Inhibition of Protein Synthesis Induced by CHK1 Inhibitors Discriminates Sensitive from Resistant Cancer Cells.

The DNA-damage-activated checkpoint protein CHK1 is required to prevent replication or mitosis in the presence of unrepaired DNA damage. Inhibitors of CHK1 (CHK1i) circumvent this checkpoint and enhance cell killing by DNA-damaging drugs. CHK1i also elicit single-agent cytotoxicity in a small subset of cell lines. Resolving the mechanisms underlying the single-agent activity may permit patient stratification and targeted therapy against sensitive tumors. Our recent comparison of three CHK1i demonstrated that they all inhibited protein synthesis only in sensitive cells. LY2606368, the most selective of these CHK1i, was used in the current study. Comparison across a panel of cell lines demonstrated that sensitive cells died upon incubation with LY2606368, whereas resistant cells underwent growth inhibition and/or cytostasis but failed to die. Sensitive cells exhibited inhibition of protein synthesis, elevated DNA damage, impaired DNA repair, and subsequently death. The consequence of CHK1 inhibition involved activation of cyclin A/CDK2 and MUS81, resulting in DNA damage. This damage led to activation of AMPK, dephosphorylation of 4E-BP1, and inhibition of protein synthesis. Inhibition of MUS81 prevented activation of AMPK, while inhibition of AMPK enhanced DNA repair and cell survival. The activation of AMPK may involve a combination of LKB1 and CaMKKß. This study raises questions concerning the potential importance of the inhibition of protein synthesis in response to other drugs, alone or in combination with CHK1i. It also highlights the importance of clearly discriminating among growth inhibition, cytostasis, and cell death, as only the latter is likely to result in tumor regression.

Activation of CDC25A phosphatase is limited by CDK2/cyclin A-mediated feedback inhibition.

Cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 1 complexed with cyclin B is a driver of mitosis, while CDK2 drives S phase entry and replicon initiation. CDK2 activity increases as cells progress through S phase, and its cyclin partner switches from cyclin E to cyclin A. Activation of CDK2 requires dephosphorylation of tyrosine-15 by CDC25A. DNA damage activates the checkpoint protein CHK1, which phosphorylates and degrades CDC25A to prevent activation of CDK2 and protect from cell cycle progression before damage is repaired. CHK1 inhibitors were developed to circumvent this arrest and enhance the efficacy of many cancer chemotherapeutic agents. CHK1 inhibition results in the accumulation of CDC25A and activation of CDK2. We demonstrate that inhibition of CDK2 or suppression of cyclin A also results in accumulation of CDC25A suggesting a feedback loop that prevents over activation of this pathway. The feedback inhibition of CDC25A targets phosphorylation of S88-CDC25A, which resides within a CDK consensus sequence. In contrast, it appears that CDK complexes with cyclin B (and possibly cyclin E) stabilize CDC25A in a feed-forward activation loop. While CDK2/cyclin A would normally be active at late S/G2, we propose that this feedback inhibitory loop prevents over activation of CDK2 in early S phase, while still leaving CDK2/cyclin E to catalyze replicon initiation. One importance of this observation is that a subset of cancer cell lines are very sensitive to CHK1 inhibition, which is mediated by CDK2/cyclin A activity in S phase cells. Hence, dysregulation of this feedback loop might facilitate sensitivity of the cells.

Comparative Activity and Off-Target Effects in Cells of the CHK1 Inhibitors MK-8776, SRA737, and LY2606368.

DNA damage activates the checkpoint protein CHK1 to arrest cell cycle progression, providing time for repair and recovery. Consequently, inhibitors of CHK1 (CHK1i) enhance damage-induced cell death. Additionally, CHK1i elicits single agent cytotoxicity in some cell lines. We compared three CHK1i that have undergone clinical trials and exhibited different toxicities. Each CHK1i inhibits other targets at higher concentrations, and whether these contribute to the toxicity is unknown. We compared their sensitivity in a panel of cell lines, their efficacy at inhibiting CHK1 and CHK2, and their ability to induce DNA damage and abrogate damage-induced S phase arrest. Published in vitro kinase analyses were a poor predictor of selectivity and potency in cells. LY2606368 was far more potent at inhibiting CHK1 and inducing growth arrest, while all three CHK1i inhibited CHK2 at concentrations 10- (MK-8776 and SRA737) to 100- (LY2606368) fold higher. MK-8776 and SRA737 exhibited similar off-target effects: higher concentrations demonstrated transient protection from growth inhibition, circumvented DNA damage, and prevented checkpoint abrogation, possibly due to inhibition of CDK2. Acquired resistance to LY2606368 resulted in limited cross-resistance to other CHK1i. LY2606368-resistant cells still abrogated DNA damage-induced S phase arrest, which requires low CDK2 activity, whereas inappropriately high CDK2 activity is responsible for sensitivity to CHK1i alone. All three CHK1i inhibited protein synthesis in a sensitive cell line correlating with cell death, whereas resistant cells failed to inhibit protein synthesis and underwent transient cytostasis. LY2606368 appears to be the most selective CHK1i, suggesting that further clinical development of this drug is warranted.

Sensitivity of cells to ATR and CHK1 inhibitors requires hyperactivation of CDK2 rather than endogenous replication stress or ATM dysfunction.

DNA damage activates cell cycle checkpoint proteins ATR and CHK1 to arrest cell cycle progression, providing time for repair and recovery. Consequently, inhibitors of ATR (ATRi) and CHK1 (CHK1i) enhance damage-induced cell death. Intriguingly, both CHK1i and ATRi alone elicit cytotoxicity in some cell lines. Sensitivity has been attributed to endogenous replications stress, but many more cell lines are sensitive to ATRi than CHK1i. Endogenous activation of the DNA damage response also did not correlate with drug sensitivity. Sensitivity correlated with the appearance of γH2AX, a marker of DNA damage, but without phosphorylation of mitotic markers, contradicting suggestions that the damage is due to premature mitosis. Sensitivity to ATRi has been associated with ATM mutations, but dysfunction in ATM signaling did not correlate with sensitivity. CHK1i and ATRi circumvent replication stress by reactivating stalled replicons, a process requiring a low threshold activity of CDK2. In contrast, γH2AX induced by single agent ATRi and CHK1i requires a high threshold activity CDK2. Hence, phosphorylation of different CDK2 substrates is required for cytotoxicity induced by replication stress plus ATRi/CHK1i as compared to their single agent activity. In summary, sensitivity to ATRi and CHK1i as single agents is elicited by premature hyper-activation of CDK2.

AT101 [(-)-Gossypol] Selectively Inhibits MCL1 and Sensitizes Carcinoma to BH3 Mimetics by Inducing and Stabilizing NOXA.

Anti-apoptotic BCL2 proteins are important targets for cancer therapy as cancers depend on their activity for survival. Direct inhibitors of MCL1 have entered clinical trials, although their efficacy may be limited by toxicity. An alternative approach may be to induce the pro-apoptotic protein NOXA which selectively inhibits MCL1 in cells. Many compounds originally proposed as inhibitors of the BCL2 family were subsequently found to induce the pro-apoptotic protein NOXA through the unfolded protein response. In the present study, we compared various putative BH3 mimetics across a panel of carcinoma cell lines and measured expression of NOXA protein and mRNA, as well as the kinetics of NOXA induction. We found that AT101 [(-)-gossypol] induces high levels of NOXA in carcinoma cell lines yet cells survive. When combined with an appropriate BCL2 or BCL-XL inhibitor, NOXA-dependent sensitization occurs. NOXA protein continues to accumulate for many hours after AT101 is removed, providing a window for administering these combinations. As MCL1 promotes drug resistance and overall survival, we propose that NOXA induction is an alternative therapeutic strategy to target MCL1 and either kill cancer cells that are dependent on MCL1 or sensitize cancer cells to other BCL2 inhibitors.

Comparison of the different mechanisms of cytotoxicity induced by checkpoint kinase I inhibitors when used as single agents or in combination with DNA damage.

Inhibition of the DNA damage response is an emerging strategy to treat cancer. Understanding how DNA damage response inhibitors cause cytotoxicity in cancer cells is crucial to their further clinical development. This review focuses on three different mechanisms of cell killing by checkpoint kinase I inhibitors (CHK1i). DNA damage induced by chemotherapy drugs, such as topoisomerase I inhibitors, results in S and G2 phase arrest. Addition of CHK1i promotes cell cycle progression before repair is completed resulting in mitotic catastrophe. Ribonucleotide reductase inhibitors such as gemcitabine also arrest cells in S phase by preventing dNTP synthesis. Addition of CHK1i re-activates the DNA helicase to unwind DNA, but in the absence of dNTPs, this leads to excessive single-strand DNA that exceeds the protective capacity of the single-strand-binding protein RPA. Unprotected DNA is subjected to nuclease cleavage, resulting in replication catastrophe. CHK1i alone also kills a subset of cell lines through MRE11 and MUS81-mediated DNA cleavage in S phase cells. The choice of mechanism depends on the activation state of CDK2. Low level activation of CDK2 mediates helicase activation, cell cycle progression, and both replication and mitotic catastrophe. In contrast, high CDK2 activity is required for sensitivity to CHK1i as monotherapy. This high CDK2 activity threshold usually occurs late in the cell cycle to prepare for mitosis, but in CHK1i-sensitive cells, high activity can be attained in early S phase, resulting in DNA cleavage and cell death. This sensitivity to CHK1i has previously been associated with endogenous replication stress, but the dependence on high CDK2 activity, as well as MRE11, contradicts this hypothesis. The major unresolved question is why some cell lines fail to restrain their high CDK2 activity and hence succumb to CHK1i in S phase. Resolving this question will facilitate stratification of patients for treatment with CHK1i as monotherapy.

A synthesis strategy for tetracyclic terpenoids leads to agonists of ERß.

Natural product and natural product-like molecules continue to be important for the development of pharmaceutical agents, as molecules in this class play a vital role in the pipeline for new therapeutics. Among these, tetracyclic terpenoids are privileged, with >100 being FDA-approved drugs. Despite this significant pharmaceutical success, there remain considerable limitations to broad medicinal exploitation of the class due to lingering scientific challenges associated with compound availability. Here, we report a concise asymmetric route to forging natural and unnatural (enantiomeric) C19 and C20 tetracyclic terpenoid skeletons suitable to drive medicinal exploration. While efforts have been focused on establishing the chemical science, early investigations reveal that the emerging chemical technology can deliver compositions of matter that are potent and selective agonists of the estrogen receptor beta, and that are selectively cytotoxic in two different glioblastoma cell lines (U251 and U87).

Nuphar alkaloids induce very rapid apoptosis through a novel caspase-dependent but BAX/BAK-independent pathway.

Nuphar alkaloids, originally isolated from water lilies, induce apoptosis in mammalian cells in less than 1 h, making them possibly the fastest known inducers. However, the mechanism by which this rapid apoptosis occurs remains unknown. We have investigated canonical aspects of apoptosis to determine how the nuphar alkaloid, (+)-6-hydroxythiobinupharidine (6HTBN), induces apoptosis. 6HTBN induced rapid apoptosis in various leukemia, lymphoma, and carcinoma cell lines, suggesting that its mechanism is cell-type independent. It also circumvented resistance of patient-derived chronic lymphocytic leukemia cells generated by co-culture on survival-promoting stroma. Intriguingly, 6HTBN failed to induce apoptosis in platelets. The mechanism of apoptosis involves activation of caspase 9 and caspase 3, but not caspase 8 as previously reported. The release of cytochrome c from mitochondria occurred even in the absence of BAX/BAK and in cells that retained mitochondrial membrane potential. These results suggest a novel mechanism of apoptosis that has previously not been reported. The molecular target of the nuphar alkaloids remains to be determined.

Confounding off-target effects of BH3 mimetics at commonly used concentrations: MIM1, UMI-77, and A-1210477.

Targeting anti-apoptotic BCL2 family proteins has become an attractive therapeutic strategy for many cancers, and the BCL2-selective inhibitor ABT-199 (venetoclax) has obtained clinical success. However, MCL1 can promote drug resistance and overall cancer cell survival. Thus, there is a critical need to develop an effective drug that antagonizes MCL1. However, most putative MCL1 inhibitors have been misclassified as they fail to directly inhibit MCL1 in cells, but rather induce the pro-apoptotic protein NOXA. We have investigated three putative MCL1 inhibitors: MIM1, UMI-77, and A-1210477. All three compounds were developed in cell-free assays and then found to be cytotoxic, and hence assumed to directly target MCL1 in cells. Here, we investigated whether these compounds directly inhibit MCL1 or inhibit MCL1 indirectly through the induction of NOXA. Both MIM1- and UMI-77-induced NOXA through the unfolded protein response pathway, and sensitized leukemia cells to ABT-199; this cytotoxicity was dependent on NOXA suggesting that these compounds do not directly target MCL1. A-1210477 was the only compound that did not induce NOXA, but it still sensitized cells to ABT-199. A-1210477 induced accumulation of MCL1 protein consistent with it binding and preventing MCL1 degradation. However, at concentrations used in several prior studies, A-1210477 also induced cytochrome c release, caspase activation, and apoptosis in a BAX/BAK-independent manner. Furthermore, the release of cytochrome c occurred without loss of mitochondrial membrane potential. This apoptosis was extremely rapid, sometimes occurring within 0.5-1 h. Hence, we have identified a novel mechanism of apoptosis that circumvents the known mechanisms of cytochrome c release. It remains to be determined whether these unexpected mechanisms of action of putative BH3 mimetics will have therapeutic potential.

Differential Sensitivity to CDK2 Inhibition Discriminates the Molecular Mechanisms of CHK1 Inhibitors as Monotherapy or in Combination with the Topoisomerase I Inhibitor SN38.

DNA damage activates checkpoints to arrest cell cycle progression in S and G2 phases, thereby providing time for repair and recovery. The combination of DNA-damaging agents and inhibitors of CHK1 (CHK1i) is an emerging strategy for sensitizing cancer cells. CHK1i induce replication on damaged DNA and mitosis before repair is complete, and this occurs in a majority of cell lines. However, ∼15% of cancer cell lines are hypersensitive to single-agent CHK1i. As both abrogation of S phase arrest and single-agent activity depend on CDK2, this study resolved how activation of CDK2 can be essential for both replication and cytotoxicity. S phase arrest was induced with the topoisomerase I inhibitor SN38; the addition of CHK1i rapidly activated CDK2, inducing S phase progression that was inhibited by the CDK2 inhibitor CVT-313. In contrast, DNA damage and cytotoxicity induced by single-agent CHK1i in hypersensitive cell lines were also inhibited by CVT-313 but at 20-fold lower concentrations. The differential sensitivity to CVT-313 is explained by different activity thresholds required for phosphorylation of CDK2 substrates. While the critical CDK2 substrates are not yet defined, we conclude that hypersensitivity to single-agent CHK1i depends on phosphorylation of substrates that require high CDK2 activity levels. Surprisingly, CHK1i did not increase SN38-mediated cytotoxicity. In contrast, while inhibition of WEE1 also abrogated S phase arrest, it more directly activated CDK1, induced premature mitosis, and enhanced cytotoxicity. Hence, while high activity of CDK2 is critical for cytotoxicity of single-agent CHK1i, CDK1 is additionally required for sensitivity to the drug combination.

Inhibition of checkpoint kinase 1 following gemcitabine-mediated S phase arrest results in CDC7- and CDK2-dependent replication catastrophe.

Combining DNA-damaging drugs with DNA checkpoint inhibitors is an emerging strategy to manage cancer. Checkpoint kinase 1 inhibitors (CHK1is) sensitize most cancer cell lines to DNA-damaging drugs and also elicit single-agent cytotoxicity in 15% of cell lines. Consequently, combination therapy may be effective in a broader patient population. Here, we characterized the molecular mechanism of sensitization to gemcitabine by the CHK1i MK8776. Brief gemcitabine incubation irreversibly inhibited ribonucleotide reductase, depleting dNTPs, resulting in durable S phase arrest. Addition of CHK1i 18 h after gemcitabine elicited cell division cycle 7 (CDC7)- and cyclin-dependent kinase 2 (CDK2)-dependent reactivation of the replicative helicase, but did not reinitiate DNA synthesis due to continued lack of dNTPs. Helicase reactivation generated extensive single-strand (ss)DNA that exceeded the protective capacity of the ssDNA-binding protein, replication protein A. The subsequent cleavage of unprotected ssDNA has been termed replication catastrophe. This mechanism did not occur with concurrent CHK1i plus gemcitabine treatment, providing support for delayed administration of CHK1i in patients. Alternative mechanisms of CHK1i-mediated sensitization to gemcitabine have been proposed, but their role was ruled out; these mechanisms include premature mitosis, inhibition of homologous recombination, and activation of double-strand break repair nuclease (MRE11). In contrast, single-agent activity of CHK1i was MRE11-dependent and was prevented by lower concentrations of a CDK2 inhibitor. Hence, both pathways require CDK2 but appear to depend on different CDK2 substrates. We conclude that a small-molecule inhibitor of CHK1 can elicit at least two distinct, context-dependent mechanisms of cytotoxicity in cancer cells.

Synthesis and Discovery of Estra-1,3,5(10),6,8-pentaene-2,16α-diol.

A metallacycle-centered approach to the assembly of partially aromatic synthetic steroids was investigated as a means to prepare a boutique collection of unique steroidal agents. The synthesis and discovery of estra-1,3,5(10),6,8-pentaene-2,16α-diol (VII) is described, along with structure-activity relationships related to its cytotoxic properties. Overall, VII was found to have a GI50 = 0.2 µg/mL (∼800 nM) in MDA-MB-231 human breast cancer cells, be an efficacious estrogen receptor agonist with potency for ERß > ERα (ERß EC50 = 21 nM), possess selective affinity to the cdc-2-like kinase CLK4 (Kd = 350 nM), and be phenotypically related to paclitaxel by an unbiased panel assessment.

Synthetic nat- or ent-steroids in as few as five chemical steps from epichlorohydrin.

Today, more than 100 Food and Drug Administration-approved steroidal agents are prescribed daily for indications including heart failure, inflammation, pain and cancer. While triumphs in organic chemistry have enabled the establishment and sustained growth of the steroid pharmaceutical industry, the production of highly functionalized synthetic steroids of varying substitution and stereochemistry remains challenging, despite the numerous reports of elegant strategies for their de novo synthesis. Here, we describe an advance in chemical synthesis that has established an enantiospecific means to access novel steroids with unprecedented facility and flexibility through the sequential use of two powerful ring-forming reactions: a modern metallacycle-mediated annulative cross-coupling and a new acid-catalysed vinylcyclopropane rearrangement cascade. In addition to accessing synthetic steroids of either enantiomeric series, these steroidal products have been selectively functionalized within each of the four carbocyclic rings, a synthetic ent-steroid has been prepared on a multigram scale, the enantiomer of a selective oestrogen has been synthesized, and a novel ent-steroid with growth inhibitory properties in three cancer cell lines has been discovered.

Cell cycle perturbation induced by gemcitabine in human tumor cells in cell culture, xenografts and bladder cancer patients: implications for clinical trial designs combining gemcitabine with a Chk1 inhibitor.

Gemcitabine irreversibly inhibits ribonucleotide reductase and induces S phase arrest but whether this occurs in tumors in mice or patients has not been established. Tumor cells in culture were incubated with gemcitabine for 6 h to approximate the administration schedule in a patient. Concentrations that induced persistent S phase arrest thereafter correlated with cell killing. Administration of gemcitabine to mice also demonstrated a persistent S phase arrest in their tumor. The minimum dose that induced almost complete S phase arrest after 24 h (40 mg/kg) was well below the maximum tolerated dose in mice. S phase arrest was also observed in tumors of bladder cancer patients receiving gemcitabine. The Chk1 inhibitor MK-8776 sensitized cells to gemcitabine with the greatest cell killing when added 18 h after gemcitabine. In mice, the administration of MK-8776 18 h after gemcitabine elicited positivity for the DNA damage marker γH2AX; this also occurred at relatively low dose (40 mg/kg) gemcitabine. Hence, in both cell culture and xenografts, MK-8776 can markedly enhance cell killing of cells reversibly arrested in S phase by gemcitabine. Some cell lines are hypersensitive to MK-8776 as monotherapy, but this was not observed in xenograft models. Effective monotherapy requires a higher dose of Chk1 inhibitor, and target inhibition over a longer time period as compared to its use in combination. These results have important implications for combining Chk1 inhibitors with gemcitabine and suggest that Chk1 inhibitors with increased bioavailability may have improved efficacy both in combination and as monotherapy.

Function-Oriented Studies Targeting Pectenotoxin 2: Synthesis of the GH-Ring System and a Structurally Simplified Macrolactone.

A chemical foundation for function-oriented studies of pectenotoxin 2 (PTX2) is described. A synthesis of the bicyclic GH-system, and the design and synthesis of a PTX2-analogue, is presented. While maintaining critical features for actin binding, and lacking the Achilles' heel for the natural product's anticancer activity (the AB-spiroketal), this first-generation analogue did not possess the anticancer properties of PTX2, an observation that indicates the molecular significance of features present in the natural product's CDEF-tetracycle.

Stereoselective Synthesis and Biological Evaluation of C1-Epimeric and Desmethyl Monomeric Nuphar Analogues.

A class of monomeric nuphar analogues that are either epimeric at C1 and C1' or lack the naturally occurring methyl group at those positions were synthesized and evaluated for biological activity. The syntheses feature enantioselective vinylogous Mukaiyama-Mannich (vM-Mannich) reactions catalyzed by chiral phosphoric acids that proceed with excellent diastereoselectivity. Biological assays reveal that both the desmethyl and C1-epimeric monomeric nuphar analogous are able to induce rapid apoptosis.

Microtubule destabilising agents: far more than just antimitotic anticancer drugs.

Vinca alkaloids have been approved as anticancer drugs for more than 50 years. They have been classified as cytotoxic chemotherapy drugs that act during cellular mitosis, enabling them to target fast growing cancer cells. With the evolution of cancer drug development there has been a shift towards new "targeted" therapies to avoid the side effects and general toxicities of "cytotoxic chemotherapies" such as the vinca alkaloids. Due to their original classification, many have overlooked the fact that vinca alkaloids, taxanes and related drugs do have a specific molecular target: tubulin. They continue to be some of the most effective anticancer drugs, perhaps because their actions upon the microtubule network extend far beyond the ability to halt cells in mitosis, and include the induction of apoptosis at all phases of the cell cycle. In this review, we highlight the numerous cellular consequences of disrupting microtubule dynamics, expanding the textbook knowledge of microtubule destabilising agents and providing novel opportunities for their use in cancer therapy.

Improving anticancer drug development begins with cell culture: misinformation perpetrated by the misuse of cytotoxicity assays.

The high failure rate of anticancer drug discovery and development has consumed billions of dollars annually. While many explanations have been provided, I believe that misinformation arising from inappropriate cell-based screens has been completely over-looked. Most cell culture experiments are irrelevant to how drugs are subsequently administered to patients. Usually, drug development focuses on growth inhibition rather than cell killing. Drugs are selected based on continuous incubation of cells, then frequently administered to the patient as a bolus. Target identification and validation is often performed by gene suppression that inevitably mimics continuous target inhibition. Drug concentrations in vitro frequently far exceed in vivo concentrations. Studies of drug synergy are performed at sub-optimal concentrations. And the focus on a limited number of cell lines can misrepresent the potential efficacy in a patient population. The intent of this review is to encourage more appropriate experimental design and data interpretation, and to improve drug development in the area of cell-based assays. Application of these principles should greatly enhance the successful translation of novel drugs to the patient.