Refine
Document Type
- Article (6)
Language
- English (6)
Has Fulltext
- yes (6)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (6)
Keywords
- mTOR (2)
- Everolimus resistance (1)
- HDAC (1)
- HDAC-inhibition (1)
- Renal cell carcinoma (1)
- Tumor growth (1)
- adhesion (1)
- cdk2/cyclin A (1)
- cross-communication (1)
- histone deacetylase (1)
Institute
- Medizin (6)
The pathophysiologic mechanisms behind urologic disease are increasingly being elucidated. The object of this investigation was to evaluate the publication policies of urologic journals during a period of progressively better understanding and management of urologic disease. Based on the ISI Web of Knowledge Journal Citation Reports and the PubMed database, the number and percentage of original experimental, original clinical, review or commentarial articles published between 2002–2010 in six leading urologic journals were analyzed. “British Journal of Urology International”, “European Urology”, “Urologic Oncology-Seminars and Original Investigations” (“Urologic Oncology”), “Urology”, “The Journal of Urology”, and “World Journal of Urology” were chosen, because these journals publish articles in all four categories. The publication policies of the six journals were very heterogeneous during the time period from 2002 to 2010. The percentage of original experimental and original clinical articles, related to all categories, remained the same in “British Journal of Urology International”, “Urologic Oncology”, “Urology” and “The Journal of Urology”. The percentage of experimental reports in “World Journal of Urology” between 2002–2010 significantly increased from 10 to 20%. A distinct elevation in the percentage of commentarial articles accompanied by a reduction of clinical articles became evident in “European Urology” which significantly correlated with a large increase in the journal’s impact factor. No clearly superior policy could be identified with regard to a general increase in the impact factors from all the journals. The publication policy of urologic journals does not expressly reflect the increase in scientific knowledge, which has occurred over the period 2002–2010. One way of increasing the exposure of urologists to research and expand the interface between experimental and clinical research, would be to enlarge the percentage of experimental articles published. There is no indication that such policy would be detrimental to a journal’s impact factor.
Scientists who are members of an editorial board have been accused of preferentially publishing their scientific work in the journal where they serve as editor. Reputation and academic standing do depend on an uninterrupted flow of published scientific work and the question does arise as to whether publication mainly occurs in the self-edited journal. This investigation was designed to determine whether editorial board members of five urological journals were more likely to publish their research reports in their own rather than in other journals. A retrospective analysis was conducted for all original reports published from 2001–2010 by 65 editorial board members nominated to the boards of five impact leading urologic journals in 2006. Publications before editorial board membership, 2001–2005, and publications within the period of time as an editorial board member, 2006–2010, were identified. The impact factors of the journals were also recorded over the time period 2001–2010 to see whether a change in impact factor correlated with publication locality. In the five journals as a whole, scientific work was not preferentially published in the journal in which the scientists served as editor. However, significant heterogeneity among the journals was evident. One journal showed a significant increase in the amount of published papers in the ‘own’ journal after assumption of editorship, three journals showed no change and one journal showed a highly significant decrease in publishing in the ‘own’ journal after assumption of editorship.
This study was designed to investigate whether epigenetic modulation by histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibition might circumvent resistance towards the mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor temsirolimus in a prostate cancer cell model. Parental (par) and temsirolimus-resistant (res) PC3 prostate cancer cells were exposed to the HDAC inhibitor valproic acid (VPA), and tumor cell adhesion, chemotaxis, migration, and invasion were evaluated. Temsirolimus resistance was characterized by reduced binding of PC3res cells to endothelium, immobilized collagen, and fibronectin, but increased adhesion to laminin, as compared to the parental cells. Chemotaxis, migration, and invasion of PC3res cells were enhanced following temsirolimus re-treatment. Integrin α and β receptors were significantly altered in PC3res compared to PC3par cells. VPA significantly counteracted temsirolimus resistance by down-regulating tumor cell–matrix interaction, chemotaxis, and migration. Evaluation of integrin expression in the presence of VPA revealed a significant down-regulation of integrin α5 in PC3res cells. Blocking studies demonstrated a close association between α5 expression on PC3res and chemotaxis. In this in vitro model, temsirolimus resistance drove prostate cancer cells to become highly motile, while HDAC inhibition reversed the metastatic activity. The VPA-induced inhibition of metastatic activity was accompanied by a lowered integrin α5 surface level on the tumor cells.
Background: Targeted therapies have improved therapeutic options of treating renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, drug response is temporary due to resistance development.
Methods: Functional and molecular changes in RCC Caki-1 cells, after acquired resistance to the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR)-inhibitor everolimus (Cakires), were investigated with and without additional application of the histone deacetylase (HDAC)-inhibitor valproic acid (VPA). Cell growth was evaluated by MTT assay, cell cycle progression and apoptosis by flow cytometry. Target molecules of everolimus and VPA, apoptotic and cell cycle regulating proteins were investigated by western blotting. siRNA blockade was performed to evaluate the functional relevance of the proteins.
Results: Everolimus resistance was accompanied by significant increases in the percentage of G2/M-phase cells and in the IC50. Akt and p70S6K, targets of everolimus, were activated in Cakires compared to drug sensitive cells. The most prominent change in Cakires cells was an increase in the cell cycle activating proteins cdk2 and cyclin A. Knock-down of cdk2 and cyclin A caused significant growth inhibition in the Cakires cells. The HDAC-inhibitor, VPA, counteracted everolimus resistance in Cakires, evidenced by a significant decrease in tumor growth and cdk2/cyclin A.
Conclusion: It is concluded that non-response to everolimus is characterized by increased cdk2/cyclin A, driving RCC cells into the G2/M-phase. VPA hinders everolimus non-response by diminishing cdk2/cyclin A. Therefore, treatment with HDAC-inhibitors might be an option for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma and acquired everolimus resistance.
Inhibitors of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) have improved the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, chronic drug exposure may trigger resistance, limiting the utility of these agents. The metastatic behavior of RCC cells, susceptible (RCC(par)) or resistant (RCC(res)) to the mTOR inhibitor temsirolimus, was investigated. Adhesion to vascular endothelium or immobilized collagen and fibronectin was quantified. Chemotactic motility was evaluated with a modified Boyden chamber assay. Integrin α and β subtype receptors were analyzed by flow cytometry and Western blot analysis. The physiological relevance of the integrins was then determined by blocking studies and small interfering RNA knockdown. Adhesion to endothelial cells and to fibronectin (not to collagen) and chemotaxis were enhanced in RCC(res) compared to RCC(par). RCC(res) detached from fibronectin and motile activity further increased under retreatment with low-dosed temsirolimus. α5 integrin was diminished inside the cell and at the cell surface, whereas the β3 subtype was reduced intracellularly but elevated at the plasma membrane. In RCC(par), blocking α5 surface receptors enhanced RCC-collagen but reduced RCC-fibronectin interaction, whereas the opposite was true for RCC(res). Chemotaxis of RCC(par) but not of RCC(res) was strongly diminished by the α5 antibody. Blocking β3 significantly lowered chemotaxis with stronger effects on RCC(res), compared to RCC(par). Importantly, β3 knockdown reduced chemotaxis of RCC(par) but upregulated the motile behavior of RCC(res). Temsirolimus resistance is characterized by quantitative alterations of integrin α5 and β3 expression, coupled to functional changes of the integrin molecules, and forces a switch from RCC adhesion to RCC migration.
Molecular tumour targeting has significantly improved anti-cancer protocols. Still, the addition of molecular targeting to the treatment regime has not led to a curative breakthrough. Combined mammalian target of Rapamycin (mTOR) and histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibition has been shown not only to enhance anti-tumour potential, but also to prevent resistance development seen under mono-drug therapy. This investigation was designed to evaluate whether cross-communication exists between mTOR signalling and epigenetic events regulated by HDAC. DU-145 prostate cancer cells were treated with insulin-like growth factor (IGF) to activate the Akt-mTOR cascade or with the HDAC-inhibitor valproic acid (VPA) to induce histone H3 and H4 acetylation (aH3, aH4). Subsequently, mTOR, Rictor, Raptor, p70s6k, Akt (all: total and phosphorylated), H3 and H4 (total and acetylated) were analysed by western blotting. Both techniques revealed a link between mTOR and the epigenetic machinery. IGF activated mTOR, Rictor, Raptor, p70s6k and Akt, but also enhanced aH3 and aH4. Inversely, IGFr blockade and knock-down blocked the Akt-mTOR axis, but simultaneously diminished aH3 and aH4. VPA treatment up-regulated histone acetylation, but also activated mTOR-Akt signalling. HDAC1 and 2 knock-down revealed that the interaction with the mTOR system is initiated by histone H3 acetylation. HDAC-mTOR communication, therefore, is apparent whereby tumour-promoting (Akt/mTORhigh, aH3/aH4low) and tumour-suppressing signals (Akt/mTORlow, aH3/aH4high) are activated in parallel. Combined use of an HDAC- and mTOR inhibitor might then diminish pro-tumour effects triggered by the HDAC- (Akt/mTORhigh) or mTOR inhibitor (aH3/aH4low) alone.