Targeting the oncogene LSF with either the small molecule inhibitor FQI1 or siRNA causes mitotic delays with unaligned chromosomes, resulting in cell death or senescence.
Apoptosis
/ drug effects
Benzodioxoles
/ pharmacology
Cell Cycle Checkpoints
/ drug effects
Cell Division
/ drug effects
Cellular Senescence
/ drug effects
Chromosomes, Human
/ drug effects
DNA-Binding Proteins
/ antagonists & inhibitors
Drug Screening Assays, Antitumor
HeLa Cells
Humans
Intravital Microscopy
Molecular Targeted Therapy
/ methods
Neoplasms
/ drug therapy
Quinolones
/ pharmacology
RNA, Small Interfering
/ metabolism
Time-Lapse Imaging
Transcription Factors
/ antagonists & inhibitors
FQI1
LSF
Mitosis
Senescence
Small molecule inhibitors
siRNA
Journal
BMC cancer
ISSN: 1471-2407
Titre abrégé: BMC Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967800
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 Jun 2020
15 Jun 2020
Historique:
received:
11
02
2020
accepted:
04
06
2020
entrez:
17
6
2020
pubmed:
17
6
2020
medline:
12
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The oncogene LSF (encoded by TFCP2) has been proposed as a novel therapeutic target for multiple cancers. LSF overexpression in patient tumors correlates with poor prognosis in particular for both hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal cancer. The limited treatment outcomes for these diseases and disappointing clinical results, in particular, for hepatocellular carcinoma in molecularly targeted therapies targeting cellular receptors and kinases, underscore the need for molecularly targeting novel mechanisms. LSF small molecule inhibitors, Factor Quinolinone Inhibitors (FQIs), have exhibited robust anti-tumor activity in multiple pre-clinical models, with no observable toxicity. To understand how the LSF inhibitors impact cancer cell proliferation, we characterized the cellular phenotypes that result from loss of LSF activity. Cell proliferation and cell cycle progression were analyzed, using HeLa cells as a model cancer cell line responsive to FQI1. Cell cycle progression was studied either by time lapse microscopy or by bulk synchronization of cell populations to ensure accuracy in interpretation of the outcomes. In order to test for biological specificity of targeting LSF by FQI1, results were compared after treatment with either FQI1 or siRNA targeting LSF. Highly similar cellular phenotypes are observed upon treatments with FQI1 and siRNA targeting LSF. Along with similar effects on two cellular biomarkers, inhibition of LSF activity by either mechanism induced a strong delay or arrest prior to metaphase as cells progressed through mitosis, with condensed, but unaligned, chromosomes. This mitotic disruption in both cases resulted in improper cellular division leading to multiple outcomes: multi-nucleation, apoptosis, and cellular senescence. These data strongly support that cellular phenotypes observed upon FQI1 treatment are due specifically to the loss of LSF activity. Specific inhibition of LSF by either small molecules or siRNA results in severe mitotic defects, leading to cell death or senescence - consequences that are desirable in combating cancer. Taken together, these findings confirm that LSF is a promising target for cancer treatment. Furthermore, this study provides further support for developing FQIs or other LSF inhibitory strategies as treatment for LSF-related cancers with high unmet medical needs.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The oncogene LSF (encoded by TFCP2) has been proposed as a novel therapeutic target for multiple cancers. LSF overexpression in patient tumors correlates with poor prognosis in particular for both hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal cancer. The limited treatment outcomes for these diseases and disappointing clinical results, in particular, for hepatocellular carcinoma in molecularly targeted therapies targeting cellular receptors and kinases, underscore the need for molecularly targeting novel mechanisms. LSF small molecule inhibitors, Factor Quinolinone Inhibitors (FQIs), have exhibited robust anti-tumor activity in multiple pre-clinical models, with no observable toxicity.
METHODS
METHODS
To understand how the LSF inhibitors impact cancer cell proliferation, we characterized the cellular phenotypes that result from loss of LSF activity. Cell proliferation and cell cycle progression were analyzed, using HeLa cells as a model cancer cell line responsive to FQI1. Cell cycle progression was studied either by time lapse microscopy or by bulk synchronization of cell populations to ensure accuracy in interpretation of the outcomes. In order to test for biological specificity of targeting LSF by FQI1, results were compared after treatment with either FQI1 or siRNA targeting LSF.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Highly similar cellular phenotypes are observed upon treatments with FQI1 and siRNA targeting LSF. Along with similar effects on two cellular biomarkers, inhibition of LSF activity by either mechanism induced a strong delay or arrest prior to metaphase as cells progressed through mitosis, with condensed, but unaligned, chromosomes. This mitotic disruption in both cases resulted in improper cellular division leading to multiple outcomes: multi-nucleation, apoptosis, and cellular senescence.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
These data strongly support that cellular phenotypes observed upon FQI1 treatment are due specifically to the loss of LSF activity. Specific inhibition of LSF by either small molecules or siRNA results in severe mitotic defects, leading to cell death or senescence - consequences that are desirable in combating cancer. Taken together, these findings confirm that LSF is a promising target for cancer treatment. Furthermore, this study provides further support for developing FQIs or other LSF inhibitory strategies as treatment for LSF-related cancers with high unmet medical needs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32539694
doi: 10.1186/s12885-020-07039-1
pii: 10.1186/s12885-020-07039-1
pmc: PMC7296649
doi:
Substances chimiques
8-(2-ethoxyphenyl)-7,8-dihydro-(1,3)dioxolo(4,5-g)quinolin-6(5H)-one
0
Benzodioxoles
0
DNA-Binding Proteins
0
Quinolones
0
RNA, Small Interfering
0
TFCP2 protein, human
0
Transcription Factors
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Video-Audio Media
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
552Subventions
Organisme : Alnylam Pharmaceuticals
ID : NA
Organisme : Alnylam Pharmaceuticals
ID : NA
Organisme : Boston University (US)
ID : NA
Organisme : Boston University (US)
ID : NA
Organisme : Boston University (US)
ID : NA
Organisme : Boston University Undergraduate Research Opportunity (US)
ID : NA
Organisme : New England Biolabs
ID : NA
Organisme : NIH HHS
ID : R01 GM078240
Pays : United States
Références
J Cell Sci. 2006 Sep 1;119(Pt 17):3664-75
pubmed: 16912073
Chromosoma. 2010 Apr;119(2):149-65
pubmed: 19904549
World J Gastroenterol. 2012 Dec 14;18(46):6709-11
pubmed: 23239907
Oncotarget. 2015 Sep 22;6(28):26266-77
pubmed: 26313006
N Engl J Med. 2017 Aug 31;377(9):819-828
pubmed: 28691885
Oncotarget. 2017 Apr 11;8(15):24389-24400
pubmed: 28412749
Molecules. 2016 May 19;21(5):
pubmed: 27213315
Genes Cells. 2002 Jan;7(1):11-7
pubmed: 11856369
J Biol Chem. 2001 Mar 16;276(11):7836-42
pubmed: 10995745
N Engl J Med. 2018 Jul 5;379(1):11-21
pubmed: 29972753
Mol Cell Biol. 2002 Feb;22(3):874-85
pubmed: 11784863
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Mar 20;109(12):4503-8
pubmed: 22396589
Oncotarget. 2017 Jul 31;8(41):70538-70549
pubmed: 29050300
PLoS One. 2017 Feb 3;12(2):e0171582
pubmed: 28158293
Nature. 2014 Dec 4;516(7529):S2-3
pubmed: 25470197
N Engl J Med. 2008 Jul 24;359(4):378-90
pubmed: 18650514
Genes Dev. 1990 Feb;4(2):287-98
pubmed: 2159933
Nat Protoc. 2009;4(12):1798-806
pubmed: 20010931
Mol Ther. 2009 May;17(5):872-9
pubmed: 19259063
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Aug 4;106(31):12938-43
pubmed: 19622726
Cell Rep. 2017 Oct 31;21(5):1227-1239
pubmed: 29091762
Oncotarget. 2016 Dec 13;7(50):83627-83640
pubmed: 27845898
J Histochem Cytochem. 2013 Dec;61(12):901-9
pubmed: 23979840
Cancer Lett. 2018 Apr 28;420:72-79
pubmed: 29410248
Nat Rev Cancer. 2008 Aug;8(8):592-603
pubmed: 18650835
Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol. 2015 Sep;39 Suppl 1:S80-5
pubmed: 26206572
Curr Signal Transduct Ther. 2013 Dec;8(3):193-202
pubmed: 25045345
Methods Mol Biol. 2015;1314:115-30
pubmed: 26139260
Cell Death Dis. 2012 Oct 18;3:e411
pubmed: 23076219
Lancet. 2018 Mar 24;391(10126):1163-1173
pubmed: 29433850
EMBO J. 2000 Sep 1;19(17):4665-75
pubmed: 10970859
Am J Cancer Res. 2012;2(3):269-85
pubmed: 22679558
Mol Biol Cell. 2009 Apr;20(8):2218-28
pubmed: 19225156
Nat Rev Cancer. 2017 Jan 27;17(2):93-115
pubmed: 28127048
J Am Chem Soc. 2014 Dec 10;136(49):16958-61
pubmed: 25434769
Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2014 Aug 15;7(9):6024-31
pubmed: 25337247
Lancet. 2017 Jan 7;389(10064):56-66
pubmed: 27932229
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2010 Feb;73(2):99-110
pubmed: 19369091
Mol Biol Cell. 2015 Sep 1;26(17):2971-85
pubmed: 26133385
Mol Ther Nucleic Acids. 2017 Mar 17;6:116-132
pubmed: 28325278
Cancer. 2017 Jul 1;123(13):2404-2412
pubmed: 28464289
Cell Cycle. 2009 Jul 15;8(14):2146-51
pubmed: 19556876
Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2015 Jul;12(7):408-24
pubmed: 26054909
CA Cancer J Clin. 2015 Mar;65(2):87-108
pubmed: 25651787
World J Gastroenterol. 2011 Aug 7;17(29):3420-30
pubmed: 21876634
Curr Opin Pharmacol. 2010 Dec;10(6):782-8
pubmed: 20889377
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 May 4;107(18):8357-62
pubmed: 20404171
Cancer Cell. 2009 Oct 6;16(4):347-58
pubmed: 19800579