Stacey D W, Hitomi M, Chen G
Department of Molecular Biology, The Lerner Research Institute, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio 44195, USA.
Mol Cell Biol. 2000 Dec;20(24):9127-37. doi: 10.1128/MCB.20.24.9127-9137.2000.
The cell cycle, oncogenic signaling, and topoisomerase (topo) IIalpha levels all influence sensitivity to anti-topo II drugs. Because the cell cycle and oncogenic signaling influence each other as well as topo IIalpha levels, it is difficult to assess the importance of any one of these factors independently of the others during drug treatment. Such information, however, is vital to an understanding of the cellular basis of drug toxicity. We, therefore, developed a series of analytical procedures to individually assess the role of each of these factors during treatment with the anti-topo II drug etoposide. All studies were performed with asynchronously proliferating cultures by the use of time-lapse and quantitative fluorescence staining procedures. To our surprise, we found that neither oncogene action nor the cell cycle altered topo IIalpha protein levels in actively cycling cells. Only a minor population of slowly cycling cells within these cultures responded to constitutively active oncogenes by elevating topo IIalpha production. Thus, it was possible to study the effects of the cell cycle and oncogene action on drug-treated cells while topo IIalpha levels remained constant. Toxicity analyses were performed with two consecutive time-lapse observations separated by a brief drug treatment. The cell cycle phase was determined from the first observation, and cell fate was determined from the second. Cells were most sensitive to drug treatment from mid-S phase through G(2) phase, with G(1) phase cells nearly threefold less sensitive. In addition, the presence of an oncogenic src gene or microinjected Ras protein increased drug toxicity by approximately threefold in actively cycling cells and by at least this level in the small population of slowly cycling cells. We conclude that both cell cycle phase and oncogenic signaling influence drug toxicity independently of alterations in topo IIalpha levels.
细胞周期、致癌信号以及拓扑异构酶(topo)IIα水平均会影响对抗拓扑异构酶II药物的敏感性。由于细胞周期和致癌信号相互影响,同时也影响拓扑异构酶IIα水平,因此在药物治疗期间很难独立于其他因素来评估这些因素中任何一个的重要性。然而,此类信息对于理解药物毒性的细胞基础至关重要。因此,我们开发了一系列分析程序,以分别评估这些因素在使用抗拓扑异构酶II药物依托泊苷治疗期间各自所起的作用。所有研究均使用延时和定量荧光染色程序,对异步增殖培养物进行。令我们惊讶的是,我们发现在活跃循环的细胞中,致癌基因作用和细胞周期均未改变拓扑异构酶IIα蛋白水平。在这些培养物中,只有一小部分缓慢循环的细胞通过提高拓扑异构酶IIα的产生对组成型激活的致癌基因作出反应。因此,在拓扑异构酶IIα水平保持恒定的情况下,有可能研究细胞周期和致癌基因作用对药物处理细胞的影响。通过两次连续的延时观察进行毒性分析,两次观察之间进行短暂的药物处理。从第一次观察确定细胞周期阶段,从第二次观察确定细胞命运。细胞从中S期到G2期对药物治疗最为敏感,G1期细胞的敏感性几乎低三倍。此外,致癌性src基因的存在或显微注射的Ras蛋白在活跃循环的细胞中使药物毒性增加约三倍,在一小部分缓慢循环的细胞中至少增加到这个水平。我们得出结论,细胞周期阶段和致癌信号均独立于拓扑异构酶IIα水平的改变而影响药物毒性。