Ohe Y, Nakagawa K, Fujiwara Y, Sasaki Y, Minato K, Bungo M, Niimi S, Horichi N, Fukuda M, Saijo N
Department of Internal Medicine, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Cancer Res. 1989 Aug 1;49(15):4098-102.
A new model to predict antitumor activity of new analogues was developed, and the cross-resistance against cisplatin (CDDP) and Adriamycin (ADM) was examined. A preclinical evaluation of various new analogues using this new model was performed. The antitumor activities of KT6149, MX-2 (KRN8602), SM5887, menogaril (TUT-7), and liblomycin (NK313) were evaluated against four non-small cell lung cancer cell lines, PC-7, -9, -13, and -14; two small cell lung cancer cell lines, H69 and N231; four CDDP-resistant cell lines, PC-7/1.0, PC-9/0.5, PC-14/1.5, and H69/0.4; a human myelogenous leukemia cell line, K562; and its ADM-resistant subline, K562/ADM by clonogenic assay. The relative antitumor activities of these new analogues were compared with those of parental agents, mitomycin C, ADM, bleomycin, and several anticancer drugs, CDDP, daunomycin, vindesine, and etoposide. KT6149 was more active than mitomycin C against all lung cancer cell lines and the human myelogenous leukemia cell line. Menogaril showed greater activity than ADM, and MX-2 showed activity similar to ADM. However, the antitumor activity of SM5887 was lower than that of ADM. SM5887 and menogaril showed cross-resistance to K562/ADM. Nevertheless, the antitumor activity against K562/ADM of MX-2 was similar to that of the parental cell lines. The activity of liblomycin was similar to that of bleomycin. Thus, KT6149 appears to be the best analogue for use in a clinical trial against lung cancer. MX-2 was active even against ADM-resistant cancer cells. The values of relative resistance to CDDP or ADM were 4.7, 8.1, 7.5, 20.0, and 13.6 for PC-7/1.0, PC-9/0.5, PC-14/1.5, H69/0.4, and K562/ADM, respectively. CDDP-resistant cell lines showed no cross-resistance with other drugs in this study. K562/ADM showed cross-resistance against daunomycin, etoposide, and vindesine. In contrast, mitomycin C and bleomycin had nearly equal activity against K562 and K562/ADM. However, K562/ADM was 2.4-fold more sensitive to CDDP than its parental cell line, K562 (P less than 0.001). These results suggested that the mechanism of CDDP resistance is different from that of multidrug resistance.
开发了一种预测新类似物抗肿瘤活性的新模型,并研究了对顺铂(CDDP)和阿霉素(ADM)的交叉耐药性。使用该新模型对各种新类似物进行了临床前评估。通过克隆形成试验评估了KT6149、MX - 2(KRN8602)、SM5887、美诺加明(TUT - 7)和利布洛霉素(NK313)对四种非小细胞肺癌细胞系PC - 7、- 9、- 13和- 14;两种小细胞肺癌细胞系H69和N231;四种CDDP耐药细胞系PC - 7/1.0、PC - 9/0.5、PC - 14/1.5和H69/0.4;人髓性白血病细胞系K562及其ADM耐药亚系K562/ADM的抗肿瘤活性。将这些新类似物的相对抗肿瘤活性与亲本药物丝裂霉素C、ADM、博来霉素以及几种抗癌药物CDDP、柔红霉素、长春地辛和依托泊苷进行了比较。KT6149对所有肺癌细胞系和人髓性白血病细胞系的活性均高于丝裂霉素C。美诺加明的活性高于ADM,MX - 2的活性与ADM相似。然而,SM5887的抗肿瘤活性低于ADM。SM5887和美诺加明对K562/ADM表现出交叉耐药性。尽管如此,MX - 2对K562/ADM的抗肿瘤活性与亲本细胞系相似。利布洛霉素的活性与博来霉素相似。因此,KT6149似乎是用于肺癌临床试验的最佳类似物。MX - 2甚至对ADM耐药癌细胞也有活性。PC - 7/1.0、PC - 9/0.5、PC - 14/1.5、H69/0.4和K562/ADM对CDDP或ADM的相对耐药值分别为4.7、8.1、7.5、20.0和13.6。在本研究中,CDDP耐药细胞系与其他药物未表现出交叉耐药性。K562/ADM对柔红霉素、依托泊苷和长春地辛表现出交叉耐药性。相比之下,丝裂霉素C和博来霉素对K562和K562/ADM的活性几乎相等。然而,K562/ADM对CDDP的敏感性是其亲本细胞系K562的2.4倍(P小于0.001)。这些结果表明,CDDP耐药机制与多药耐药机制不同。