Imatinib Uptake into Cells is Not Mediated by Organic Cation Transporters OCT1, OCT2, or OCT3, But is Influenced by Extracellular pH

BACKGROUND

Cancer cells undergo genetic and environmental changes that can alter cellular disposition of drugs, notably by alterations of transmembrane drug transporters expression. Whether the influx organic cation transporter 1 (OCT1) encoded by the gene SLC221A1 is implicated in the cellular uptake of imatinib is still controversial. Besides, imatinib ionization state may be modulated by the hypoxic acidic surrounding extracellular microenvironment.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the functional contribution of OCTs and extracellular pH on imatinib cellular disposition.

METHODS

We measured imatinib uptake in two different models of selective OCTs drug transporter expression (transfected Xenopus laevis oocytes and OCT-expressing HEK293 human cells), incubated at pH 7.4 and 6, using specific mass spectrometry analysis.

RESULTS

Imatinib cellular uptake occurred independently of OCT1- OCT2- or OCT3-mediated drug transport at pH 7.4. Uptake of the OCTs substrate tetraethylammonium in oocytes remained intact at pH 6, while the accumulation of imatinib in oocytes was 10-fold lower than at pH 7.4, irrespectively of OCTs expressions. In OCT1- and OCT2-HEK cells at pH 6, imatinib accumulation was reduced by 2- 3-fold regardless of OCTs expressions. Since 99.5% of imatinib at pH6 is under the cationic form, the reduced cellular accumulation of imatinib at such pH may be explained by the lower amount of uncharged imatinib remaining for passive diffusion across cellular membrane.

CONCLUSION

Imatinib is not a substrate of OCTs 1-3 while the environmental pH modulates cellular disposition of imatinib. The observation that a slightly acidic extracellular pH influences imatinib cellular accumulation is important, considering the low extracellular pH reported in the hematopoietic leukemia/ cancer cell microenvironment.

OCT1 and imatinib transport in CML: is it clinically relevant?

Imatinib is a highly effective therapy for chronic phase-chronic myeloid leukaemia (CP-CML) patients; however, responses to frontline imatinib are variable. The human organic cation transporter 1 (OCT1; SLC22A1) has been reported to be the main influx transporter involved in imatinib uptake into CML cells. Furthermore, variation in the efficiency of imatinib influx via OCT1 has been demonstrated to result in the inter-patient variation observed in primary response to imatinib. Although studies have questioned the role of OCT1 in imatinib influx, these have been largely performed in non-clinical settings. Measuring both OCT1 mRNA levels and the functional activity of OCT1 in primary leukaemic cells has been demonstrated to predict molecular response and outcome in imatinib-treated CP-CML patients in several independent studies. Here, the role of OCT1 and OCT1 genetic variants in imatinib uptake and response prediction is summarised and data generated from model systems assessing the role of OCT1 in imatinib transport is discussed.

Lysosomal Sequestration Determines Intracellular Imatinib Levels

The intracellular uptake and retention (IUR) of imatinib is reported to be controlled by the influx transporter SLC22A1 (organic cation transporter 1). We recently hypothesized that alternative uptake and/or retention mechanisms exist that determine intracellular imatinib levels. Here, we systematically investigate the nature of these mechanisms. Imatinib uptake in cells was quantitatively determined by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Fluorescent microscopy was used to establish subcellular localization of imatinib. Immunoblotting, cell cycle analyses, and apoptosis assays were performed to evaluate functional consequences of imatinib sequestration. Uptake experiments revealed high intracellular imatinib concentrations in HEK293, the leukemic cell lines K562 and SD-1, and a gastrointestinal stromal tumor cell line GIST-T1. We demonstrated that imatinib IUR is time-, dose-, temperature-, and energy-dependent and provide evidence that SLC22A1 and other potential imatinib transporters do not substantially contribute to the IUR of imatinib. Prazosin, amantadine, NH4Cl, and the vacuolar ATPase inhibitor bafilomycin A1 significantly decreased the IUR of imatinib and likely interfere with lysosomal retention and accumulation of imatinib. Costaining experiments with LysoTracker Red confirmed lysosomal sequestration of imatinib. Inhibition of the lysosomal sequestration had no effect on the inhibition of c-Kit signaling and imatinib-mediated cell cycle arrest but significantly increased apoptosis in imatinib-sensitive GIST-T1 cells. We conclude that intracellular imatinib levels are primarily determined by lysosomal sequestration and do not depend on SLC22A1 expression.

Response-related predictors of survival in CML

The assessment of response to tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) does not only reflect tumor burden at a given time but has been shown to be linked to long-term survival outcomes as well. Therefore, the quantification of molecular or cytogenetic response as early as 3 months on treatment allows a prognostic stratification of a patient's individual risk. With competing TKI regimens available, a timely switch of treatment can be considered if unfavorable outcome has to be expected due to early response failure. Numerous studies have demonstrated the association of long-term outcome with early response for first-line treatment with imatinib, with second-generation TKI and for second-line TKI treatment as well.

Evaluation of response to first-line treatment for chronic myeloid leukemia: has imatinib been outperformed?

SUMMARY 

Achievement of deep, early response to first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy significantly predicts favorable long-term outcome in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Although imatinib is an effective first-line treatment, nilotinib and dasatinib, more potent TKIs, are more effective in eliciting deep, rapid response to therapy and preventing disease progression, and may represent superior first-line treatment options in CML. Although many patients who are resistant to, or intolerant of first-line imatinib can be rescued by second-line TKIs, the clinical outlook for these patients is inferior, particularly if there is disease progression. Therefore, clinicians should strive to minimize the occurrence of disease progression, and optimize the depth of response early in the treatment course in patients with chronic-phase CML.

Cellular uptake of imatinib into leukemic cells is independent of human organic cation transporter 1 (OCT1)

PURPOSE

In addition to mutated BCR-ABL1 kinase, the organic cation transporter 1 (OCT1, encoded by SLC22A1) has been considered to contribute to imatinib resistance in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). As data are conflicting as to whether OCT1 transports imatinib and may serve as a clinical biomarker, we used a combination of different approaches including animal experiments to elucidate comprehensively the impact of OCT1 on cellular imatinib uptake.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Transport of imatinib was studied using OCT1-expressing Xenopus oocytes, mammalian cell lines (HEK293, MDCK, V79) stably expressing OCT1, human leukemic cells, and Oct1-knockout mice. OCT1 mRNA and protein expression were analyzed in leukemic cells from patients with imatinib-naïve CML as well as in cell lines.

RESULTS

Transport and inhibition studies showed that overexpression of functional OCT1 protein in Xenopus oocytes or mammalian cell lines did not lead to an increased cellular accumulation of imatinib. The CML cell lines (K562, Meg-01, LAMA84) and leukemic cells from patients expressed neither OCT1 mRNA nor protein as demonstrated by immunoblotting and immunofluorescence microscopy, yet they showed a considerable imatinib uptake. Oct1 deficiency in mice had no influence on plasma and hepatic imatinib concentrations.

CONCLUSIONS

These data clearly demonstrate that cellular uptake of imatinib is independent of OCT1, and therefore OCT1 is apparently not a valid biomarker for imatinib resistance.

Treatment efficacy with accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI): final analysis of the American Society of Breast Surgeons MammoSite(®) breast brachytherapy registry trial

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to examine data on treatment efficacy, cosmesis and toxicities for the final analysis of the American Society of Breast Surgeons MammoSite(®) breast brachytherapy registry trial.

METHODS

A total of 1,449 cases of early-stage breast cancer underwent breast conserving therapy. The single-lumen MammoSite(®) device was used to deliver accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) (34 Gy in 3.4 Gy fractions). Of these, 1,255 cases (87 %) had invasive breast cancer (IBC) and 194 cases had DCIS. Median follow-up was 63.1 months with 45 % of all patients having follow-up of 6 years or longer.

RESULTS

There were 41 cases (2.8 %) that developed an ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) for a 5-year actuarial rate of 3.8 % (3.7 % for IBC and 4.1 % for DCIS). Tumor size (odds ratio [OR] = 1.1, p = 0.03) and estrogen receptor negativity (OR = 3.0, p = 0.0009) were associated with IBTR, while a trend was noted for positive margins (OR = 2.0, p = 0.06) and cautionary/unsuitable status compared with suitable status (OR = 1.8, p = 0.07). The percentage of patients with excellent/good cosmetic results at 60, 72, and 84 months was 91.3, 90.5, and 90.6 %, respectively. The overall rates of fat necrosis and infections remained low at 2.5 and 9.6 % with few late toxicity events beyond 2 years. The overall symptomatic seroma rate was 13.4 and 0.6 % beyond 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The final analysis of treatment efficacy, cosmesis, and toxicity from the American Society of Breast Surgeons MammoSite(®) breast brachytherapy registry trial confirms previously noted excellent results and compares favorably with other forms of APBI with similar follow-up and to outcomes seen in selected patients treated with whole breast irradiation.

Considerations for early switch to nilotinib or dasatinib in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia with inadequate response to first-line imatinib

Clinical evidence in chronic myeloid leukemia demonstrates a significant link between optimal response to tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy and favorable clinical outcome. For patients with suboptimal response to first-line TKI, clinical data show that a considerable proportion can be rescued by second-line TKI. Practice guidelines now recommend that clinicians consider a switch in TKI for patients with suboptimal response as early as 3 months after first-line TKI initiation, thus allowing clinicians to intervene in a timely manner and consider the potential benefit of a switch in TKI therapy.

Contrasting effects of diclofenac and ibuprofen on active imatinib uptake into leukaemic cells

Background:

The human organic cation transporter-1 (OCT-1) is the primary active protein for imatinib uptake into target BCR-ABL-positive cells. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are frequently used by chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) patients on imatinib to manage musculoskeletal complaints.

Methods:

Here we investigated the impact of NSAIDs on functional activity of the OCT-1 (OCT-1 activity; OA) in CML cells.

Results:

Although ten of twelve NSAIDs tested had no significant impact on OA (P>0.05), we observed increased OA (27% increase in K562; 22% increase in KU812 cells, P<0.05) and reduced IC50^imatinib when treated with diclofenac. Co-incubation with imatinib and diclofenac resulted in a significantly lower viable cell number compared with imatinib alone. In contrast, ibuprofen led to a significant decrease in OA, an increase in IC50^imatinib and thus reduced the cytotoxicity of imatinib. In primary CML samples, diclofenac significantly increased OA, particularly in patients with low OA (<4 ng per 200 000 cells), and significantly decreased IC50^imatinib. Ibuprofen induced significant decreases in OA in CML samples and healthy donors.

Conclusion:

On the basis of the expected impact of these two drugs on OA, ibuprofen should be avoided in combination with imatinib. Further studies are warranted regarding the potential benefit of diclofenac to improve OA in a clinical setting.