Mechanisms Underlying the Heterogeneous Sensitivities of Cancer Cells to Proteasome Inhibitors

The mechanisms underlying cellular response to proteasome inhibitors have not been clearly elucidated in solid tumor models. Evidence suggests that the ability of a cell to manage the amount of proteotoxic stress following proteasome inhibition dictates survival. In this study using the FDA-approved proteasome inhibitor bortezomib (Velcade®) in solid tumor cells, we demonstrated that perhaps the most critical response to proteasome inhibition is repression of global protein synthesis by phosphorylation of the eukaryotic initiation factor 2-α subunit (eIF2α). In a panel of 10 distinct human pancreatic cancer cells, we showed marked heterogeneity in the ability of cancer cells to induce eIF2α phosphorylation upon stress (eIF2α-P); lack of inducible eIF2α-P led to excessive accumulation of aggregated proteins, reactive oxygen species, and ultimately cell death. In addition, we examined complementary cytoprotective mechanisms involving the activation of the heat shock response (HSR), and found that induction of heat shock protein 70 kDa (Hsp72) protected against proteasome inhibitor-induced cell death in human bladder cancer cells. Finally, investigation of a novel histone deacetylase 6 (HDAC6)-selective inhibitor suggested that the cytoprotective role of the cytoplasmic histone deacetylase 6 (HDAC6) in response to proteasome inhibition may have been previously overestimated.

Identification and characterization of cellular genes differentially expressed in a subset of tumors with non -functional WT1

Wilms tumor (WT) or nephroblastoma is a genetically heterogeneous pediatric renal tumor that accounts for 6–7% of all childhood cancers in the U.S. WT1, located at 11p13, is the sole WT gene cloned to date. Additional genomic regions containing genes that play a role in the development of Wilms tumor include 11p15, 7p, 16q, 1p, 17q and 19q. This heterogeneity has made it extremely difficult to develop an understanding of the pathways involved in the development of WT, even in the 5–20% of tumors that show mutations at the WT1 locus. My research addresses this gap in our current comprehension of the development of WT. ^ I have used two complementary approaches to extend the current understanding of molecular changes involved in the development of WT. In order to minimize complexities due to genetic heterogeneity, I confined my analysis to the WT1 pathway by assessing those genetically defined tumors that carry WT1 mutations. WT1 encodes a zinc finger transcription factor, and in vitro studies have identified many genes that are potentially regulated in vivo by WT1. However, there is very little in vivo data that suggests that they are transcriptionally regulated endogenously by WT1. In one approach I assessed the role of WT1 in the in vivo regulation of PDGFA and IGF2, two genes that are strong contenders for endogenous regulation by WT1. Using primary tissue samples, I found no correlation between the level of RNA expression of WT1 with either PDGFA or IGF2, suggesting that WT1 does not play a critical role in their expression in either normal kidney or WT. ^ In a parallel strategy, using differential display analysis I compared global gene expression in a subset of tumors with known homozygous inactivating WT1 mutations (WT1-tumors) to the gene expression in a panel of appropriate control tissues (fetal kidney, normal kidney, rhabdoid tumor and pediatric renal cell carcinoma). Transcripts that are aberrantly expressed in this subset of Wilms tumors are candidates for endogenous transcriptional regulation by WT1 as well as for potentially functioning in the development of WT. By this approach I identified several differentially expressed transcripts. I further characterized two of these transcripts, identifying a candidate WT gene in the process. I then performed a detailed analysis of this WT candidate gene, which maps to 7p. Future studies will shed more light on the role of these differentially expressed genes in WT. ^