Jekunen et al: Strategy of sensitizing tumor cells with adenovirus-p53 transfectionRecently, a report using isobologram modelling haveshowed that the combination of adeno-p53 + radiationproduced significantly synergistic effects in NSCL celllines, whereas the combination of docetaxel + adeno-p53and docetaxel + radiation produced mixed effects rangingbetween additive and synergistic (Nguyen al., 1996). Thethree-agent combination also produced significantlysynergistic effects.Brown and Wouters have criticized the sensitizingresults obtained in cell cultures. They have pointed out theneed for further evidence in relating p53 to the sensitivityof anticancer agents (Brown and Wouters, 1999). Becauseapoptosis, particularly p53–dependent apoptosis, can occurrapidly after drug exposure, short-term growth rate assaystend to underestimate overall death of cells with mutantp53 or of cells not undergoing apoptosis. This may resultin a situation where short-term assays may incorrectlyassess overall cell death in tumor cells with differentprobabilities of undergoing early apoptosis. Thus, resultsmay have a bias toward increased cell death in wild-typep53 cells and decreased cell kill in mutant p53 cells.Results of experiments with normal cells transformed withdominant oncogenes have often been extrapolated totumor cells, instead of initially using cancer cell models.Transformed normal cells are usually apoptotically moresensitive than cancer cells. Therefore, in sensitizingexperiments, both long term clonogenic assays and tumorcell models with solid tumors should be used rather thangrowth rate assays and transformed normal cells.However, the more widely accepted conclusion drawnfrom studies conducted in cancer cell lines and tumors ofdifferent origin is still that restoration of normal p53function in tumors restores the apoptotic pathway andleads to an increased response to chemotherapy (Peller,1998; Ferreira, 1999; Chang, 2000).C. Transfection of cell cultures with theadenovirus p53 gene constructAdenovirus vectors have many advantages over otherviral and non-viral vectors. Their transfection efficacy ishigh, in both dividing and resting cells, and they showhigh expression levels (Hwu, 2001). As adenoviral DNAis not incorporated into the cell genome, expression of thetransgene is transient, but adenoviral vectors can beproduced at high titers. Introduction of wild-type p53 intotumors with non functional p53 offers a novel strategy fortreating cancer, by inducing apoptotic death in neoplasticcells.Genomic instability accompanied by loss of p53-mediated apoptosis can also lead to therapy resistance. Thesupport for this rationale is that loss of p53 coulddesensitize cells to the damaging effects of drugs. Normaltransgenic hematopoetic cells (Lotem and Sachs, 1993),E1A-expressing transgenic fibroblasts (Lowe et al, 1993),and transformed transgenic fibroblasts (Lowe et al, 1994)were all more resistant to apoptosis following treatmentwith any of a wide variety of anticancer agents, than werecomparable cells from the parental strain of mice, whichexpressed wild-type p53. Apoptosis seemed to beenhanced in cells that expressed wild-type p53 and wereable to trigger their own cell death program.In cell culture models, adenovirus-mediated p53 genetransfer alone inhibits cell growth and promotes apoptosis,regardless of the endogenous p53 status of the ovariancancer cells (Santoso et al, 1995). In tumor cells, mutatedp53 and also loss of p53 function were associated withresistance to chemotherapeutic agents. There are severalreports of at least an additive interaction between adenop53and cisplatin in bladder cancer (Miyake et al, 2000),between adeno-p53 and cisplatin, SN-38 (a metabolite ofirinotecan), 5-fluorouracil, taxanes, bleomycin, andcyclophosphamide in NSCLC (Fujiwara et al, 1994)(Horio et al, 2000), and between adeno-p53 and paclitaxelin ovarian cancer (Nielsen et al, 1998). In the ovariancancer model, enhanced efficacy has been reported in athree-drug combination of adeno-p53, cisplatin, andpaclitaxel (Gurnani et al, 1999).There is some evidence that chemosensitivity can beincreased by replacement of the p53 gene. Roth (Roth,1996) reported that recombinant-adenovirus-mediatedtransfer of the wild-type p53 gene into several human cellswith homozygous deletions of p53 markedly increasedcellular chemosensitivity to the major chemotherapeuticdrugs. An additive antiproliferative effect was reported inp53null H358 lung cancer cells when cultured withcisplatin for 24 h before transduction with adeno-p53(Fujiwara et al, 1994). Enhanced apoptosis, detected byDNA fragmentation, was reported for the combinationcompared with each agent alone.A viability assay demonstrated that a replicationdefectiveadenovirus encoding the wild-type p53 gene(INGN 201, Introgen Therapeutics, Inc.) suppressesgrowth and enhances sensitivity to DNA-damagingchemotherapeutic drugs (5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin,cisplatin) in p53-mutant-expressing cell lines (Gjerset andMercola, 2000). These cells lines represent DLD-1 coloncancer, T47D breast cancer, PC-3 prostate cancer, andT98G glioblastoma. Transfection efficiencies were 60-70%. It seems that restoration of the wild-type p53 tomutant p53-expressing or p53null cells results in markedenhancement of sensitivity to several DNA damagingagents. This enhancement of sensitivity was not observedin two wild-type p53-expressing cell lines, MCF7 andLS174T, suggesting that, in this model, wild-type p53gene transfer is effective as therapy sensitization only intumors that have lost wild-type p53 function.1. Glioma and pancreatic cancerSomatic gene therapy based on the reintroduction ofp53 limits the proliferation of human malignant gliomacells, but is unlikely to induce clinically relevantsensitization to chemotherapy in these tumors. Wild-typep53 failed to sensitize glioma cells to cytotoxic drugsincluding BCNU, cytarabine, doxorubicin, teniposide, andvincristine. The combined effects of the wild-type p53gene transfer and drug treatment were less than additiverather than synergistic, suggesting that the intracellularcascades activated by p53 and chemotherapy wereredundant. Unexpectedly, forced expression of mutant-28
<strong>Gene</strong> <strong>Therapy</strong> and <strong>Molecular</strong> <strong>Biology</strong> Vol 7, page 29p53-modulated drug sensitivity enhanced the toxicity ofsome drugs but attenuated the effects of others (Trepel etal, 1998). Likewise, in p53-null pancreatic carcinomacells, wild-type p53 gene transduction had no effect on invitro chemosensitivity to cisplatin, etoposide, 5-fluorouracil and paclitaxel (Kimura et al, 1997).Moreover, in anaplastic thyroid cancer cells, adeno-p53increased the sensitivity to doxorubicin with a 10-folddecrease in IC 50 values.2. Hepatocellular cancerOne of the goals of gene therapy for treating canceris selective expression of cytotoxic gene products in tumorcells. When replication-defective retroviruses wereconstructed containing p53 cDNA that wastranscriptionally regulated by the human hepatocellularcarcinoma-associatedalpha-fetoprotein genetranscriptional control elements, the expression ofexogenous wild-type p53 from this retroviral vector waslimited to the cells producing alpha-fetoprotein.Introduction of wild-type p53 into alpha-fetoproteinpositive human hepatocellular carcinoma cells byretroviral infection markedly inhibited their clonal growthin a monolayer and increased the sensitivity of these cellsto the chemotherapeutic drug cisplatin (Xu et al, 1996).3. Ovarian cancerIn cell culture models adenovirus-mediated p53 genetherapy is one way to inhibit cell growth and promotesapoptosis, regardless of the endogenous p53 status of theovarian cancer cells (Santoso et al, 1995) (Wolf et al,1999). Adeno-p53 gene transfer, combined with cisplatin,doxorubicin, 5-fluorouracil, methotrexate, or etoposide,inhibited cell proliferation more effectively thanchemotherapy alone in head and neck, ovarian, prostateand breast tumor cell lines. Of particular significance, inan ovarian cancer model enhanced efficacy was notedwhen using the three-drug combination of adeno-p53,cisplatin, and paclitaxel (Gurnani et al, 1999). In humanhead and neck, ovarian, prostate, and breast cancer cells,low concentrations of paclitaxel also increase the numberof cells transduced by recombinant adeno-p53 in a dosedependentmanner (Nielsen et al, 1998). The concentrationof paclitaxel responsible for increased adenovirustransduction is lower than that required for microtubulecondensation.4. Breast cancerTransduction of cells using replication-deficientadenovirus vectors can induce endogenous p53 expressionin cells containing the wild-type p53 gene and thisresponse is different from the p53 induction observed afterDNA damage (McPake et al, 1999). Lebedeva et al, haveexamined the effects of a replication-defective adenovirusencoding p53 (INGN 201, Ad5CMV-p53), alone or incombination with the breast cancer therapeuticdoxorubicin, in suppressing growth and inducing apoptosisin breast cancer cells in vitro (Lebedeva et al, 2001). Theyfound that whereas in vitro treatment of cells with adenop53reduced 3 H-thymidine incorporation by about 90% at48 hr, cell viability at 6 days was reduced by only about50% relative to controls. Although apoptosis is detectablein the adeno-p53-treated cultures, these results suggest thata large fraction of adeno-p53-treated cells merely undergoreversible cell cycle arrest. Combined treatment withadeno-p53 and doxorubicin results in a greater thanadditive loss of viability in vitro and increased apoptosis.These data indicate an additive to synergistic effect ofadeno-p53 and doxorubicin for the treatment of primaryand metastatic breast cancer.However, in breast cancer cell lines results withoutany clear cut link between transfection of p53 and asensitizing effect have been reported. Two human breastcancer cell lines, MDA-MB-231 and MDA-MB-435, bothwith p53 mutations, were transduced with adenoviralvectors containing wild-type p53 and the effects on growthwere determined by clonogenic assays (Parker et al, 2000).Combining VP-16 and paclitaxel with Ad5CMV-p53 didnot consistently or significantly decrease clonogenicsurvival.5. Bladder cancerCombined treatment with Ad5CMV-p53 andcisplatin could be an attractive strategy for inhibitingprogression of bladder cancer. In human bladder cancerKoTCC-1 cells, transfer of an adenovirus-mediated p53gene enhances cisplatin cytotoxicity in vitro, andAd5CMV-p53 and cisplatin synergistically inhibit growthand metastasis in vivo. Ad5CMV-p53 substantiallyenhances cisplatin chemosensitivity in a dose-dependentmanner, reducing the median IC 50 by more than 50%.Furthermore, orthotopic injection of adeno-p53 combinedwith cisplatin therapy synergistically inhibits growth ofsubcutaneous KoTCC-1 tumors and the incidence ofmetastasis (Miyake et al, 2000). In contrast, p21 cip1/waf1gene therapy had no effect on in vitro or in vivochemosensitivity to cisplatin (Miyake et al, 1998).6. Lung cancerRecombinant adenovirus-mediated transfer of thewild-type p53 gene into monolayer cultures ormulticellular tumor spheroids of the human NSCLC cellline H358, in which there is homozygous deletion of p53,markedly increased the cellular sensitivity of these cells tocisplatin (Fujiwara et al, 1994). In a study made by Osakiet al,(Osaki et al, 2000), an alteration in drugchemosensitivity caused by the adenovirus-mediatedtransfer of the wild-type p53 gene in human lung cancercells was tested on a human pulmonary squamous cellcarcinoma cell line, NCI-H157, and a human pulmonarylarge-cell carcinoma cell line, NCI-H1299. Based onisobologram data, a supra-additive effect was observed for5-fluorouracil and SN-38 on NCI-H157 cells. An additiveeffect was also observed for cisplatin, paclitaxel,bleomycin, and cyclophosphamide on NCI-H157 cells.Cisplatin, paclitaxel, 5-fluorouracil, and SN-38 had anadditive effect on NCI-H1299 cells. No drug showed anysubadditive or protective effects. These findings suggest29
- Page 7 and 8: Instructions to authors:Gene Therap
- Page 9: Please submit an electronic version
- Page 12: 103-111 ResearchArticle113-133 Revi
- Page 17 and 18: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 19 and 20: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 21 and 22: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 23 and 24: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 25 and 26: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 27 and 28: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 29 and 30: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 31 and 32: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 33 and 34: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 35 and 36: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 37 and 38: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 39 and 40: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 41: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 45 and 46: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 47 and 48: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 49 and 50: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 51 and 52: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 53 and 54: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 55 and 56: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 57 and 58: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 59 and 60: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 61 and 62: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 63 and 64: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 65 and 66: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 67 and 68: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 69 and 70: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 71 and 72: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 73 and 74: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 75 and 76: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 77: Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 80 and 81: Epperly et al: Late injection of Mn
- Page 82 and 83: Epperly et al: Late injection of Mn
- Page 84 and 85: Goldberg-Cohen et al: Regulation of
- Page 86 and 87: Goldberg-Cohen et al: Regulation of
- Page 88 and 89: Goldberg-Cohen et al: Regulation of
- Page 90 and 91: Gascón-Irún et al: Gene therapy a
- Page 92 and 93:
Gascón-Irún et al: Gene therapy a
- Page 94 and 95:
Gascón-Irún et al: Gene therapy a
- Page 96 and 97:
Gascón-Irún et al: Gene therapy a
- Page 98 and 99:
Gascón-Irún et al: Gene therapy a
- Page 100 and 101:
Gascón-Irún et al: Gene therapy a
- Page 102 and 103:
Gascón-Irún et al: Gene therapy a
- Page 104 and 105:
Gascón-Irún et al: Gene therapy a
- Page 106 and 107:
Suzuki et al: Regulation of the Sp/
- Page 108 and 109:
Suzuki et al: Regulation of the Sp/
- Page 110 and 111:
Suzuki et al: Regulation of the Sp/
- Page 112 and 113:
Suzuki et al: Regulation of the Sp/
- Page 114 and 115:
Li et al: MET amplification in live
- Page 116 and 117:
Li et al: MET amplification in live
- Page 118 and 119:
Chavakis et al: Leukocyte adhesion
- Page 120 and 121:
Chavakis et al: Leukocyte adhesion
- Page 122 and 123:
Chavakis et al: Leukocyte adhesion
- Page 124 and 125:
Chavakis et al: Leukocyte adhesion
- Page 126 and 127:
Chavakis et al: Leukocyte adhesion
- Page 128 and 129:
Sanlioglu et al: Adenovirus mediate
- Page 130 and 131:
Sanlioglu et al: Adenovirus mediate
- Page 132 and 133:
Sanlioglu et al: Adenovirus mediate
- Page 134 and 135:
Sanlioglu et al: Adenovirus mediate
- Page 136 and 137:
Sanlioglu et al: Adenovirus mediate
- Page 138 and 139:
Sanlioglu et al: Adenovirus mediate
- Page 140 and 141:
Sanlioglu et al: Adenovirus mediate
- Page 142 and 143:
Sanlioglu et al: Adenovirus mediate
- Page 144 and 145:
Sanlioglu et al: Adenovirus mediate
- Page 146 and 147:
Sanlioglu et al: Adenovirus mediate
- Page 148 and 149:
Sanlioglu et al: Adenovirus mediate
- Page 150 and 151:
George et al: Gene therapy for vasc
- Page 152 and 153:
George et al: Gene therapy for vasc
- Page 154 and 155:
George et al: Gene therapy for vasc
- Page 156 and 157:
George et al: Gene therapy for vasc
- Page 158 and 159:
George et al: Gene therapy for vasc
- Page 160 and 161:
George et al: Gene therapy for vasc
- Page 162 and 163:
George et al: Gene therapy for vasc
- Page 164 and 165:
George et al: Gene therapy for vasc
- Page 166 and 167:
George et al: Gene therapy for vasc
- Page 168 and 169:
Zhang et al: Angiogenic Gene Therap
- Page 170 and 171:
Zhang et al: Angiogenic Gene Therap
- Page 172 and 173:
Zhang et al: Angiogenic Gene Therap
- Page 174 and 175:
Zhang et al: Angiogenic Gene Therap
- Page 176 and 177:
Zhang et al: Angiogenic Gene Therap
- Page 178 and 179:
Zhang et al: Angiogenic Gene Therap
- Page 180 and 181:
Zhang et al: Angiogenic Gene Therap
- Page 182 and 183:
Xu et al: G-CSF receptor-mediated S
- Page 184 and 185:
Xu et al: G-CSF receptor-mediated S
- Page 186 and 187:
Xu et al: G-CSF receptor-mediated S
- Page 188 and 189:
Burek et al: Calcium induced cell d
- Page 190 and 191:
Burek et al: Calcium induced cell d
- Page 192 and 193:
Burek et al: Calcium induced cell d
- Page 194 and 195:
Burek et al: Calcium induced cell d
- Page 196 and 197:
David et al: Current status and fut
- Page 198 and 199:
David et al: Current status and fut
- Page 200 and 201:
David et al: Current status and fut
- Page 202 and 203:
David et al: Current status and fut
- Page 204 and 205:
David et al: Current status and fut
- Page 206 and 207:
David et al: Current status and fut
- Page 208 and 209:
David et al: Current status and fut
- Page 210 and 211:
David et al: Current status and fut
- Page 212 and 213:
David et al: Current status and fut
- Page 214 and 215:
David et al: Current status and fut
- Page 216 and 217:
David et al: Current status and fut
- Page 218 and 219:
David et al: Current status and fut
- Page 220 and 221:
David et al: Current status and fut
- Page 222 and 223:
David et al: Current status and fut
- Page 224 and 225:
David et al: Current status and fut
- Page 226 and 227:
Stoll et al: The role of EBV and ge
- Page 228 and 229:
Stoll et al: The role of EBV and ge
- Page 230 and 231:
Stoll et al: The role of EBV and ge
- Page 232 and 233:
Stoll et al: The role of EBV and ge
- Page 234 and 235:
Stoll et al: The role of EBV and ge
- Page 236 and 237:
Maruyama et al: Kidney-targeted pla
- Page 238 and 239:
Maruyama et al: Kidney-targeted pla
- Page 240 and 241:
Maruyama et al: Kidney-targeted pla
- Page 242 and 243:
Maruyama et al: Kidney-targeted pla
- Page 244 and 245:
Kren et al: Hepatocyte-targeted del
- Page 246 and 247:
Kren et al: Hepatocyte-targeted del
- Page 248 and 249:
Kren et al: Hepatocyte-targeted del
- Page 250 and 251:
Kren et al: Hepatocyte-targeted del
- Page 252 and 253:
Kren et al: Hepatocyte-targeted del
- Page 254 and 255:
Zeng: PRL-3 as a target for cancer
- Page 256 and 257:
Zeng: PRL-3 as a target for cancer
- Page 258 and 259:
Zeng: PRL-3 as a target for cancer
- Page 260 and 261:
Latchman: Protective effect of heat
- Page 262 and 263:
Latchman: Protective effect of heat
- Page 264 and 265:
Latchman: Protective effect of heat
- Page 266 and 267:
Latchman: Protective effect of heat
- Page 268 and 269:
Latchman: Protective effect of heat
- Page 270 and 271:
Cai et al: Lung cancer gene therapy
- Page 272 and 273:
Cai et al: Lung cancer gene therapy
- Page 274 and 275:
Cai et al: Lung cancer gene therapy
- Page 276 and 277:
Cai et al: Lung cancer gene therapy
- Page 278 and 279:
Cai et al: Lung cancer gene therapy
- Page 280:
Cai et al: Lung cancer gene therapy
- Page 283 and 284:
Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 285 and 286:
Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 287 and 288:
Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 289 and 290:
Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 291 and 292:
Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 293 and 294:
Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 295 and 296:
Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 297 and 298:
Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 299 and 300:
Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 301 and 302:
Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 303 and 304:
Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 305 and 306:
Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 307 and 308:
Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology
- Page 309:
Gene Therapy and Molecular Biology