Stabilization of microtubule dynamics by estramustine by binding to a novel site in tubulin: A possible mechanistic basis for its antitumor action

The cellular targets for estramustine, an antitumor drug used in the treatment of hormone-refractory prostate cancer, are believed to be the spindle microtubules responsible for chromosome separation at mitosis. Estramustine only weakly inhibits polymerization of purified tubulin into microtubules by binding to tubulin (Kd, ≈30 μM) at a site distinct from the colchicine or the vinblastine binding sites. However, by video microscopy, we find that estramustine strongly stabilizes growing and shortening dynamics at plus ends of bovine brain microtubules devoid of microtubule-associated proteins at concentrations substantially below those required to inhibit polymerization of the microtubules. Estramustine strongly reduced the rate and extent both of shortening and growing, increased the percentage of time the microtubules spent in an attenuated state, neither growing nor shortening detectably, and reduced the overall dynamicity of the microtubules. Significantly, the combined suppressive effects of vinblastine and estramustine on the rate and extent of shortening and dynamicity were additive. Thus, like the antimitotic mechanisms of action of the antitumor drugs vinblastine and taxol, the antimitotic mechanism of action of estramustine may be due to kinetic stabilization of spindle microtubule dynamics. The results may explain the mechanistic basis for the benefit derived from combined use of estramustine with vinblastine or taxol, two other drugs that target microtubules, in the treatment of hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

Avaliação de resposta a Vinorelbina-Estramustina em segunda linha terapêutica, em doentes com carcinoma da próstata hormono-refratário previamente tratados com Docetaxel

Trabalho Final do Curso de Mestrado Integrado em Medicina, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Lisboa, 2014

Which drug combination for hormone-refractory prostate cancer

Patients with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer have a progressive disease with a median survival of similar to 11 months, and currently no treatment offers a survival advantage. The standard drug treatment is a corticosteroid and chemotherapy with mitoxantrone. In a comparison of docetaxel every 3 weeks and prednisone, versus mitoxantrone and prednisone, with a follow-up of similar to 21 months, there were less deaths in the docetaxel group than in the mitoxantrone group (166 of 335 patients and 201 of 337 patients, respectively). Docetaxel also prolonged the duration of survival compared with mitoxantrone (18.9 and 16.5 months, respectively). When given with prednisone, docetaxel was also shown to reduce pain and serum prostate specific antigen levels and improve quality of life compared with mitoxantrone/prednisone. In another trial in hormone-resistant prostate cancer patients, which compared docetaxel and estramustine with mitoxantrone and prednisone during a median follow-up of 32 months, there were fewer deaths with docetaxel/estramustine than with mitoxantrone/prednisone, which were 217 of 338 and 235 of 336 patients, respectively. Median survival was also longer in the docetaxel and estramustine group than in the mitoxantrone/prednisone group (17.5 and 15.6 months, respectively). In conclusion, two combinations (docetaxel/prednisone and docetaxel/estramustine) have been shown to be superior to mitoxantrone/prednisone in hormone-refractory prostate cancer and both should be considered for use. With the present information, there is little to distinguish between these combinations.