Search

5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) and its metabolite 5-fluorodeoxyuridine (FdUrd, floxuridine) are chemotherapy agents that are converted to 5-fluorodeoxyuridine monophosphate (FdUMP) and 5-fluorodeoxyuridine triphosphate (FdUTP). FdUMP inhibits thymidylate synthase and causes the accumulation of uracil in the genome, whereas FdUTP is incorporated by DNA polymerases as 5-FU in the genome; however, it remains unclear how either genomically incorporated U or 5-FU contributes to killing. We show that depletion of the uracil DNA glycosylase (UNG) sensitizes tumor cells to FdUrd. Furthermore, we show that UNG depletion does not sensitize cells to the thymidylate synthase inhibitor (raltitrexed), which induces uracil but not 5-FU accumulation, thus indicating that genomically incorporated 5-FU plays a major role in the antineoplastic effects of FdUrd. We also show that 5-FU metabolites do not block the first round of DNA synthesis but instead arrest cells at the G1/S border when cells again attempt replication and activate homologous recombination (HR). This arrest is not due to 5-FU lesions blocking DNA polymerase δ but instead depends, in part, on the thymine DNA glycosylase. Consistent with the activation of HR repair, disruption of HR sensitized cells to FdUrd, especially when UNG was disabled. These results show that 5-FU lesions that escape UNG repair activate HR, which promotes cell survival., (Copyright © 2015 by The American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.)

Floxuridine (5-fluorodeoxyuridine, FdUrd), a U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved drug and metabolite of 5-fluorouracil, causes DNA damage that is repaired by base excision repair (BER). Thus, poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, which disrupt BER, markedly sensitize ovarian cancer cells to FdUrd, suggesting that this combination may have activity in this disease. It remains unclear, however, which DNA repair and checkpoint signaling pathways affect killing by these agents individually and in combination. Here we show that depleting ATR, BRCA1, BRCA2, or RAD51 sensitized to ABT-888 (veliparib) alone, FdUrd alone, and FdUrd + ABT-888 (F+A), suggesting that homologous recombination (HR) repair protects cells exposed to these agents. In contrast, disabling the mismatch, nucleotide excision, Fanconi anemia, nonhomologous end joining, or translesion synthesis repair pathways did not sensitize to these agents alone (including ABT-888) or in combination. Further studies demonstrated that in BRCA1-depleted cells, F+A was more effective than other chemotherapy+ABT-888 combinations. Taken together, these studies 1) identify DNA repair and checkpoint pathways that are important in ovarian cancer cells treated with FdUrd, ABT-888, and F+A, 2) show that disabling HR at the level of ATR, BRCA1, BRCA2, or RAD51, but not Chk1, ATM, PTEN, or FANCD2, sensitizes cells to ABT-888, and 3) demonstrate that even though ABT-888 sensitizes ovarian tumor cells with functional HR to FdUrd, the effects of this drug combination are more profound in tumors with HR defects, even compared with other chemotherapy + ABT-888 combinations, including cisplatin + ABT-888.

Cisplatin and other platinating agents are some of the most widely used chemotherapy agents. These drugs exert their antiproliferative effects by creating intrastrand and interstrand DNA cross-links, which block DNA replication. The cross-links mobilize signaling and repair pathways, including the Rad9-Hus1-Rad1-ATR-Chk1 pathway, a pathway that helps tumor cells survive the DNA damage inflicted by many chemotherapy agents. Here we show that Rad9 and ATR play critical roles in helping tumor cells survive cisplatin treatment. However, depleting Chk1 with small interfering RNA or inhibiting Chk1 with 3-(carbamoylamino)-5-(3-fluorophenyl)-N-(3-piperidyl)thiophene-2-carboxamide (AZD7762) did not sensitize these cells to cisplatin, oxaliplatin, or carboplatin. Moreover, when Rad18, Rad51, BRCA1, BRCA2, or FancD2 was disabled, Chk1 depletion did not further sensitize the cells to cisplatin. In fact, Chk1 depletion reversed the sensitivity seen when Rad18 was disabled. Collectively, these studies suggest that the pharmacological manipulation of Chk1 may not be an effective strategy to sensitize tumors to platinating agents.

Although agents that inhibit DNA synthesis are widely used in the treatment of cancer, the optimal method for combining such agents and the mechanism of their synergy is poorly understood. The present study examined the effects of combining gemcitabine (2',2'-difluoro 2'-deoxycytidine) and 7-ethyl-10-hydroxycamptothecin (SN-38; the active metabolite of irinotecan), two S-phaseselective agents that individually have broad antitumor activity, in human cancer cells in vitro. Colony-forming assays revealed that simultaneous treatment of Ovcar-5 ovarian cancer cells or BxPC-3 pancreatic cancer cells with gemcitabine and SN-38 resulted in antagonistic effects. In contrast, sequential treatment with these two agents in either order resulted in synergistic anti-proliferative effects, although the mechanism of synergy varied with the sequence. In particular, SN-38 arrested cells in S phase, enhanced the accumulation of gemcitabine metabolites, and diminished checkpoint kinase 1, thereby sensitizing cells in the SN-38 --> gemcitabine sequence. Gemcitabine treatment followed by removal allowed prolonged progression through S phase, contributing to synergy of the gemcitabine --> SN-38 sequence. These results collectively suggest that S-phase-selective agents might exhibit more cytotoxicity when administered sequentially rather than simultaneously.

Two signaling pathways are activated by antineoplastic therapies that damage DNA and stall replication. In one pathway, double-strand breaks activate ataxia-telangiectasia mutated kinase (ATM) and checkpoint kinase 2 (Chk2), two protein kinases that regulate apoptosis, cell-cycle arrest, and DNA repair. In the second pathway, other types of DNA lesions and replication stress activate the Rad9-Hus1-Rad1 complex and the protein kinases ataxia-telangiectasia mutated and Rad3-related kinase (ATR) and checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1), leading to changes that block cell-cycle progression, stabilize stalled replication forks, and influence DNA repair. Gemcitabine and cytarabine are two highly active chemotherapeutic agents that disrupt DNA replication. Here, we examine the roles these pathways play in tumor cell survival after treatment with these agents. Cells lacking Rad9, Chk1, or ATR were more sensitive to gemcitabine and cytarabine, consistent with the fact that these agents stall replication forks, and this sensitization was independent of p53 status. Interestingly, ATM depletion sensitized cells to gemcitabine and ionizing radiation but not cytarabine. Together, these results demonstrate that 1) gemcitabine triggers both checkpoint signaling pathways, 2) both pathways contribute to cell survival after gemcitabine-induced replication stress, and 3) although gemcitabine and cytarabine both stall replication forks, ATM plays differential roles in cell survival after treatment with these agents.