Epigenetic Silencing of IRF7 and/or IRF5 in Lung Cancer Cells Leads to Increased Sensitivity to Oncolytic Viruses

Program in Molecular Biology and Genetics, Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute, Detroit, Michigan, United States of America.
PLoS ONE (Impact Factor: 3.53). 12/2011; 6(12):e28683. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0028683
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Defective IFN signaling results in loss of innate immunity and sensitizes cells to enhanced cytolytic killing after Vesticular Stomatitis Virus (VSV) infection. Examination of the innate immunity status of normal human bronchial epithelial cells Beas2B and 7 lung cancer cells revealed that the abrogation of IFN signaling in cancer cells is associated with greater sensitivity to VSV infection. The disruption of the IFN pathway in lung cancer cell lines and primary tumor tissues is caused by epigenetic silencing of critical interferon responsive transcription factors IRF7 and/or IRF5. Although 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine treatment fails to reactivate IRF7 and IRF5 expression or protect cells from VSV infection, manipulating IFN signaling by altering IRF expression changes the viral susceptibility of these cells. Lung cancer cells can be partially protected from viral killing using IRF5+IRF7 overexpression, whereas IFN pathway disruption by transfection of siRNAs to IRF5+IRF7 increases cells' vulnerability to viral infection. Therefore, IRF5 and IRF7 are key transcription factors in IFN pathway that determine viral sensitivity of lung cancer cells; the epigenetically impaired IFN pathway in lung cancer tissues provides potential biomarkers for successful selective killing of cancer cells by oncolytic viral therapy.

1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Epigenetic alterations are strongly associated with cancer development and drug resistance. The use of the DNA methylation inhibitor decitabine (Dacogen®) has been approved in the treatment of hematologic malignancies, and its clinical effects on solid tumors have gained attention. Here, we present a review of the molecular regulation mechanisms, clinical experiences and biological evaluation for novel decitabine-based therapies in solid tumors. We also discuss the following questions: What is the best administration schedule of decitabine in solid tumors? Is there tumor type specificity for decitabine-based epigenetic therapy? What are the biological function and mechanism of decitabine in suppressing tumor development? Is there a correlation between DNA demethylation and clinical response? Importantly, low-dose decitabine and combined therapy show significant improvement in solid tumor treatment. However, the correlation studies are preliminary, and key biomarkers for prognosis need further investigation.
    Cancer Letters 08/2014; 354(1). DOI:10.1016/j.canlet.2014.08.010 · 5.02 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Following the successes of monoclonal antibody immunotherapies (trastuzumab (Herceptin®) and rituximab (Rituxan®)) and the first approved cancer vaccine, Provenge® (sipuleucel-T), investigations into the immune system and how it can be modified by a tumor has become an exciting and promising new field of cancer research. Dozens of clinical trials for new antibodies, cancer and adjuvant vaccines, and autologous T and dendritic cell transfers are ongoing in hopes of identifying ways to re-awaken the immune system and force an anti-tumor response. To date, however, few consistent, reproducible, or clinically-relevant effects have been shown using vaccine or autologous cell transfers due in part to the fact that the immunosuppressive mechanisms of the tumor have not been overcome. Much of the research focus has been on re-activating or priming cytotoxic T cells to recognize tumor, in some cases completely disregarding the potential roles that B cells play in immune surveillance or how a solid tumor should be treated to maximize immunogenicity. Here, we will summarize what is currently known about the induction or evasion of humoral immunity via tumor-induced cytokine/chemokine expression and how formation of tertiary lymphoid structures (TLS) within the tumor microenvironment may be used to enhance immunotherapy response.
    06/2014; 6(2):969-97. DOI:10.3390/cancers6020969
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Migration of breast cancer cells out of a duct or lobule is a prerequisite for invasion and metastasis. However, the factors controlling breast cancer cell migration are not fully elucidated. We previously found that expression of the transcription factor interferon regulatory factor 5 (IRF5) is significantly decreased as a breast lesion progresses from a non-malignant stage to ductal carcinoma in situ and is eventually lost in ~80% of invasive ductal carcinomas examined. Human in vitro and murine in vivo models of invasive breast cancer confirmed an important role for IRF5 in regulating cell motility, invasion and/or metastasis; yet, the mechanism(s) by which this occurs is not known. Since IRF5 is primarily expressed in the cytoplasm of human mammary epithelial cells, we hypothesized that IRF5 may function in a transcription-independent manner to control intrinsic cell migration.ResultsA series of IRF5 deletion mutants were tested in cell motility, invasion and migration assays. A novel, conserved 10 amino acid domain was identified that regulates mammary epithelial cell migration. This region (¿115-125) is downstream of IRF5¿s DNA binding domain and therefore when absent, retains IRF5 transcription activity but loses cell migration control. An IRF5 construct with a mutated nuclear localization signal further confirmed that IRF5 controls migration in a cytoplasmic and transcription-independent manner. Candidate cytoskeletal molecules were identified in MDA-MB-231 cells to interact with IRF5 by immunoprecipitation and mass spectrometry analysis. ¿6-tubulin was independently confirmed to interact with endogenous IRF5 in MCF-10A cells. Alterations in F-actin bundling after staining EV- and IRF5-231 cells with phalloidin suggests that IRF5 may control cell migration/motility through its interaction with cytoskeletal molecules that contribute to the formation of F-actin networks. Last and most notably, we found that IRF5¿s control of cell migration is not restricted to mammary epithelial cells but functions in other epithelial cell types suggesting a more global role for this newly identified cell migratory function of IRF5.Conclusions These findings are significant as they identify a new regulator of epithelial cell migration and provide specific insight into the mechanism(s) by which loss of IRF5 expression in mammary epithelial cells contributes to breast cancer metastasis.
    Molecular Cancer 02/2015; 14(1):32. DOI:10.1186/s12943-015-0305-5 · 5.40 Impact Factor

Full-text (3 Sources)

Available from
May 23, 2014