AIM: To screen five potential pharmacological substances specifically targeting EGF-R, MAPK, mTOR, or PI3K for their antiproliferative effects, possible impact on cell viability, as well as cell death rates on three different uveal melanoma metastasis cell lines in vitro. METHODS: Three different uveal melanoma metastasis cell lines (OMM2.5, OMM2.3, and OMM1), that originated from human hepatic and subcutaneous metastasis, were exposed to inhibitors of different targets: erlotinib (EGF-R), everolimus (mTOR), selumetinib (MAPK), trametinib (MAPK) or the alkylphosphocholine erufosine (PI3K). Cell viability was assessed with a 2,3-bis-(2-methoxy-4-nitro-5-sulfophenyl)-2H-tetrazolium-5-carboxanilide (XTT) dye reduction assay after 24h of treatment. Antiproliferative effects were evaluated separately after a 72-hour incubation of the cells with the pharmacological substance. Subsequently, the IC50 was calculated. Tumor cell death was investigated using a double stain apoptosis detection assay. RESULTS: Selumetinib, trametinib, and erufosine significantly decreased cell viability of all OMM cell lines (P<0.04). In addition, selumetinib and trametinib showed a significant inhibition of cell proliferation (P<0.05). Everolimus and erlotinib solely inhibited cell proliferation at the used concentrations (P<0.05). Besides an increase of necrotic cells after erufosine treatment (P<0.001), no changes in the number of dead cells for the other substances were observed. CONCLUSION: The preliminary drug screening demonstrates five new candidates, successfully targeting the canonical MAPK/ERK and PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathways in uveal melanoma metastasis cells in vitro. Hence, these findings provide an experimental basis to explore future single or combined therapy strategies for metastatic uveal melanoma. International Journal of Ophthalmology Press.
AIM: To screen five potential pharmacological substances specifically targeting EGF-R, MAPK, mTOR, or PI3K for their antiproliferative effects, possible impact on cell viability, as well as cell death rates on three different uveal melanoma metastasis cell lines in vitro. METHODS: Three different uveal melanoma metastasis cell lines (OMM2.5, OMM2.3, and OMM1), that originated from human hepatic and subcutaneous metastasis, were exposed to inhibitors of different targets: erlotinib (EGF-R), everolimus (mTOR), selumetinib (MAPK), trametinib (MAPK) or the alkylphosphocholine erufosine (PI3K). Cell viability was assessed with a 2,3-bis-(2-methoxy-4-nitro-5-sulfophenyl)-2H-tetrazolium-5-carboxanilide (XTT) dye reduction assay after 24h of treatment. Antiproliferative effects were evaluated separately after a 72-hour incubation of the cells with the pharmacological substance. Subsequently, the IC50 was calculated. Tumor cell death was investigated using a double stain apoptosis detection assay. RESULTS: Selumetinib, trametinib, and erufosine significantly decreased cell viability of all OMM cell lines (P<0.04). In addition, selumetinib and trametinib showed a significant inhibition of cell proliferation (P<0.05). Everolimus and erlotinib solely inhibited cell proliferation at the used concentrations (P<0.05). Besides an increase of necrotic cells after erufosine treatment (P<0.001), no changes in the number of dead cells for the other substances were observed. CONCLUSION: The preliminary drug screening demonstrates five new candidates, successfully targeting the canonical MAPK/ERK and PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathways in uveal melanoma metastasis cells in vitro. Hence, these findings provide an experimental basis to explore future single or combined therapy strategies for metastatic uveal melanoma. International Journal of Ophthalmology Press.
Authors: Richard D Carvajal; Sophie Piperno-Neumann; Ellen Kapiteijn; Paul B Chapman; Stephen Frank; Anthony M Joshua; Josep M Piulats; Pascal Wolter; Veronique Cocquyt; Bartosz Chmielowski; T R Jeffry Evans; Lauris Gastaud; Gerald Linette; Carola Berking; Jacob Schachter; Manuel J Rodrigues; Alexander N Shoushtari; Delyth Clemett; Dana Ghiorghiu; Gabriella Mariani; Shirley Spratt; Susan Lovick; Peter Barker; Elaine Kilgour; Zhongwu Lai; Gary K Schwartz; Paul Nathan Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-03-12 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Grazia Ambrosini; Christine A Pratilas; Li-Xuan Qin; Madhavi Tadi; Oliver Surriga; Richard D Carvajal; Gary K Schwartz Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2012-05-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: K G Griewank; X Yu; J Khalili; M M Sozen; K Stempke-Hale; C Bernatchez; S Wardell; B C Bastian; S E Woodman Journal: Pigment Cell Melanoma Res Date: 2012-02-02 Impact factor: 4.693
Authors: Sonja Katharina Königs; Christian Philipp Pallasch; Lars Hartwin Lindner; Janine Schwamb; Alexandra Schulz; Reinhild Brinker; Julia Claasen; Aditya Veldurthy; Hansjoerg Eibl; Michael Hallek; Clemens-Martin Wendtner Journal: Leuk Res Date: 2010-01-21 Impact factor: 3.156
Authors: Efstathios Vounotrypidis; Anna Hillenmayer; Christian M Wertheimer; Alexis Athanasiou; Jakob Siedlecki; Michael Orth; Andreas Ohlmann; Siegfried G Priglinger; Armin Wolf Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-04-13 Impact factor: 4.379