Article

Monitoring drug-induced gammaH2AX as a pharmacodynamic biomarker in individual circulating tumor cells.

Laboratory of Human Toxicology and Pharmacology, Science Applications International Corporation, Frederick, MD, USA.
Clinical Cancer Research (Impact Factor: 8.19). 02/2010; 16(3):1073-84. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-09-2799
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Circulating tumor cells (CTC) in peripheral blood of patients potentially represent a fraction of solid tumor cells available for more frequent pharmacodynamic assessment of drug action than is possible using tumor biopsy. However, currently available CTC assays are limited to cell membrane antigens. Here, we describe an assay that directly examines changes in levels of the nuclear DNA damage marker gammaH2AX in individual CTCs of patients treated with chemotherapeutic agents.
An Alexa Fluor 488-conjugated monoclonal gammaH2AX antibody and epithelial cancer cell lines treated with topotecan and spiked into whole blood were used to measure DNA damage-dependent nuclear gammaH2AX signals in individual CTCs. Time-course changes in both CTC number and gammaH2AX levels in CTCs were also evaluated in blood samples from patients undergoing treatment.
The percentage of gammaH2AX-positive CTCs increased in a concentration-dependent manner in cells treated with therapeutically relevant concentrations of topotecan ex vivo. In samples from five patients, percent gammaH2AX-positive cells increased post-treatment from a mean of 2% at baseline (range, 0-6%) to a mean of 38% (range, 22-64%) after a single day of drug administration; this increase was irrespective of increases or decreases in the total CTC count.
These data show promise for monitoring dynamic changes in nuclear biomarkers in CTCs (in addition to CTC count) for rapidly assessing drug activity in clinical trials of molecularly targeted anticancer therapeutics as well as for translational research.

4 Followers
 · 
232 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), one of the most common and aggressive malignant brain tumors, is highly resistant to radiotherapy. Numerous approaches have been pursued to find new radiosensitizers. We used a picogreen and colonogenic assay to appraise the DNA damage and cell death in a spheroid culture of GBM cells caused by iodine-131 (I-131) beta radiation in the presence of topotecan (TPT). U87MG cells were cultured as spheroids with approximate diameters of 300 μm. Cells were treated with beta radiation of I-131 (at a dose of 2 Gy) and/ or TPT (1 μg/ml for 2 hours). The numbers of cells that survived were compared with untreated cells using a colonogenic assay. In addition, we evaluated possible DNA damages by the picogreen method. The relation between DNA damage and cell death was assessed in the experimental study of groups. The findings showed that survival fraction (SF) in the I-131+TPT group (39%) was considerably less than the I-131 group (58.92%; p<0.05). The number of single strand breaks (SSB) and double strand breaks (DSB), in the DNA of U87MG cells treated with beta radiation of I-131 and TPT (I-131+TPT) significantly increased compared to cells treated with only I-131 or TPT (p<0.05). The amount of SSB repair was more than DSB repair (p<0.05). The relationship between cell death and DNA damage was close (r≥0.6) and significant (p<0.05) in the irradiated and treated groups. Also the maximum rate of DNA repair occurred 24 hours after the treatments. A significant difference was not observed on other days of the restoration. The findings in the present study indicated that TPT can sensitize U87MG cells to radiation and increase DNA damages. Potentially, TPT can cause an increase in damage from DSB and SSB by its inhibitory effects on topoisomerase enzyme and the cell cycle. The increased complex damages following the use of a genotoxic agent and beta I-131 radiation, causes a significant increase the cell death because of the difficult repair process. By assessing the relationship between DNA damage and cell death, the picogreen method can be useful in predicting colonogenic assay. Consequently, it is suggested that co-treatment with I-131 beta radiation and TPT can improve GBM treatment.
    Cell Journal 01/2015; 17(1):99-110. · 0.46 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background:Abiraterone and enzalutamide are novel endocrine treatments that abrogate androgen receptor (AR) signalling in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Here, we developed a circulating tumour cells (CTCs)-based assay to evaluate AR expression in real-time in CRPC and investigated nuclear AR expression in CTCs in patients treated with enzalutamide and abiraterone.Methods:CTCs were captured and characterised using the CellSearch system. An automated algorithm to identify CTCs and quantify AR expression was employed. The primary aim was to evaluate the association between CTC AR expression and prior treatment with abiraterone or enzalutamide.Results:AR expression in CTCs was evaluated in 94 samples from 48 metastatic CRPC patients. We observed large intra-patient heterogeneity of AR expression in CTCs. Prior exposure to abiraterone or enzalutamide was not associated with a change in CTCs AR expression (median intensity and distribution of AR-positive classes). In support of this, we also confirmed maintained nuclear AR expression in tissue samples collected after progression on abiraterone. AR staining also identified additional AR-positive CD45-negative circulating cells that were CK-negative/weak and therefore missed using standard protocols. The number of these events correlated with traditional CTCs and was associated with worse outcome on univariate analysis.Conclusions:We developed a non-invasive method to monitor AR nuclear expression in CTCs. Our studies confirm nuclear AR expression in CRPC patients progressing on novel endocrine treatments. Owing to the significant heterogeneity of AR expression in CTCs, studies in larger cohorts of patients are required to identify associations with outcome.British Journal of Cancer advance online publication, 26 February 2015; doi:10.1038/bjc.2015.63 www.bjcancer.com.
    British Journal of Cancer 02/2015; 112(7). DOI:10.1038/bjc.2015.63 · 4.82 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: Veliparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, demonstrated clinical activity in combination with oral cyclophosphamide in patients with BRCA-mutant solid tumors in a phase 1 trial. To define the relative contribution of PARP inhibition to the observed clinical activity, we conducted a randomized phase 2 trial to determine the response rate of veliparib in combination with cyclophosphamide compared to cyclophosphamide alone in patients with pretreated BRCA-mutant ovarian cancer or in patients with pretreated primary peritoneal, fallopian tube, or high-grade serous ovarian cancers (HGSOC). Experimental Design: Adult patients were randomized to receive cyclophosphamide alone (50 mg orally once daily) or with veliparib (60 mg orally once daily) in 21-day cycles. Crossover to the combination was allowed at disease progression. Results: Seventy-five patients were enrolled and 72 were evaluable for response; 38 received cyclophosphamide alone and 37 the combination as their initial treatment regimen. Treatment was well tolerated. One complete response was observed in each arm, with three partial responses (PR) in the combination arm and six PRs in the cyclophosphamide alone arm. Genetic sequence and expression analyses were performed for 211 genes involved in DNA repair; none of the detected genetic alterations were significantly associated with treatment benefit. Conclusions: This is the first trial that evaluated single agent, low dose cyclophosphamide in HGSOC, peritoneal, fallopian tube, and BRCA-mutant ovarian cancers. It was well tolerated and clinical activity was observed; the addition of veliparib at 60 mg daily did not improve either the response rate or the median progression free survival. Copyright © 2015, American Association for Cancer Research.
    Clinical Cancer Research 01/2015; DOI:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-2565 · 8.19 Impact Factor