mk-8776 and Pancreatic-Neoplasms

MLN4924 inhibits the cullin-RING ligases mediated ubiquitin-proteasome system, and has showed antitumor activities in preclinical studies, but its effects and mechanisms on pancreatic cancer (PC) remains elusive. We found that MLN4924 inhibited the proliferation and clonogenicity of PC cells, caused DNA damage, particularly double-strand breaks, and leaded to Chk1 activation and cell-cycle arrest. Chk1 inhibitor SCH 900776 alone exhibited minimal cytotoxicity, and caused no DNA damage on PC cells. But in the combination therapy, SCH 900776 enhanced the cytotoxicity and DNA damage caused by MLN4924, likely by abrogating G2/M arrest and promoting DNA re-replication. In vivo study on a xenograft PC mouse model also showed that SCH 900776 increased the efficacy of MLN4924. We also evaluated the level of NEDD8-activating enzyme (NAE), the direct target of MLN4924, and found that NAE level was elevated in PC tissues compared with normal pancreas, but was irrelevant with prognosis. Our findings provide the preclinical evidence and the rationale of the combination therapy of MLN4924 with SCH 900776 or other Chk1 inhibitors to treat PC.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Animals; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Cell Line, Tumor; Checkpoint Kinase 1; Cyclopentanes; DNA Damage; DNA Replication; Drug Synergism; Female; G2 Phase Cell Cycle Checkpoints; Humans; Male; Mice, Nude; Middle Aged; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Prognosis; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Pyrazoles; Pyrimidines; Ubiquitin-Activating Enzymes

Small molecule inhibitors of the checkpoint proteins CHK1 and WEE1 are currently in clinical development in combination with the antimetabolite gemcitabine. It is unclear, however, if there is a therapeutic advantage to CHK1 vs. WEE1 inhibition for chemosensitization. The goals of this study were to directly compare the relative efficacies of the CHK1 inhibitor MK8776 and the WEE1 inhibitor AZD1775 to sensitize pancreatic cancer cell lines to gemcitabine and to identify pharmacodynamic biomarkers predictive of chemosensitization. Cells treated with gemcitabine and either MK8776 or AZD1775 were first assessed for clonogenic survival. With the exception of the homologous recombination-defective Capan1 cells, which were relatively insensitive to MK8776, we found that these cell lines were similarly sensitized to gemcitabine by CHK1 or WEE1 inhibition. The abilities of either the CDK1/2 inhibitor roscovitine or exogenous nucleosides to prevent MK8776 or AZD1775-mediated chemosensitization, however, were both inhibitor-dependent and variable among cell lines. Given the importance of DNA replication stress to gemcitabine chemosensitization, we next assessed high-intensity, pan-nuclear γH2AX staining as a pharmacodynamic marker for sensitization. In contrast to total γH2AX, aberrant mitotic entry or sub-G1 DNA content, high-intensity γH2AX staining correlated with chemosensitization by either MK8776 or AZD1775 (R

Topics: Analysis of Variance; Biomarkers, Tumor; Cell Cycle Checkpoints; Cell Cycle Proteins; Cell Line, Tumor; Cell Survival; Checkpoint Kinase 1; Deoxycytidine; DNA Replication; Gemcitabine; Histones; Humans; Nucleosides; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Protein-Tyrosine Kinases; Pyrazoles; Pyrimidines; Pyrimidinones; Roscovitine; Staining and Labeling

The combination of radiation with chemotherapy is the most effective therapy for unresectable pancreatic cancer. To improve upon this regimen, we combined the selective Checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) inhibitor MK8776 with gemcitabine-based chemoradiation in preclinical pancreatic cancer models.. We tested the ability of MK8776 to sensitize to gemcitabine-radiation in homologous recombination repair (HRR)-proficient and -deficient pancreatic cancer cells and assessed Rad51 focus formation. In vivo, we investigated the efficacy, tumor cell selectivity, and pharmacodynamic biomarkers of sensitization by MK8776.. We found that MK8776 significantly sensitized HRR-proficient (AsPC-1, MiaPaCa-2, BxPC-3) but not -deficient (Capan-1) pancreatic cancer cells to gemcitabine-radiation and inhibited Rad51 focus formation in HRR-proficient cells. In vivo, MiaPaCa-2 xenografts were significantly sensitized to gemcitabine-radiation by MK8776 without significant weight loss or observable toxicity in the small intestine, the dose-limiting organ for chemoradiation therapy in pancreatic cancer. We also assessed pChk1 (S345), a pharmacodynamic biomarker of DNA damage in response to Chk1 inhibition in both tumor and small intestine and found that MK8776 combined with gemcitabine or gemcitabine-radiation produced a significantly greater increase in pChk1 (S345) in tumor relative to small intestine, suggesting greater DNA damage in tumor than in normal tissue. Furthermore, we demonstrated the utility of an ex vivo platform for assessment of pharmacodynamic biomarkers of Chk1 inhibition in pancreatic cancer.. Together, our results suggest that MK8776 selectively sensitizes HRR-proficient pancreatic cancer cells and xenografts to gemcitabine-radiation and support the clinical investigation of MK8776 in combination with gemcitabine-radiation in locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

Topics: Animals; Cell Line, Tumor; Checkpoint Kinase 1; Chemoradiotherapy; Deoxycytidine; Disease Models, Animal; Drug Resistance, Neoplasm; Female; Gemcitabine; Humans; Inhibitory Concentration 50; Mice; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Protein Kinases; Pyrazoles; Pyrimidines; Radiation-Sensitizing Agents; Recombinational DNA Repair; Xenograft Model Antitumor Assays

Chk1 inhibitors have emerged as promising anticancer therapeutic agents particularly when combined with antimetabolites such as gemcitabine, cytarabine or hydroxyurea. Here, we address the importance of appropriate drug scheduling when gemcitabine is combined with the Chk1 inhibitor MK-8776, and the mechanisms involved in the schedule dependence.. Growth inhibition induced by gemcitabine plus MK-8776 was assessed across multiple cancer cell lines. Experiments used clinically relevant "bolus" administration of both drugs rather than continuous drug exposures. We assessed the effect of different treatment schedules on cell cycle perturbation and tumor cell growth in vitro and in xenograft tumor models.. MK-8776 induced an average 7-fold sensitization to gemcitabine in 16 cancer cell lines. The time of MK-8776 administration significantly affected the response of tumor cells to gemcitabine. Although gemcitabine induced rapid cell cycle arrest, the stalled replication forks were not initially dependent on Chk1 for stability. By 18 h, RAD51 was loaded onto DNA indicative of homologous recombination. Inhibition of Chk1 at 18 h rapidly dissociated RAD51 leading to the collapse of replication forks and cell death. Addition of MK-8776 from 18-24 h after a 6-h incubation with gemcitabine induced much greater sensitization than if the two drugs were incubated concurrently for 6 h. The ability of this short incubation with MK-8776 to sensitize cells is critical because of the short half-life of MK-8776 in patients' plasma. Cell cycle perturbation was also assessed in human pancreas tumor xenografts in mice. There was a dramatic accumulation of cells in S/G₂ phase 18 h after gemcitabine administration, but cells had started to recover by 42 h. Administration of MK-8776 18 h after gemcitabine caused significantly delayed tumor growth compared to either drug alone, or when the two drugs were administered with only a 30 min interval.. There are two reasons why delayed addition of MK-8776 enhances sensitivity to gemcitabine: first, there is an increased number of cells arrested in S phase; and second, the arrested cells have adequate time to initiate recombination and thereby become Chk1 dependent. These results have important implications for the design of clinical trials using this drug combination.

Topics: Animals; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Cell Line, Tumor; Deoxycytidine; DNA Damage; Drug Administration Schedule; Drug Resistance, Neoplasm; Drug Synergism; Gemcitabine; Humans; Mice; Mice, Nude; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pyrazoles; Pyrimidines; Recombinational DNA Repair; S Phase Cell Cycle Checkpoints; Tumor Burden; Xenograft Model Antitumor Assays