Chinatsu Kurasaka1, Nana Nishizawa1, Yoko Ogino1,2, Akira Sato1. 1. Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Tokyo University of Science, 2641 Yamazaki, Noda, Chiba 278-8510, Japan. 2. Department of Gene Regulation, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Tokyo University of Science, 2641 Yamazaki, Noda, Chiba 278-8510, Japan.
Abstract
The major metabolite of the anticancer agent 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is 5-fluorodeoxyuridine monophosphate (FdUMP), which is a potent inhibitor of thymidylate synthase (TS). Recently, we hypothesized that 5-FU-resistant colorectal cancer (CRC) cells have increased levels of TS protein relative to 5-FU-sensitive CRC cells and use a fraction of their TS to trap FdUMP, which results in resistance to 5-FU. In this study, we analyzed the difference between the regulation of the balance of the free, active form of TS and the inactive FdUMP-TS form in 5-FU-resistant HCT116 cells and parental HCT116 cells. Silencing of TYMS, the gene that encodes TS, resulted in greater enhancement of the anticancer effect of 5-FU in the 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells than in the parental HCT116 cells. In addition, the trapping of FdUMP by TS was more effective in the 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells than in the parental HCT116 cells. Our observations suggest that the regulation of the balance between the storage of the active TS form and the accumulation of FdUMP-TS is responsible for direct resistance to 5-FU. The findings provide a better understanding of 5-FU resistance mechanisms and may enable the development of anticancer strategies that reverse the sensitivity of 5-FU resistance in CRC cells.
The major metabolite of the anticancer agent 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is 5-fluorodeoxyuridine monophosphate (FdUMP), which is a potent inhibitor of thymidylate synthase (TS). Recently, we hypothesized that 5-FU-resistant colorectal cancer (CRC) cells have increased levels of TS protein relative to 5-FU-sensitive CRC cells and use a fraction of their TS to trap FdUMP, which results in resistance to 5-FU. In this study, we analyzed the difference between the regulation of the balance of the free, active form of TS and the inactive FdUMP-TS form in 5-FU-resistant HCT116 cells and parental HCT116 cells. Silencing of TYMS, the gene that encodes TS, resulted in greater enhancement of the anticancer effect of 5-FU in the 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells than in the parental HCT116 cells. In addition, the trapping of FdUMP by TS was more effective in the 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells than in the parental HCT116 cells. Our observations suggest that the regulation of the balance between the storage of the active TS form and the accumulation of FdUMP-TS is responsible for direct resistance to 5-FU. The findings provide a better understanding of 5-FU resistance mechanisms and may enable the development of anticancer strategies that reverse the sensitivity of 5-FU resistance in CRC cells.
5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) is a key anticancer
drug used for the chemotherapy
of colorectal cancer (CRC).[1,2] In the body, 5-FU is
converted to 5-fluorodeoxyuridine monophosphate (FdUMP), which is
a potent inhibitor of thymidylate synthase (TS).[2−4] TS, encoded
by the TYMS gene in humans, catalyzes the conversion
of dUMP to dTMP using the co-substrate 5,10-methylenetetrahydrofolate
(CH2-THF).[5] FdUMP forms a covalent ternary
complex with TS and CH2-THF.[1,2,4,6−8] This covalent
ternary complex inhibits TS, depletes the intracellular dTTP pool,
and subsequently inhibits DNA synthesis.[1−4] In addition, 5-FU can exert cytotoxic effects
through its incorporation into DNA and RNA as fluorodeoxyuridine triphosphate
(FdUTP) and fluorouridine triphosphate (FUTP), respectively.[1−3]Cancer cells are known to acquire resistance to anticancer
drugs
through a variety of mechanisms. The common cancer resistance mechanisms
include inactivation of drugs, enhancement of drug efflux, alteration
of drug target molecules, utilization of bypass pathways, facilitation
of DNA damage repair, and escaping cell death.[1,2,9] Many studies have examined the mechanisms
of resistance to 5-FU and its derivatives.[1,2,9] The function and/or expression of TS and
other enzymes related to the 5-FU anabolism or catabolism pathways
are often altered, accelerating resistance to 5-FU.[1,2,9−11] In addition, the known
mechanisms of 5-FU resistance are perturbance of cell death and autophagy,
altered epigenetic repression, and expression/functional changes in
drug transporters and noncoding RNA (i.e., microRNA and long noncoding
RNA).[1,2,9] It is widely
considered that TS is part of an important molecular mechanism that
enhances 5-FU sensitivity and that targeting TS is an excellent strategy
to reverse 5-FU resistance.[1,2,12] Indeed, numerous studies have shown that the gene amplification
of TYMS, leading to mRNA and protein overexpression
is a major mechanism of resistance to 5-FU and its derivatives.[12−15] In addition, we have shown that 5-FU-resistant CRC cells increase TYMS expression relative to 5-FU-sensitive CRC cells and
use a fraction of TS to trap FdUMP, which results in resistance to
5-FU and its derivatives.[16] We predict
that the regulation of TS status, which refers to the balance between
the active free-TS form and the inactive FdUMP-TS covalent complex,
may confer 5-FU resistance.[16]In
this study, we investigated the anticancer sensitivity of the
5-FU-resistant HCT116 cells and the parental HCT116 cells to 5-FU
after TYMS knockdown. In addition, we analyzed the
difference in the regulation of the balance between the active free-TS
form and the inactive FdUMP-TS form in 5-FU-resistant HCT116 cells
and the parental HCT116 cells. We discussed the possibility of the
FdUMP trapping by the TS protein as one of the mechanisms of 5-FU
resistance.
Results
Knockdown of TYMS Enhances
the Anticancer Effect
of 5-FU on 5-FU-Resistant HCT116RF10 Cells Compared with
the Effect on Parental HCT116 Cells
The main anticancer mechanism
of 5-FU is inhibiting TS by FdUMP, an active metabolite of 5-FU.[1,2,17] The fundamental mechanism for
this activity, proposed by Santi in 1980,[4] is that FdUMP forms a covalent ternary complex with TS and CH2-THF.[4] We have investigated the mechanisms of resistance
to 5-FU in human CRC cell models, 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells, and parental HCT116 cells, revealing their genetic background
by exome analysis. The concentration that confers 50% efficacy (EC50) of 5-FU in the 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 and
parental HCT116 cells in the colony formation and WST-8 assays is
shown in Table and Figures A,B. We recently
hypothesized that 5-FU-resistant CRC cells have upregulated TYMS expression
and use a fraction of their TS to trap FdUMP, resulting in 5-FU resistance.[16] Indeed, the protein levels of free-TS, FdUMP-TS-CH2-THF
covalent complex, and total TS were significantly higher in HCT116RF10 cells than in HCT116 cells under the passage culture conditions
(Figures C,D). Additionally,
the protein levels of free-TS (native enzyme), FdUMP-TS covalent complex
(which we termed as FdUMP-TS), and total TS were individually about
1.6–1.8-fold higher in HCT116RF10 cells than in
HCT116 cells after treatment with 100 μM 5-FU for 24 h. In these
experiments, we tested 5-FU at a concentration of 100 μM, which
has a sufficient anticancer effect in HCT116RF10 and HCT116
cells. Interestingly, the total TS and FdUMP-TS levels were upregulated
about twofold in HCT116 cells but not in HCT116RF10 cells
after treatment with 5-FU for 24 h compared with individual subculture
conditions. These results indicate that the 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells may have a system that traps FdUMP with TS and removes
FdUMP-TS as a resistance mechanism.
Table 1
Summary of 5-FU Sensitivities in the
5-FU-Resistant HCT116RF10 Cells and Parental HCT116 Cells
EC50 (μM)
cell line
colony formation
WST-8
HCT116
5.5
5.1
HCT116RF10
38.0
29.0
Figure 1
Two TS protein forms, free-TS and FdUMP-TS,
are higher in 5-FU-resistant
HCT116RF10 cells than in 5-FU-sensitive parental HCT116
cells. (A) 5-FU sensitivity of HCT116 and HCT116RF10 cells
using colony formation assay. The cells were treated with the indicated
concentration of 5-FU and incubated for 10 d. Colony formation (%)
represents the average of three independent experiments, with error
bars showing the ±SE (standard error) of triplicates. Solid circle,
HCT116RF10 cells; open circle, HCT116 cells. (B) Cells
were tested for cell activity after 72 h of treatment with the indicated
concentration of 5-FU. Results represent the averages of three independent
experiments, with error bars showing the ±SE of triplicates.
(C) Protein levels of TS and β-actin in HCT116RF10 and HCT116 cells. Whole-cell lysates were prepared from parental
HCT116 and HCT116RF10 cells. The expression levels of β-actin
were used as an internal control. The data represent at least three
independent experiments. (D) Protein levels of two TS forms, free-TS
and FdUMP-TS, in HCT116 and HCT116RF10 cells. TS protein
levels in HCT116RF10 cells are shown by the ratio of TS
density to β-actin density relative to the control value for
HCT116 cells. Results represent the average of three independent experiments,
with error bars showing the ±SE of triplicates. C, control; passage
culture condition of parental HCT116 cells (no drug or solvent). C#,
passage culture condition of 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells;
the cells were continually treated with 10 μM 5-FU. 5-FU, the
cells were treated with 100 μM 5-FU for 24 h. White bar, free-TS
form; gray bar, FdUMP-TS form. Student’s t-test, **p < 0.01 and ***p <
0.001. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), p <
0.0001 (for each total TS and FdUMP-TS levels of all groups).
Two TS protein forms, free-TS and FdUMP-TS,
are higher in 5-FU-resistant
HCT116RF10 cells than in 5-FU-sensitive parental HCT116
cells. (A) 5-FU sensitivity of HCT116 and HCT116RF10 cells
using colony formation assay. The cells were treated with the indicated
concentration of 5-FU and incubated for 10 d. Colony formation (%)
represents the average of three independent experiments, with error
bars showing the ±SE (standard error) of triplicates. Solid circle,
HCT116RF10 cells; open circle, HCT116 cells. (B) Cells
were tested for cell activity after 72 h of treatment with the indicated
concentration of 5-FU. Results represent the averages of three independent
experiments, with error bars showing the ±SE of triplicates.
(C) Protein levels of TS and β-actin in HCT116RF10 and HCT116 cells. Whole-cell lysates were prepared from parental
HCT116 and HCT116RF10 cells. The expression levels of β-actin
were used as an internal control. The data represent at least three
independent experiments. (D) Protein levels of two TS forms, free-TS
and FdUMP-TS, in HCT116 and HCT116RF10 cells. TS protein
levels in HCT116RF10 cells are shown by the ratio of TS
density to β-actin density relative to the control value for
HCT116 cells. Results represent the average of three independent experiments,
with error bars showing the ±SE of triplicates. C, control; passage
culture condition of parental HCT116 cells (no drug or solvent). C#,
passage culture condition of 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells;
the cells were continually treated with 10 μM 5-FU. 5-FU, the
cells were treated with 100 μM 5-FU for 24 h. White bar, free-TS
form; gray bar, FdUMP-TS form. Student’s t-test, **p < 0.01 and ***p <
0.001. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), p <
0.0001 (for each total TS and FdUMP-TS levels of all groups).First, to elucidate
the relationship between 5-FU resistance and TYMS expression, we analyzed the anticancer activity of
5-FU in the 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells and parental
HCT116 cells transfected with TYMS-targeted siRNA.
HCT116 and HCT116RF10 cells were treated with the indicated
concentration of 5-FU (EC20 values: 3 μM for HCT116
cells; 15 μM for HCT116RF10 cells), respectively.
Additionally, the knockdown of TYMS enhanced the
anticancer activity of 5-FU in both types of CRC cells (Figure A–C). In the parental
HCT116 cells, the percentage of colony formation following 5-FU treatment
was lower when the cells were transfected with TYMS-targeted siRNA (28%) than with nonsilencing siRNA (55%) (Figures A,C). Similarly,
in 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells (Figures B,C), the percentage of colony formation
after 5-FU treatment was lower after transfection with TYMS-targeted siRNA (51%) than with nonsilencing siRNA (79%). The enhancement
of the anticancer effect of 5-FU cytotoxicity by TYMS knockdown was stronger in HCT116RF10 cells (186%) than
in parental HCT116 cells (50%) (Figure D). There are numerous reports that the phenotype of
5-FU sensitivity and resistance is influenced by the levels of TS
protein and enzymatic activity in cancer cells.[13−15,18] These observations suggest that the TS protein’s
intracellular abundance, status, and function are important for the
phenotypic characteristics of sensitivity and resistance to 5-FU in
cancer cells.
Figure 2
TYMS knockdown results in stronger enhancement
of the anticancer activity of 5-FU in HCT116RF10 cells
than in HCT116 cells. (A) Image of colony formation in HCT116 cells.
(B) Image of colony formation in HCT116RF10 cells. Anticancer
activity of 5-FU in HCT116RF10 cells and HCT116 cells,
measured using the colony formation assay. HCT116RF10 cells
and HCT116 cells were transfected with TYMS-targeted
siRNA or nonsilencing siRNA. Then, both types of cells were treated
with the indicated concentration of 5-FU and incubated for 9 days.
NT, nontreatment; vehicle, lipofectamine RNAiMax alone; NT(S), solvent
(dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)); NSsi, nonsilencing siRNA; TSsi, TYMS-targeted siRNA; 5-FU(3), 5-FU 3 μM; 5-FU(15),
5-FU 15 μM. (C) Colony formation (%) represents the average
of three independent experiments, each performed in duplicate, with
error bars showing the SE of triplicate experiments. Student’s t-test, # p = 0.0840, ## p = 0.0828, and one-way ANOVA, p < 0.0001 (for
all groups). (D) 5-FU efficacy (%) indicates the enhancement of 5-FU
efficacy in HCT116RF10 cells and HCT116 cells, respectively.
5-FU efficacy was calculated using the values for colony formation:
5-FU efficacy (%) = (NSsi + 5-FU – TSsi + 5-FU)/(NSsi alone
– TSsi alone) × 100. White bar, P: parental
HCT116 cells; black bar, R: 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells.
Student’s t-test, # p = 0.2273
(vs P) and F-test p = 0.0219 (vs P).
TYMS knockdown results in stronger enhancement
of the anticancer activity of 5-FU in HCT116RF10 cells
than in HCT116 cells. (A) Image of colony formation in HCT116 cells.
(B) Image of colony formation in HCT116RF10 cells. Anticancer
activity of 5-FU in HCT116RF10 cells and HCT116 cells,
measured using the colony formation assay. HCT116RF10 cells
and HCT116 cells were transfected with TYMS-targeted
siRNA or nonsilencing siRNA. Then, both types of cells were treated
with the indicated concentration of 5-FU and incubated for 9 days.
NT, nontreatment; vehicle, lipofectamine RNAiMax alone; NT(S), solvent
(dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)); NSsi, nonsilencing siRNA; TSsi, TYMS-targeted siRNA; 5-FU(3), 5-FU 3 μM; 5-FU(15),
5-FU 15 μM. (C) Colony formation (%) represents the average
of three independent experiments, each performed in duplicate, with
error bars showing the SE of triplicate experiments. Student’s t-test, # p = 0.0840, ## p = 0.0828, and one-way ANOVA, p < 0.0001 (for
all groups). (D) 5-FU efficacy (%) indicates the enhancement of 5-FU
efficacy in HCT116RF10 cells and HCT116 cells, respectively.
5-FU efficacy was calculated using the values for colony formation:
5-FU efficacy (%) = (NSsi + 5-FU – TSsi + 5-FU)/(NSsi alone
– TSsi alone) × 100. White bar, P: parental
HCT116 cells; black bar, R: 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells.
Student’s t-test, # p = 0.2273
(vs P) and F-test p = 0.0219 (vs P).
Trapping of FdUMP by the
TS Protein is More Effective in 5-FU-Resistant
HCT116RF10 Cells than in Parental HCT116 Cells
We tested the hypothesis that the TS protein is utilized to trap
FdUMP, which results in resistance to 5-FU. As shown in Figure A,B, the expression of TYMS in untreated and 5-FU-treated parental HCT116 cells
and 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells was suppressed by transfection
of TYMS-targeted siRNA. In the untreated stage, the
knockdown efficacies of the TS protein were 86% in HCT116 cells and
63% in HCT116RF10 cells transfected with TYMS-targeted siRNA compared to that in both cells transfected with nonsilencing
siRNA, respectively. The other control experiment, in which nonsilencing
siRNA was transfected, showed no effect on the expression of TS and
β-actin in either cell type. Similarly, the transfection of TYMS-targeted siRNA in both types of cells showed no impact
on the expression of β-actin. These control experiments showed
similar protein levels of TS and β-actin in HCT116 cells and
HCT116RF10 cells under both the passage culture condition
and 5-FU-treated condition (Figure D). In both types of nonsilencing siRNA-transfected
TS, i.e., total TS, appears to be overproduced in HCT116RF10 cells compared with the parental HCT116 cells with and without 5-FU
treatment. The same results were observed when both cell types were
transfected with TYMS-targeted siRNA. The induction
of TS after treatment with 5-FU for 24 h was higher in parental HCT116
cells (1.7-fold increase in NSsi-transfected cells and 2.1-fold increase
in TSsi-transfected cells) than in the 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells (1.4-fold increase in NSsi-transfected cells and
1.5-fold increase in TSsi-transfected cells). Furthermore, the accumulation
of the FdUMP-TS protein after 5-FU for 24 h was dramatically increased
in HCT116RF10 cells (1.8–3.0-fold higher) compared
with HCT116 cells transfected with nonsilencing siRNA or TYMS-targeted siRNA. It is known that the FdUMP-TS protein band, indicating
the FdUMP-covalent form, represents TS in ternary complexes and is
correlated with the intracellular concentration of FdUMP.[19−22] Similarly, the storage of active free-TS protein after 5-FU for
24 h was significantly increased in HCT116RF10 cells (2.5–2.9-fold
higher) compared with HCT116 cells after transfection of nonsilencing
siRNA or TYMS-targeted siRNA. Notably, the expression
of free-TS protein in 5-FU-resistant HCT11RF10 cells was
decreased (19% at 24 h and 26% at 48 h in NSsi-transfected cells;
23% at 24 h and 23% at 48 h in TSsi-transfected cells) by 5-FU treatment
compared with no treatment after transfection of TYMS-targeted siRNA or nonsilencing siRNA, respectively. Similarly, the
expression of free-TS protein in parental HCT116 cells was decreased
(36% at 24 h and 37% at 48 h in NSsi-transfected cells; 21% at 24
h and 32% at 48 h in TSsi-transfected cells) by 5-FU treatment compared
with the untreated control after transfection TYMS-targeted siRNA or nonsilencing siRNA. These observations indicate
that the regulation of the balance between the storage of active free-TS
and the accumulation of FdUMP-TS is a leading cause of direct resistance
to 5-FU.
Figure 3
Trapping efficiency of FdUMP by TS is higher in HCT116RF10 cells than in parental HCT116 cells. (A) Dynamics of the TS protein
in TYMS-silenced HCT116RF10 cells and
HCT116 cells after treatment with 5-FU. At 48 h after transfection
with TYMS-targeted siRNA or nonsilencing siRNA, the
cells were treated with 5-FU 100 μM for the indicated treatment
time, and whole-cell lysates were prepared. The protein expression
of TS and β-actin was measured by Western blotting analysis.
The data are representative of at least three independent experiments.
NSsi, nonsilencing siRNA; TSsi, TYMS-targeted siRNA;
(B) TS protein level in HCT116RF10 cells and HCT116 cells.
The levels of total TS, i.e., the active free-TS form and the inactive
FdUMP-TS form, are indicated by the ratio of TS density to β-actin
density for each treatment relative to the value for the NSsi-transfected
parental HCT116 cells without 5-FU. The results represent the average
of three independent experiments and the error bars show the ±SE
of triplicate experiments. White bar, free-TS form; gray bar, FdUMP-TS
form. Student’s t-test, * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01, one-way ANOVA, p < 0.001 (for total TS levels of all groups), and p < 0.05 (for FdUMP-TS levels of all groups).
Trapping efficiency of FdUMP by TS is higher in HCT116RF10 cells than in parental HCT116 cells. (A) Dynamics of the TS protein
in TYMS-silenced HCT116RF10 cells and
HCT116 cells after treatment with 5-FU. At 48 h after transfection
with TYMS-targeted siRNA or nonsilencing siRNA, the
cells were treated with 5-FU 100 μM for the indicated treatment
time, and whole-cell lysates were prepared. The protein expression
of TS and β-actin was measured by Western blotting analysis.
The data are representative of at least three independent experiments.
NSsi, nonsilencing siRNA; TSsi, TYMS-targeted siRNA;
(B) TS protein level in HCT116RF10 cells and HCT116 cells.
The levels of total TS, i.e., the active free-TS form and the inactive
FdUMP-TS form, are indicated by the ratio of TS density to β-actin
density for each treatment relative to the value for the NSsi-transfected
parental HCT116 cells without 5-FU. The results represent the average
of three independent experiments and the error bars show the ±SE
of triplicate experiments. White bar, free-TS form; gray bar, FdUMP-TS
form. Student’s t-test, * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01, one-way ANOVA, p < 0.001 (for total TS levels of all groups), and p < 0.05 (for FdUMP-TS levels of all groups).
Discussion
TS, which is encoded by the TYMS gene in humans,
catalyzes the conversion of dUMP to dTMP using the co-substrate CH2-THF
as a methyl donor.[5] The TS enzyme is believed
to exist in two forms, a monomer and a dimer, which are in monomer–homodimer
equilibrium.[5] The TS dimer is essential
for its catalytic activity. It is known that binding of TS, in its
dimeric form, to its own mRNA leads to the formation of an autoregulatory
feedback loop that represses the translation of TYMS mRNA.[19,23−26] Many mechanisms have been proposed
to explain 5-FU resistance in cancer cells. One important mechanism
is the disruption of the autoregulatory feedback loop for the repression
of translation. TS ligands, such as 5-FU, disrupt the binding of the
TS enzyme with TYMS mRNA, leading to translational
derepression and overproduction of the TS enzyme.[19,25,26] In addition to translational derepression,
enzyme stabilization has been suggested as the primary mechanism of
TS induction by fluoropyrimidines in human CRC and ovarian cancer
cell lines.[27−29] Furthermore, it is proposed that fluoropyrimidine-mediated
increases in TS levels are induced by its effect on TS enzyme stability,
with no effect on TYMS mRNA.[28,30,31] The amplification of TYMS, leading to the overproduction of TYMS mRNA and
TS protein, is another mechanism of resistance to fluoropyrimidines
like 5-FU and its derivatives.[12] These
observations indicated that an understanding of translational derepression,
enzyme stabilization, and gene amplification as the process of TS
induction can help to elucidate the mechanism of the acquisition of
5-FU resistance. These findings clearly suggest that the mechanisms
of 5-FU resistance are a complex and serious problem.Recently,
we established a 5-FU-resistant cell line, HCT116RF10 cells,
from parental human CRC HCT116 cells and analyzed
the resistance mechanisms of 5-FU.[16] In
previous findings, HCT116RF10 cells were weakly sensitive
to SN-38, the active metabolite of irinotecan, and cisplatin compared
with the parental HCT116 cells.[16] The sensitivity
of SN-38 and cisplatin was 1.4-fold (EC50 = 3 nM in HCT116RF10 cells; 4.2 nM in HCT116 cells) and 1.2-fold (EC50 = 4.5 μM in HCT116RF10 cells; 5.2 μM in HCT116
cells) higher in HCT116RF10 cells than in parental HCT116
cells, respectively.[16] Additionally, the
parental HCT116 cells grow with a doubling time of approximately 18
h. In contrast, 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells grow with
a doubling time of approximately 27 h in both passage culture conditions
with and without 10 μM 5-FU. Interestingly, the 5-FU-resistant
HCT116RF10 cells exhibited a lower ability to form colonies
and tumor spheres compared with parental HCT116 cells in colony formation
and three-dimensional cell culture experiments.[16] We consider that the difference of proliferation capacity
and clonogenicity may be less relevant to anticancer drug sensitivity
in HCT116RF10 cells and HCT116 cells. Further, we previously
reported that 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells have increased TYMS expression relative to 5-FU-sensitive parental HCT116
cells and they use a fraction of TS to trap FdUMP, thereby resulting
in resistance to 5-FU and its derivative fluorodeoxyuridine.[16]In this study, we demonstrated that the
regulation of the balance
between the storage of active free-TS and the accumulation of inactive
FdUMP-TS is responsible for the resistance to 5-FU. Our findings suggest
that the TS enzyme in 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells can
actively and efficiently trap FdUMP. Notably, several studies have
shown that 5-FU treatment enhances TS enzyme induction, mainly the
ternary complex among TS, FdUMP, and CH2-THF in various human CRC
cells and tissues.[1,2,12,32−34] Indeed, the expression
levels of TYMS mRNA and TS protein are molecular
biomarkers predicting tumor sensitivity to 5-FU.[1,2] Additionally,
5-FU resistance is associated with the level of TS protein and enzymatic
activity in several human CRC cells and tumors.[1,2,12,32] The numerous
findings may support the hypothesis that the trapping of FdUMP by
TS enzyme confers resistance to 5-FU and its derivatives, in that
several CRC cells and patients with high TS levels are less sensitive
to 5-FU. However, it is critical that many studies to date have not
discussed the relationship between the FdUMP trapping capacity by
TS enzyme, i.e., FdUMP-TS level at total TS level, and the anticancer
sensitivity to 5-FU in human CRC cells. Previously, many researchers
understood that 5-FU exerts its anticancer effects through inhibition
of TS by its active metabolite FdUMP and incorporation of 5-FU’s
metabolites, i.e., FUMP and FdUMP, into RNA and DNA, respectively.
In particular, we realize that the main anticancer mechanism of 5-FU
is inhibiting TS by its active metabolite, FdUMP. In this study, particularly,
our findings suggest that the TS enzyme, which is the target of FdUMP,
acts as a resistance factor that traps FdUMP in 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells. We think that additional studies in several 5-FU-resistant
human CRC cells are needed to understand the mechanisms of 5-FU resistance
utilizing the trap of FdUMP by the TS enzyme. We also consider that
the regulatory mechanisms of monomeric and dimeric TS protein form
differ between 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells and the
5-FU-sensitive parental HCT116 cells. We further investigated the
relationship between the regulation of TS protein status, i.e., the
balance between active form of free-TS and the inactive TS form (FdUMP-TS–CH2-THF),
and that the potential regulators of 5-FU resistance include TS-interacting
proteins, mRNAs, and noncoding RNAs.
Conclusions
Collectively,
we demonstrated that the trapping of FdUMP by its
target enzyme TS confers resistance to 5-FU. In addition, we showed
that 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells became resistant to
5-FU by regulating the balance between the storage of the active TS
protein and the accumulation of FdUMP-TS protein. In contrast, parental
HCT116 cells are sensitized to 5-FU by the depletion of TS, which
is due to the formation of the FdUMP-TS complex (Figure ). Our findings provide a better
understanding of the mechanisms of 5-FU resistance and may lead to
the development of anticancer strategies to reverse sensitivity to
5-FU and its derivatives.
Figure 4
Predictive model of the regulation of TS status
by balancing the
accumulation of the inactive FdUMP-TS form and the storage of the
active free-TS form in the 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells
and parental HCT116 cells. We show that the trapping of FdUMP by TS
enzyme is more effective in 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells
than in parental HCT116 cells. In addition, we predict that the regulation
of the balance between the storage of the active TS form and the accumulation
of FdUMP-TS is responsible for direct resistance to 5-FU. 5-FU, 5-fluorouracil;
FUdR, 5-fluorodeoxyuridine; FdUMP, 5-fluorodeoxyuridine monophosphate;
TS, thymidylate synthase.
Predictive model of the regulation of TS status
by balancing the
accumulation of the inactive FdUMP-TS form and the storage of the
active free-TS form in the 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells
and parental HCT116 cells. We show that the trapping of FdUMP by TS
enzyme is more effective in 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cells
than in parental HCT116 cells. In addition, we predict that the regulation
of the balance between the storage of the active TS form and the accumulation
of FdUMP-TS is responsible for direct resistance to 5-FU. 5-FU, 5-fluorouracil;
FUdR, 5-fluorodeoxyuridine; FdUMP, 5-fluorodeoxyuridine monophosphate;
TS, thymidylate synthase.
Materials
and Methods
Reagents
5-FU was purchased from FUJIFILM Wako Pure
Chemical (Osaka, Japan) and stored as a 100 mM stock in dimethyl sulfoxide
(DMSO; Sigma-Aldrich, Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany) at −25
°C. The TYMS-targeted siRNA (Hs_TYMS_3 FlexiTube
siRNA, catalog number: SI00021616, sequence: unpublished) and nonsilencing
siRNA (AllStars negative control siRNA, catalog number: 1027280, sequence:
unpublished) were obtained from QIAGEN (Dusseldorf, Germany) and stored
as a 20 μM stock solution in RNase-free water at −25
°C. Invitrogen Lipofectamine RNAiMax reagent was purchased from
Thermo Fisher Scientific (Waltham, MA).
Cell Lines and Cell Culture
The human CRC cell line
HCT116 was obtained from the American Type Culture Collection (Manassas,
VA). 5-FU-resistant HCT116 (HCT116RF10) cells were produced
in accordance with a previously described method.[16] The parental HCT116 and 5-FU-resistant HCT116RF10 cell lines were then cultured as previously described.[16] Both the parental HCT116 cells and the 5-FU-resistant
HCT116RF10 cells were grown in Dulbecco’s modified
Eagle’s medium (D-MEM, Cat#:043-30085, FUJIFILM Wako Pure Chemical).
The culture medium contained 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum,
100 units/mL penicillin, and 100 μg/mL streptomycin.
Transfection
The transfection of TYMS-targeted siRNA (TSsi)
or nonsilencing siRNA (NSsi) was performed
using the Lipofectamine RNAiMax reagent (Thermo Fisher Scientific)
in accordance with the manufacturer’s protocol. Briefly, cells
were seeded into six-well plates (5 × 104 cells/well)
and then incubated overnight. Prior to transfection, the culture medium
was exchanged for 1 mL/well Opti-MEM (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The
cells were transfected with TSsi or NSsi (each at 10 nM final concentration).
At 4–6 h after transfection, the medium was removed and replaced
with an antibiotic-free culture medium.
Colony Formation Assay
The colony formation assay was
performed in accordance with a previously described method.[16,35,36] The cells were detached using
Accutase, suspended in medium, inoculated into six-well plates (200
cells/well), and incubated overnight. Experiments were performed in
triplicate. The cells were treated with various concentrations of
5-FU or with solvent (i.e., DMSO) as the negative control. After incubation
for 10 days, the cells were fixed with 4% formaldehyde solution, stained
with 0.1% (w/v) crystal violet, and the number of colonies in each
well was counted. In the transfection experiments, the cells were
transfected with TSsi or NSsi (10 nM, as above). After incubation
for 24 h, the cells were treated with various concentrations of 5-FU
or with DMSO. After incubation for 9 days, the colonies were fixed,
stained, and counted.
Cell Activity by WST-8 Assay
Cell
activity assays were
performed as previously described.[16] Cell
activity was determined using the Cell Counting Kit-8 (WST-8) cell
proliferation assay (Dojindo, Tokyo, Japan).
Western Blotting
Western blotting analysis was performed
as previously described.[16,35] The antibodies used
were rabbit anti-thymidylate synthase (D5B3) monoclonal antibody (9045S,
1:1000, Cell Signaling Technologies, Massachusetts), mouse anti-DPYD
(A-5) monoclonal antibody (sc-376712, 1:1000, Santa Cruz Biotechnology,
Texas), mouse anti-β-actin monoclonal antibody (A19178-200UL,
1:20 000, Sigma-Aldrich), horseradish peroxidase-linked antirabbit
IgG (1:20 000, GE Healthcare, Connecticut), and horseradish
peroxidase-linked whole-antibody antimouse IgG (1:20 000, GE
Healthcare).
Statistical Analysis
Statistical
analyses were performed
using GraphPad Prism 9 software. The data are presented as the mean
± standard error. Significant differences among groups were evaluated
using Student’s t-test, F-test, and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). A p value of <0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.
Authors: Divita Garg; Stefan Henrich; Outi M H Salo-Ahen; Hannu Myllykallio; Maria P Costi; Rebecca C Wade Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2010-09-23 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Weiguang Wang; Howard L McLeod; James Cassidy; Elaina S R Collie-Duguid Journal: Cancer Chemother Pharmacol Date: 2006-11-22 Impact factor: 3.333
Authors: G J Peters; C L van der Wilt; B van Triest; G Codacci-Pisanelli; P G Johnston; C J van Groeningen; H M Pinedo Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 1995 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: P G Johnston; H J Lenz; C G Leichman; K D Danenberg; C J Allegra; P V Danenberg; L Leichman Journal: Cancer Res Date: 1995-04-01 Impact factor: 12.701