Insight into Cisplatin-Resistance Signaling of W1 Ovarian Cancer Cells Emerges mTOR and HSP27 as Targets for Sensitization Strategies.

The microenvironment possesses a strong impact on the tumor chemoresistance when cells bind to components of the extracellular matrix. Here we elucidate the signaling pathways of cisplatin resistance in W1 ovarian cancer cells binding to collagen type 1 (COL1) and signaling interference with constitutive cisplatin resistance in W1CR cells to discover the targets for sensitization. Proteome kinase arrays and Western blots were used to identify the signaling components, their impact on cisplatin resistance was evaluated by inhibitory or knockdown approaches. W1 cell binding to COL1 upregulates integrin-associated signals via FAK/PRAS40/mTOR, confirmed by ß1-integrin (ITGB1) knockdown. mTOR appears as key for resistance, its blockade reversed COL1 effects on W1 cell resistance completely. W1CR cells compensate ITGB1-knockdown by upregulation of discoidin domain receptor 1 (DDR1) as alternative COL1 sensor. COL1 binding via DDR1 activates the MAPK pathway, of which JNK1/2 appears critical for COL1-mediated resistance. JNK1/2 inhibition inverts COL1 effects in W1CR cells, whereas intrinsic cisplatin resistance remained unaffected. Remarkably, knockdown of HSP27, another downstream MAPK pathway component overcomes intrinsic resistance completely sensitizing W1CR cells to the level of W1 cells for cisplatin cytotoxicity. Our data confirm the independent regulation of matrix-induced and intrinsic chemoresistance in W1 ovarian cancer cells and offer novel targets for sensitization.

ß1-Integrin binding to collagen type 1 transmits breast cancer cells into chemoresistance by activating ABC efflux transporters.

Molecular interactions of tumor cells with the microenvironment are regarded as onset of chemotherapy resistance, referred to as cell adhesion mediated drug resistance (CAM-DR). Here we elucidate a mechanism of CAM-DR in breast cancer cells in vitro. We show that human MCF-7 and MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells decrease their sensitivity towards cisplatin, doxorubicin, and mitoxantrone cytotoxicity upon binding to collagen type 1 (COL1) or fibronectin (FN). The intracellular concentrations of doxorubicin and mitoxantrone were decreased upon cell cultivation on COL1, while cellular cisplatin levels remained unaffected. Since doxorubicin and mitoxantrone are transporter substrates, this refers to ATP binding cassette (ABC) efflux transporter activities. The activation of the transporters BCRP, P-gp and MRP1 was shown by fluorescence assays to distinguish the individual input of these transporters to resistance in presence of COL1 and related to their expression levels by western blot. An ABC transporter inhibitor was able to re-sensitize COL1-treated cells for doxorubicin and mitoxantrone toxicity. Antibody-blocking of ß1-integrin (ITGB1) induced sensitization towards the indicated cytostatic drugs by attenuating the increased ABC efflux activity. This refers to a key role of ITGB1 for matrix binding and subsequent transporter activation. A downregulation of α2ß1 integrin following COL1 binding appears as clear indication for the relationship between ITGB1 and ABC transporters in regulating resistance formation, while knockdown of ITGB1 leads to a significant upregulation of all three transporters. Our data provide evidence for a role of CAM-DR in breast cancer via an ITGB1 - transporter axis and offer promising therapeutic targets for cancer sensitization.

The Impact of Integrin-Mediated Matrix Adhesion on Cisplatin Resistance of W1 Ovarian Cancer Cells.

BACKGROUND: Tumor cell binding to the microenvironment is regarded as the onset of therapeutic resistance, referred to as cell adhesion mediated drug resistance (CAM-DR). Here we elucidate whether CAM-DR occurs in ovarian cancer cells and contributes to still-existing cisplatin resistance. METHODS: Cultivation of W1 and cisplatin-resistant W1CR human ovarian cancer cells on collagen-type I (COL1) was followed by whole genome arrays, MTT assays focusing cisplatin cytotoxicity, and AAS detection of intracellular platinum levels. Expression of cisplatin transporters Ctr1 and MRP2 was analyzed. Mechanistic insight was provided by lentiviral ß1-integrin (ITGB1) knockdown, or inhibition of integrin-linked kinase (ILK). RESULTS: EC50 values of cisplatin cytotoxicity increased twofold when W1 and W1CR cells were cultivated on COL1, associated with significantly diminished intracellular platinum levels. Transporter deregulation could not be detected at mRNA levels but appears partially responsible at protein levels. The ITGB1 knockdown confirms that CAM-DR follows a COL1/ITGB1 signaling axis in W1 cells; thus, a blockade of ILK re-sensitized W1 cells on COL1 for cisplatin. In contrast, CAM-DR adds to cisplatin resistance in W1CR cells independent of ITGB1. CONCLUSIONS: CAM-DR appears relevant for ovarian cancer cells, adding to existing genetic resistance and thus emerges as a target for sensitization strategies.

The Impact of the Low Molecular Weight Heparin Tinzaparin on the Sensitization of Cisplatin-Resistant Ovarian Cancers-Preclinical In Vivo Evaluation in Xenograft Tumor Models.

Resistance formation of tumors against chemotherapeutics is the major obstacle in clinical cancer therapy. Although low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is an important component in oncology referring to guideline-based antithrombotic prophylaxis of tumor patients, a potential interference of LMWH with chemoresistance is unknown. We have recently shown that LMWH reverses the cisplatin resistance of A2780cis human ovarian cancer cells in vitro. Here we address the question whether this LMWH effect is also valid under in vivo conditions. Therefore, we established tumor xenografts of A2780 and cisplatin resistant A2780cis cells in nude mice and investigated the impact of daily tinzaparin applications (10 mg/kg BW) on anti-tumor activity of cisplatin (6 mg/kg BW, weekly) considering the tumor growth kinetics. Intratumoral platinum accumulation was detected by GF-AAS. Xenografts of A2780 and A2780cis cells strongly differed in cisplatin sensitivity. As an overall consideration, tinzaparin co-treatment affected the response to cisplatin of A2780cis, but not A2780 tumors in the later experimental time range. A subgroup analysis confirmed that initially smaller A2780cis tumors benefit from tinzaparin, but also small A2780 xenografts. Tinzaparin did not affect cisplatin accumulation in A2780cis xenografts, but strongly increased the platinum content in A2780, obviously related to morphological differences in both xenografts. Although we cannot directly confirm a return of A2780cis cisplatin resistance by tinzaparin, as shown in vitro, the present findings give reason to discuss heparin effects on cytostatic drug efficiency for small tumors and warrants further investigation.