On the
other hand, trametinib inhibited the levels of pERK, pS6 (Ser235/236), but did
not significantly affect the activity of AMPK, 4E-BP1 and pS6 (Ser240/244).
These findings suggest that metformin exerts its effect in the direction of
inhibiting PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway, but simultaneously plays its effect toward
activation of RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK pathway in NCI-H2087 NSCLC cells.
Fig. 1.
Western blot analysis for downstream effector proteins of cell
signaling pathways.
NCI-H2087 cells were treated with increasing doses of metformin (0.5–4
mM) or trametinib (2–20 nM) for 24 h. Phosphorylation was determined
with antibodies against specific phospho-proteins compared to their
total proteins. β-actin was used as a loading control.
Western blot analysis for downstream effector proteins of cell
signaling pathways.
NCI-H2087 cells were treated with increasing doses of metformin (0.5–4
mM) or trametinib (2–20 nM) for 24 h. Phosphorylation was determined
with antibodies against specific phospho-proteins compared to their
total proteins. β-actin was used as a loading control.
Effects of metformin, trametinib and their combination treatment on NSCLC
cell survival
Next, we asked what could be happened in cell survival when combined metformin
with trametinib. To this end, NCI-H2087 cells were exposed to varying
concentrations of drugs as single agent or their combination for 72 h, and cell
survival analysis was performed using MTT assay. As expected, relative cell
viability was decreased following treatment of metformin and trametinib in a
dose-dependent manner. IC50 values (concentrations of drugs leading
to 50% decrease in cell viability relative to controls) for metformin and
trametinib were 3.2 mM and 108.4 nM, respectively. Combination of two drugs at
low doses resulted in a greater inhibition of cell viability than those of
metformin or trametinib alone, while the combination treatment at high doses did
not show the additively increased inhibition of cell viability (Fig. 2A). To quantify the response of NSCLC
cells to the combination of metformin and trametinib, we combined two drugs in a
constant ratio to each other and measured CI and DRI using CompuSyn software.
The CI values in combination at low doses ranged from 0.62 (at the combination
of 0.25 mM metformin and 2.5 nM trametinib) to 0.84 (at the combination of 1 mM
metformin and 10 nM trametinib) indicating synergism according to the method of
Chou-Talalay (Chou & Talalay,
1981). On the other hand, CI values in combination at high doses were
1.33 (at 2 mM metformin and 20 nM trametinib) and 2.08 (at 4 mM metformin and 40
nM trametinib) denoting antagonistic effect between two drugs (Fig. 2B). The DRI values displayed a similar
pattern to that of CI values; combination of two drugs at low doses showed a
remarkable drug reduction effect with DRI Values above 1, and at high doses
little drug reduction effect with DRI values of metformin below 1 (Fig. 2C).
Fig. 2.
Combination of metformin and trametinib has synergistic effect on
cell viability in NCI-H2087 cells.
(A) Representative growth response curves for metformin (Metf),
trametinib (Tra) and the combination in constant ratio (1:10). NCI-H2087
cells were seeded at 5×104 cells/well (0.5 mL) in
24-well culture plates, incubated for 24 h and then treated with
metformin, trametinib and their combination for 72 h. MTT assay was
performed for the determination of cell viability. The viability of
control cells was regarded as 100%. (B) Combination index (CI)
values for the various combination points of metformin and trametinib.
The CI values were calculated by using CompuSyn software. (C) Drug
reduction index (DRI) values of combination of metformin and trametinib.
DRI values indicate how many folds of dose reduction are allowed for
each drug due to synergism as compared to the dose of each drug alone.
(D) Western blot analysis for downstream regulatory proteins of cell
signaling pathways. Cells were treated with trametinib (T, 5 nM),
metformin (M, 1 mM), and their combinations for 24 h. The combination of
both drugs caused synergistic decrease of pERK, p4E-BP1, pS6 s240/244,
and pS6 s235/236. β-actin was used as a loading control.
Combination of metformin and trametinib has synergistic effect on
cell viability in NCI-H2087 cells.
(A) Representative growth response curves for metformin (Metf),
trametinib (Tra) and the combination in constant ratio (1:10). NCI-H2087
cells were seeded at 5×104 cells/well (0.5 mL) in
24-well culture plates, incubated for 24 h and then treated with
metformin, trametinib and their combination for 72 h. MTT assay was
performed for the determination of cell viability. The viability of
control cells was regarded as 100%. (B) Combination index (CI)
values for the various combination points of metformin and trametinib.
The CI values were calculated by using CompuSyn software. (C) Drug
reduction index (DRI) values of combination of metformin and trametinib.
DRI values indicate how many folds of dose reduction are allowed for
each drug due to synergism as compared to the dose of each drug alone.
(D) Western blot analysis for downstream regulatory proteins of cell
signaling pathways. Cells were treated with trametinib (T, 5 nM),
metformin (M, 1 mM), and their combinations for 24 h. The combination of
both drugs caused synergistic decrease of pERK, p4E-BP1, pS6 s240/244,
and pS6 s235/236. β-actin was used as a loading control.To evaluate the mechanisms underlying the synergistic growth inhibitory effect
between metformin and trametinib at low doses, we characterized the effect of
this drug combination on downstream regulatory proteins of cell signaling
pathways involved in cell survival and proliferation using Western blot
analysis. After 24 h of treatment, the combination of metformin and trametinib
led to the enhanced suppression of pERK, p4E-BP1, pS6 (s240/244), pS6 (s235/236)
compared to that of single agent treatment, and trametinib revealed little
effect on metformin-induced activation of AMPK (Fig. 2D).
Effect of metformin in combination with trametinib on colony
formation
In the present study, we showed that the combination of metformin and trametinib
in treatment with low doses synergistically inhibits NSCLC cancer cells. To
extend these results into long-term effect of the combination treatment, we
tried colony formation assay by culturing NCI-H2087 NSCLC cells for 15 days. As
shown in Fig. 3, treatment with metformin
and trametinib alone resulted in a partial inhibition of colony formation,
whereas the combination treatment with low doses enhanced the inhibitory effect
on the formation and growth of cell colonies as compared with either agent
alone. These results further support the synergistic growth inhibitory effect of
metformin and trametinib combination on cell viability assayed by using MTT
assay.
Fig. 3.
Effect of metformin and trametinib combination on colony formation in
NCI-H2087 cells.
Cells were seeded in 6-well plates at a density of 600 cells per well. At
24 h after plating, cells were treated with indicated concentrations of
metformin and/or trametinib. Following 15-day treatment, cell colonies
were stained using crystal violet dye and pictures were taken with a
digital camera. Metf, metformin; Tra, trametinib.
Effect of metformin and trametinib combination on colony formation in
NCI-H2087 cells.
Cells were seeded in 6-well plates at a density of 600 cells per well. At
24 h after plating, cells were treated with indicated concentrations of
metformin and/or trametinib. Following 15-day treatment, cell colonies
were stained using crystal violet dye and pictures were taken with a
digital camera. Metf, metformin; Tra, trametinib.
DISCUSSION
Conventional clinical therapeutics for NSCLC depends on surgical resection of tumor
mass, radiation therapy and chemotherapy. Chemotherapeutic strategies, such as
cisplatin monotherapy or platinum-based combination therapy, give limited benefits
due to drug resistance and serious side effects resulting from killing of normal
cells (Stinchcombe et al., 2010). In NSCLC,
diverse molecular alterations in oncogenic genes involved in cell survival and
proliferation have been known, such as EGFR, RAS, PI3k, and BRAF. Recently, several
small molecule inhibitors targeting these oncogenic mutations have been developed
and proved their efficacies in the treatment of NSCLC. Although these targeted
agents achieved remarkable progress for NSCLCpatients with better overall response
rate and progression-free survival compared with chemotherapeutic agents, most
patients eventually experience relapse due to acquired drug resistance to these
agents (Liu et al., 2020). Therefore, the
new therapeutic strategies to overcome the acquired resistance is required in the
field of NSCLC oncology and current research is focusing on multidrug combination
therapy with minimal side effects.The antidiabetic drug metformin proved to be well-tolerable drug with safety profile
and low cost. Moreover, there is no report for acquired resistance to metformin
although it has been used as first-line treatment for type II diabetes over 60
years. Metformin as monotherapy or combination therapy inhibits the growth and
proliferation of NSCLC cell in vitro and in xenograft model (Yousef & Tsiani, 2017). Our previous
studies also suggested that metformin inhibits mTOR activity via activation of AMPK
and suppresses the phosphorylation of mTOR substrates, 4E-BP1 and S6 in melanoma and
colorectal cancer cells. We also showed that metformin inhibits the activation of
ERK, a key mediator of RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK proliferative signaling pathway (Kim et al., 2018; Ko et al., 2019).However, the effect of metformin on RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK pathway has shown some
controversial results in NSCLC cells. Several studies suggested that metformin
treatment inhibits ERK phosphorylation in diverse NSCLC cells (Do et al., 2013; Ko et al.,
2013). Morgillo and his collaborators (2013), on the other hand, showed
that exposure of metformin to NSCLC cells leads to phosphorylation and activation of
ERK through an increased BRAF/CRAF heterodimerization. Our present study also showed
a remarkable increase of ERK phosphorylation and suppression of mTOR signaling
pathway following metformin treatment in NCI-H2087 NSCLC cells. Although crosstalk
and compensation effect between signaling pathways have been well recognized (De Luca et al., 2012), the molecular mechanism
or cellular context underlying metformin-induced ERK activation is unclear. Since
BRAF/CRAF heterodimerization is a key event for the activation of ERK specifically
in RAS mutant cells (Holderfield et al.,
2014), metformin-induced activation of ERK is most probable in cells with
activated RAS. However, activation of ERK after metformin exposure is observed in
NSCLC cells with wild-type RAS (Corte et al.,
2016). In addition, Martin and his colleagues (2012), using melanoma cell
with BRAF mutation, demonstrated that metformin-induced AMPK activation targets and
reduce the DUSP6 protein, a phosphatase acting as ERK-negative regulator, which
results in increased ERK activity and acceleration of cell growth.The metformin-induced activation of ERK could be important in cancer therapeutics,
since metformin, via activation of ERK, could compromise its well-known anticancer
activity suppressing mTOR signaling pathway. Therefore, we reasoned that suppression
or activation of ERK activity in response to metformin treatment could be the
predictive biomarker for synergism or antagonism when combined metformin with other
molecular targeted agents. To elucidate this subject, we combined metformin with
trametinib, a MEK inhibitor, and found that the combination synergistically
decreases cell viability in treatment with low doses of two drugs, while it gives
antagonistic effect at high doses. Our result is inconsistent with others (Corte et al., 2016) in which the combination
of metformin with MEK inhibitor selumetinib induces synergistic anti-proliferative
effect in NSCLC cell lines, independently from the RAS mutational status. In the
present time, we have no idea for this difference, but we speculate that in our cell
model metformin-induced activation of ERK in combination of two drugs at low doses
is not strong enough to overcome the trametinib-induced inhibition of ERK
activation, but at high doses metformin counteracts the trametinib-induced
inhibition of ERK activity, which in turn leads to cell proliferation and
antagonistic effect. Another plausible explanation for the discrepancy may be the
difference of mutational status in NSCLC cells between the studies; whereas we used
NCI-H2087 cells with BRAF mutation, Corte and his colleagues employed NSCLC cells
with wild type BRAF. In melanoma cells with mutant BRAF, metformin-induced increase
of pERK is dependent on AMPK-induced degradation of DUSP6 protein (Martin et al., 2012). In NCI-H2087 cells with
coexistent mutations of NRAS and BRAF, therefore, AMPK-mediated DUSP6 protein
degradation could potentiate the pERK increase induced by BRAF-CRAF
heterodimerization occurred in the context of RAS mutated cells. In BRAF wild-type
cells, in contrast, trametinib may counteract pERK increase by metformin-mediated
BRAF-CRAF heterodimerization, since MEK inhibitor acts downstream of RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK
signaling pathway.To our knowledge, this study is the first report to show biphasic antitumor effect in
the combination therapy of metformin and trametinib using NSCLC cells. These
findings suggest that the efficacy of metformin and trametinib combination therapy
may depend on the alteration of ERK activity induced by metformin and specific
cellular context of cancer cells such as mutational status. Further studies are
required to elucidate the effect of metformin and trametinib combination in
treatment with high doses, and in vivo effect of this combination
therapy.
Authors: Ramaswamy Govindan; Li Ding; Malachi Griffith; Janakiraman Subramanian; Nathan D Dees; Krishna L Kanchi; Christopher A Maher; Robert Fulton; Lucinda Fulton; John Wallis; Ken Chen; Jason Walker; Sandra McDonald; Ron Bose; David Ornitz; Donghai Xiong; Ming You; David J Dooling; Mark Watson; Elaine R Mardis; Richard K Wilson Journal: Cell Date: 2012-09-14 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Li Ding; Gad Getz; David A Wheeler; Elaine R Mardis; Michael D McLellan; Kristian Cibulskis; Carrie Sougnez; Heidi Greulich; Donna M Muzny; Margaret B Morgan; Lucinda Fulton; Robert S Fulton; Qunyuan Zhang; Michael C Wendl; Michael S Lawrence; David E Larson; Ken Chen; David J Dooling; Aniko Sabo; Alicia C Hawes; Hua Shen; Shalini N Jhangiani; Lora R Lewis; Otis Hall; Yiming Zhu; Tittu Mathew; Yanru Ren; Jiqiang Yao; Steven E Scherer; Kerstin Clerc; Ginger A Metcalf; Brian Ng; Aleksandar Milosavljevic; Manuel L Gonzalez-Garay; John R Osborne; Rick Meyer; Xiaoqi Shi; Yuzhu Tang; Daniel C Koboldt; Ling Lin; Rachel Abbott; Tracie L Miner; Craig Pohl; Ginger Fewell; Carrie Haipek; Heather Schmidt; Brian H Dunford-Shore; Aldi Kraja; Seth D Crosby; Christopher S Sawyer; Tammi Vickery; Sacha Sander; Jody Robinson; Wendy Winckler; Jennifer Baldwin; Lucian R Chirieac; Amit Dutt; Tim Fennell; Megan Hanna; Bruce E Johnson; Robert C Onofrio; Roman K Thomas; Giovanni Tonon; Barbara A Weir; Xiaojun Zhao; Liuda Ziaugra; Michael C Zody; Thomas Giordano; Mark B Orringer; Jack A Roth; Margaret R Spitz; Ignacio I Wistuba; Bradley Ozenberger; Peter J Good; Andrew C Chang; David G Beer; Mark A Watson; Marc Ladanyi; Stephen Broderick; Akihiko Yoshizawa; William D Travis; William Pao; Michael A Province; George M Weinstock; Harold E Varmus; Stacey B Gabriel; Eric S Lander; Richard A Gibbs; Matthew Meyerson; Richard K Wilson Journal: Nature Date: 2008-10-23 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Takla Griss; Emma E Vincent; Robert Egnatchik; Jocelyn Chen; Eric H Ma; Brandon Faubert; Benoit Viollet; Ralph J DeBerardinis; Russell G Jones Journal: PLoS Biol Date: 2015-12-01 Impact factor: 8.029