A chondroitin sulfate proteoglycan 4‑specific monoclonal antibody inhibits melanoma cell invasion in a spheroid model.
Antibodies, Monoclonal
/ pharmacology
Cell Cycle
/ drug effects
Cell Line, Tumor
Cell Movement
/ drug effects
Cell Survival
/ drug effects
Chondroitin Sulfate Proteoglycans
/ metabolism
Drug Synergism
Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic
/ drug effects
Humans
Melanoma
/ drug therapy
Membrane Proteins
/ metabolism
Mutation
Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf
/ genetics
Spheroids, Cellular
/ cytology
Tumor Cells, Cultured
Vemurafenib
/ pharmacology
BRAF inhibitor
BRAF‑mutated melanoma
CSPG4
CSPG4‑positive tumors
CSPG4‑specific antibody
cell invasion inhibition
melanoma
monoclonal antibody
spheroids
Journal
International journal of oncology
ISSN: 1791-2423
Titre abrégé: Int J Oncol
Pays: Greece
ID NLM: 9306042
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2021
Sep 2021
Historique:
received:
14
05
2021
accepted:
12
07
2021
entrez:
28
7
2021
pubmed:
29
7
2021
medline:
6
1
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The overexpression of chondroitin sulfate proteoglycan 4 (CSPG4) is associated with several tumor types, including malignant melanoma, squamous cell carcinoma, triple‑negative breast carcinoma, oligodendrocytomas or gliomas. Due to its restricted distribution in normal tissues, CSPG4 has been considered a potential target for several antitumor approaches, including monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies. The aim of the present study was to characterize the impact of the CSPG4‑specific mAb clone 9.2.27 on its own or in combination with the commonly used BRAF‑selective inhibitor, PLX4032, on different functions of melanoma cells to assess the potential synergistic effects. The BRAF V600‑mutant human melanoma cell lines, M14 (CSPG4‑negative) and WM164 (CSPG4‑positive), were exposed to the CSPG4‑specific 9.2.27 mAb and/or PLX4032. Cell viability and colony formation capacity were evaluated. A 3D‑cell culture spheroid model was used to assess the invasive properties of the treated cells. In addition, flow cytometric analysis of apoptosis and cell cycle analyses were performed. Incubation of the WM164 cell line with CSPG4‑specific 9.2.27 mAb decreased viability, colony formation ability and the invasive capacity of CSPG4‑positive tumor cells, which was not the case for the CSPG4‑negative M14 cell line. Combined treatment of the WM164 cells with 9.2.27 mAb plus PLX4032 did not exert any significant additional effect in comparison to treatment with PLX4032 alone in the clonogenic and invasion assays. M14 cell cycle distribution was not influenced by the CSPG4‑specific 9.2.27 mAb. By contrast, the exposure of WM164 cells to the mAb resulted in an arrest of the cells in the S phase. Moreover, combined treatment of the WM164 cells led to a significantly increased accumulation of cells in the subG1 phase, combined with a decrease of cells in the G2/M phase. On the whole, findings of the present study indicate that the CSPG4‑specific 9.2.27 mAb exerts an anti‑invasive effect on CSPG4‑positive melanoma spheroids, which is not enhanced by BRAF inhibition. These findings provide the basis for further investigations on the effects of anti‑CSPG4‑based treatments of CSPG4‑positive tumors.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34318902
doi: 10.3892/ijo.2021.5250
pii: 70
pmc: PMC8357264
doi:
pii:
Substances chimiques
Antibodies, Monoclonal
0
CSPG4 protein, human
0
Chondroitin Sulfate Proteoglycans
0
Membrane Proteins
0
Vemurafenib
207SMY3FQT
BRAF protein, human
EC 2.7.11.1
Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf
EC 2.7.11.1
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
Clin Cancer Res. 2008 Jan 1;14(1):230-9
pubmed: 18172275
Int J Cancer. 2014 Dec 1;135(11):2727-34
pubmed: 24740185
Biochem J. 2007 May 1;403(3):553-63
pubmed: 17217338
Lancet. 2018 Sep 15;392(10151):971-984
pubmed: 30238891
Int J Cancer. 2005 Apr 10;114(3):426-32
pubmed: 15578703
J Cell Biol. 2004 Jun 21;165(6):881-91
pubmed: 15210734
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Feb 26;105(8):3041-6
pubmed: 18287029
Int J Cancer. 2016 Aug 15;139(4):916-27
pubmed: 27037627
PLoS One. 2014 Jun 16;9(6):e100178
pubmed: 24932730
Acta Neuropathol. 2011 Oct;122(4):495-510
pubmed: 21863242
Lancet. 2020 Jun 13;395(10240):1835-1844
pubmed: 32534646
Immunol Res. 2011 Aug;50(2-3):294-302
pubmed: 21717063
Mol Biol Rep. 2018 Dec;45(6):2935-2940
pubmed: 30311129
Pigment Cell Melanoma Res. 2011 Dec;24(6):1148-57
pubmed: 22004131
Int J Mol Sci. 2020 Aug 28;21(17):
pubmed: 32872135
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1983 Jan;80(2):529-33
pubmed: 6572905
Int J Cancer. 1981 Sep 15;28(3):293-300
pubmed: 7033148
J Transl Med. 2017 Jul 1;15(1):151
pubmed: 28668095
N Engl J Med. 2011 Jun 30;364(26):2507-16
pubmed: 21639808
Mol Cancer. 2010 Nov 23;9:301
pubmed: 21092273
Front Immunol. 2018 Jan 10;8:1911
pubmed: 29375561
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010 Oct 6;102(19):1496-512
pubmed: 20852124
Cancers (Basel). 2020 Jul 07;12(7):
pubmed: 32645969
Crit Rev Immunol. 2004;24(4):267-96
pubmed: 15588226
J Transl Med. 2010 Apr 20;8:39
pubmed: 20406486
Biotechnol Adv. 2016 Dec;34(8):1427-1441
pubmed: 27845258
Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Oct 1;18(19):5352-63
pubmed: 22893632
Healthcare (Basel). 2013 Dec 23;2(1):27-46
pubmed: 27429258
J Biochem. 2018 May 1;163(5):399-412
pubmed: 29462330
Melanoma Res. 2000 Jun;10(3):281-9
pubmed: 10890383
Int J Oncol. 2015 Jul;47(1):81-90
pubmed: 25997619
Adv Cancer Res. 2010;109:73-121
pubmed: 21070915
Oncotarget. 2013 Sep;4(9):1527-46
pubmed: 24127551
Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2007 Oct;8(10):839-45
pubmed: 17684528
Int J Cancer. 2009 Jul 1;125(1):23-33
pubmed: 19350633
Oncol Res. 2015;22(2):117-21
pubmed: 25706398
Pigment Cell Melanoma Res. 2010 Dec;23(6):820-7
pubmed: 20973932
J Biol Chem. 2018 Feb 16;293(7):2466-2475
pubmed: 29196603
Biomedicines. 2017 Jun 28;5(3):
pubmed: 28657611
Cancers (Basel). 2020 Feb 19;12(2):
pubmed: 32092958
Oncol Rep. 2021 Apr;45(4):
pubmed: 33649790
Mol Cancer Ther. 2006 May;5(5):1136-44
pubmed: 16731745