Decitabine impact on the endocytosis regulator RhoA, the folate carriers RFC1 and FOLR1, and the glucose transporter GLUT4 in human tumors

Targeting tumor endothelial cells with methyltransferase inhibitors: Mechanisms of action and the potential of combination therapy

Tumor endothelial cells (TECs) reside in the inner lining of blood vessels and represent a promising target for targeted cancer therapy. DNA methylation is a chemical process that involves the transfer of a methyl group to a specific base in the DNA strand, catalyzed by DNA methyltransferase (DNMT). DNMT inhibitors (DNMTis) can inhibit the activity of DNMTs, thereby preventing the transfer of methyl groups from s-adenosyl methionine (SAM) to cytosine. Currently, the most viable therapy for TECs is the development of DNMTis to release cancer suppressor genes from their repressed state. In this review, we first outline the characteristics of TECs and describe the development of tumor blood vessels and TECs. Abnormal DNA methylation is closely linked to tumor initiation, progression, and cell carcinogenesis, as evidenced by numerous studies. Therefore, we summarize the role of DNA methylation and DNA methyltransferase and the therapeutic potential of four types of DNMTi in targeting TECs. Finally, we discuss the accomplishments, challenges, and opportunities associated with combination therapy with DNMTis for TECs.

Nanomedicine of synergistic drug combinations for cancer therapy - Strategies and perspectives

Nanomedicine of synergistic drug combinations has shown increasing significance in cancer therapy due to its promise in providing superior therapeutic benefits to the current drug combination therapy used in clinical practice. In this article, we will examine the rationale, principles, and advantages of applying nanocarriers to improve anticancer drug combination therapy, review the use of nanocarriers for delivery of a variety of combinations of different classes of anticancer agents including small molecule drugs and biologics, and discuss the challenges and future perspectives of the nanocarrier-based combination therapy. The goal of this review is to provide better understanding of this increasingly important new paradigm of cancer treatment and key considerations for rational design of nanomedicine of synergistic drug combinations for cancer therapy.

Evaluation of folate receptor 1 (FOLR1) mRNA expression, its specific promoter methylation and global DNA hypomethylation in type I and type II ovarian cancers

Background

In this retrospective study we evaluated the respective correlations and clinical relevance of FOLR1 mRNA expression, FOLR1 promoter specific methylation and global DNA hypomethylation in type I and type II ovarian cancer.

Methods

Two hundred fifty four ovarian cancers, 13 borderline tumours and 60 samples of healthy fallopian epithelium and normal ovarian epithelium were retrospectively analysed for FOLR1 expression with RT-PCR. FOLR1 DNA promoter methylation and global DNA hypomethylation (measured by means of LINE1 DNA hypomethylation) were evaluated with MethyLight technique.

Results

No correlation between FOLR1 mRNA expression and its specific promoter DNA methylation was found neither in type I nor in type II cancers, however, high FOLR1 mRNA expression was found to be correlated with global DNA hypomethylation in type II cancers (p = 0.033). Strong FOLR1 mRNA expression was revealed for Grades 2-3, FIGO stages III-IV, residual disease > 0, and serous histotype. High FOLR1 expression was found to predict increased platinum sensitivity in type I cancers (odds ratio = 3.288; 1.256-10.75; p = 0.020). One-year survival analysis showed in type I cancers an independent better outcome for strong expression of FOLR1 in FIGO stage III and IV. For the entire follow up period no significant independent outcome for FOLR1 expression was revealed. In type I cancers LINE 1 DNA hypomethylation was found to exhibit a worse PFS and OS which were confirmed to be independent in multivariate COX regression model for both PFS (p = 0.026) and OS (p = 0.012).

Conclusion

No correlations were found between FOLR1 expression and its specific promoter methylation, however, high FOLR1 mRNA expression was associated with DNA hypomethylation in type II cancers. FOLR1 mRNA expression did not prove to predict clinical outcome in type II cancers, although strong FOLR1 expression generally denotes ovarian cancers with highly aggressive phenotype. In type I cancers, however, strong FOLR1 expression has been found to be a reliable indicator of improved platinum responsiveness reflecting a transient better one-year follow up outcome in highly FOLR1 expressing type I cancers. An independent prognostic role of global DNA hypomethylation was demonstrated in type I tumours.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2637-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Concerted changes in transcriptional regulation of genes involved in DNA methylation, demethylation, and folate-mediated one-carbon metabolism pathways in the NCI-60 cancer cell line panel in response to cancer drug treatment

BACKGROUND

Aberrant patterns of DNA methylation are abundant in cancer, and epigenetic pathways are increasingly being targeted in cancer drug treatment. Genetic components of the folate-mediated one-carbon metabolism pathway can affect DNA methylation and other vital cell functions, including DNA synthesis, amino acid biosynthesis, and cell growth.

RESULTS

We used a bioinformatics tool, the Transcriptional Pharmacology Workbench, to analyze temporal changes in gene expression among epigenetic regulators of DNA methylation and demethylation, and one-carbon metabolism genes in response to cancer drug treatment. We analyzed gene expression information from the NCI-60 cancer cell line panel after treatment with five antitumor agents, 5-azacytidine, doxorubicin, vorinostat, paclitaxel, and cisplatin. Each antitumor agent elicited concerted changes in gene expression of multiple pathway components across the cell lines. Expression changes of FOLR2, SMUG1, GART, GADD45A, MBD1, MTR, MTHFD1, and CTH were significantly correlated with chemosensitivity to some of the agents. Among many genes with concerted expression response to individual antitumor agents were genes encoding DNA methyltransferases DNMT1, DNMT3A, and DNMT3B, epigenetic and DNA repair factors MGMT, GADD45A, and MBD1, and one-carbon metabolism pathway members MTHFD1, TYMS, DHFR, MTR, MAT2A, SLC19A1, ATIC, and GART.

CONCLUSIONS

These transcriptional changes are likely to influence vital cellular functions of DNA methylation and demethylation, cellular growth, DNA biosynthesis, and DNA repair, and some of them may contribute to cytotoxic and apoptotic action of the drugs. This concerted molecular response was observed in a time-dependent manner, which may provide future guidelines for temporal selection of genetic drug targets for combination drug therapy treatment regimens.

Epigenetics of Aging and Alzheimer's Disease: Implications for Pharmacogenomics and Drug Response

Epigenetic variability (DNA methylation/demethylation, histone modifications, microRNA regulation) is common in physiological and pathological conditions. Epigenetic alterations are present in different tissues along the aging process and in neurodegenerative disorders, such as Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Epigenetics affect life span and longevity. AD-related genes exhibit epigenetic changes, indicating that epigenetics might exert a pathogenic role in dementia. Epigenetic modifications are reversible and can potentially be targeted by pharmacological intervention. Epigenetic drugs may be useful for the treatment of major problems of health (e.g., cancer, cardiovascular disorders, brain disorders). The efficacy and safety of these and other medications depend upon the efficiency of the pharmacogenetic process in which different clusters of genes (pathogenic, mechanistic, metabolic, transporter, pleiotropic) are involved. Most of these genes are also under the influence of the epigenetic machinery. The information available on the pharmacoepigenomics of most drugs is very limited; however, growing evidence indicates that epigenetic changes are determinant in the pathogenesis of many medical conditions and in drug response and drug resistance. Consequently, pharmacoepigenetic studies should be incorporated in drug development and personalized treatments.

Impact of decitabine on immunohistochemistry expression of the putative tumor suppressor genes FHIT, WWOX, FUS1 and PTEN in clinical tumor samples

BACKGROUND

Since tumor suppressor gene function may be lost through hypermethylation, we assessed whether the demethylating agent decitabine could increase tumor suppressor gene expression clinically. For fragile histidine triad (FHIT), WW domain-containing oxidoreductase (WWOX), fused in sarcoma-1 (FUS1) and phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN), immunohistochemistry scores from pre- and post-decitabine tumor biopsies (25 patients) were correlated with methylation of the long interspersed nuclear element-1 (LINE-1) repetitive DNA element (as a surrogate for global DNA methylation) and with tumor regression.

RESULTS

With negative staining pre-decitabine (score = 0), the number of patients converting to positive staining post-decitabine was 1 of 1 for FHIT, 3 of 6 for WWOX, 2 of 3 for FUS1 and 1 of 10 for PTEN. In tumors with low pre-decitabine tumor suppressor gene scores (≤150), expression was higher post-treatment in 8 of 8 cases for FHIT (P = 0.014), 7 of 17 for WWOX (P = 0.0547), 7 of 12 for FUS1 (P = 0.0726), and 1 of 16 for PTEN (P = 0.2034). If FHIT, WWOX and FUS1 were considered together, median pre- versus post-decitabine scores were 60 versus 100 (P = 0.0002). Overall, tumor suppressor gene expression change did not correlate with LINE-1 demethylation, although tumors converting from negative to positive had a median decrease in LINE-1 methylation of 24%, compared to 6% in those not converting (P = 0.069). Five of 15 fully evaluable patients had reductions in tumor diameter (range 0.2% to 33.4%). Of these, three had simultaneous increases in three tumor suppressor genes (including the two patients with the greatest tumor regression) compared to 2 of 10 with tumor growth (P = 0.25).

CONCLUSIONS

In tumors with low tumor suppressor gene expression, decitabine may be associated with increased expression of the tumor suppressor genes FHIT, FUS1, and WWOX, but not PTEN.