4.6 Article

A Novel Phthalimide Derivative, TC11, Has Preclinical Effects on High-Risk Myeloma Cells and Osteoclasts

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0116135

关键词

-

资金

  1. Private University Strategic Research Base Development Program of MEXT (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology) of Japan
  2. Keio Gijuku Academic development Funds
  3. Japan Leukemia Research Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite the recent advances in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM), MM patients with high-risk cytogenetic changes such as t(4;14) translocation or deletion of chromosome 17 still have extremely poor prognoses. With the goal of helping these high-risk MM patients, we previously developed a novel phthalimide derivative, TC11. Here we report the further characterization of TC11 including anti-myeloma effects in vitro and in vivo, a pharmacokinetic study in mice, and anti-osteoclastogenic activity. Intraperitoneal injections of TC11 significantly delayed the growth of subcutaneous tumors in human myeloma-bearing SCID mice. Immunohistochemical analyses showed that TC11 induced apoptosis of MM cells in vivo. In the pharmacokinetic analyses, the C-max was 2.1 mu M at 1 h after the injection of TC11, with 1.2 h as the half-life. TC11 significantly inhibited the differentiation and function of tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP)-positive multinucleated osteoclasts in mouse osteoclast cultures using M-CSF and RANKL. We also revealed that TC11 induced the apoptosis of myeloma cells accompanied by alpha-tubulin fragmentation. In addition, TC11 and lenalidomide, another phthalimide derivative, directly bound to nucleophosmin 1 (NPM1), whose role in MM is unknown. Thus, through multiple molecular interactions, TC11 is a potentially effective drug for high-risk MM patients with bone lesions. The present results suggest the possibility of the further development of novel thalidomide derivatives by drug designing.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据