The role of p73 in cancer – a pathway towards more effective cancer therapy

The p53-family consists of three transcription factors, p53, p73 and p63. The family members have similar but also individual functions connected to cell cycle regulation, development and tumorigenesis. p53 and p73 act mainly as tumor suppressors. During DNA damage caused by anticancer drugs or irradiation, p53 and p73 levels are upregulated in cancer cells leading to apoptosis and cell cycle arrest. p53 is mutated in almost 50 per cent of the cancers, causing the cancer cells unable to undergo cell death. Instead, p73 is rarely mutated in cancer cells and because of that could be more viable target for anticancer therapy. The network surrounding the regulation of p73 is extensive and has several potential targets for cancer therapy. One of the most studied is Itch ligase, the negative regulator of p73 levels. Gene therapy directed towards knockdown of Itch ligase is a potential approach but in need for more in vivo proof. p73 has two isoforms, transactivating TA-forms and dominant-negative ΔN-forms. The specific regulation of these isoforms could also offer a possible way for more effective cancer treatment. The literature work includes information of structures, isoforms, functions and possible therapeutic targets of p73. Also the main therapeutic approaches to date are introduced. The experimental part is based on transfection and cytotoxicity studies done e.g. in pancreatic cancer cells (Mia PaCa-2, PANC1, BxPc-3 and HPAC). The aim of the experimental work was to optimize the conditions for effective transfection with DAB16 dendrimer nanoparticles and to measure the cytotoxicity of plain dendrimers and DAB16-pDNA complexes. Also the protein levels of p73 and Itch ligase were measured by Western blotting. The work was done as a part of a bigger project, which was aiming to down regulate Itch ligase (negative regulator of p73) by siRNA/shRNA. Tranfection results were promising, showing good transfection efficacy with DAB16 N/P30 in pancreatic cancer cells (except in BxPc-3). Pancreatic cancer cells showed recovery in 3 days after they were exposed to plain dendrimer solution or to DAB16-pDNA. Measurement of protein levels by Western blotting was not optimal and the proposals for the improvement regarding e.g. the gels and the extracted protein amounts have been done.

DNA damage recognition in the normal epithelium of human prostate and seminal vesicles

Prostate cancer is one of the most prevalent cancer types in men. The development of prostate tumors is known to require androgen exposure, and several pathways governing cell growth are deregulated in prostate tumorigenesis. Recent genetic studies have revealed that complex gene fusions and copy - number alterations are frequent in prostate cancer, a unique feature among solid tumors. These chromosomal aberrations are though to arise as a consequence of faulty repair of DNA double strand breaks (DSB). Most repair mechanisms have been studied in detail in cancer cell lines, but how DNA damage is detected and repaired in normal differentiated human cells has not been widely addressed. The events leading to the gene fusions in prostate cancer are under rigorous studies, as they not only shed light on the basic pathobiologic mechanisms but may also produce molecular targets for prostate cancer treatment and prevention. Prostate and seminal vesicles are part of the male reproductive system. They share similar structure and function but differ dramatically in their cancer incidence. Approximately fifty primary seminal vesicle carcinomas have been reported worldwide. Surprisingly, only little is known on why seminal vesicles are resistant to neoplastic changes. As both tissues are androgen dependent, it is a mystery that androgen signaling would only lead to tumors in prostate tissue. In this work, we set up novel ex vivo human tissue culture models of prostate and seminal vesicles, and used them to study how DNA damage is recognized in normal epithelium. One of the major DNA - damage inducible pathways, mediated by the ATM kinase, was robustly activated in all main cell types of both tissues. Interestingly, we discovered that secretory epithelial cells had less histone variant H2A.X and after DNA damage lower levels of H2AX were phosphorylated on serine 139 (γH2AX) than in basal or stromal cells. γH2AX has been considered essential for efficient DSB repair, but as there were no significant differences in the γH2AX levels between the two tissues, it seems more likely that the role of γH2AX is less important in postmitotic cells. We also gained insight into the regulation of p53, an important transcription factor that protects genomic integrity via multiple mechanisms, in human tissues. DSBs did not lead to a pronounced activation of p53, but treatments causing transcriptional stress, on the other hand, were able to launch a notable p53 response in both tissue types. In general, ex vivo culturing of human tissues provided unique means to study differentiated cells in their relevant tissue context, and is suited for testing novel therapeutic drugs before clinical trials. In order to study how prostate and seminal vesicle epithelial cells are able to activate DNA damage induced cell cycle checkpoints, we used primary cultures of prostate and seminal vesicle epithelial cells. To our knowledge, we are the first to report isolation of human primary seminal vesicle cells. Surprisingly, human prostate epithelial cells did not activate cell cycle checkpoints after DSBs in part due to low levels of Wee1A, a kinase regulating CDK activity, while primary seminal vesicle epithelial cells possessed proficient cell cycle checkpoints and expressed high levels of Wee1A. Similarly, seminal vesicle cells showed a distinct activation of the p53 - pathway after DSBs that did not occur in prostate epithelial cells. This indicates that p53 protein function is under different control mechanisms in the two cell types, which together with proficient cell cycle checkpoints may be crucial in protecting seminal vesicles from endogenous and exogenous DNA damaging factors and, as a consequence, from carcinogenesis. These data indicate that two very similar organs of male reproductive system do not respond to DNA damage similarly. The differentiated, non - replicating cells of both tissues were able to recognize DSBs, but under proliferation human prostate epithelial cells had deficient activation of the DNA damage response. This suggests that prostate epithelium is most vulnerable to accumulating genomic aberrations under conditions where it needs to proliferate, for example after inflammatory cellular damage.