4.7 Article

G-Quadruplex Ligand RHPS4 Potentiates the Antitumor Activity of Camptothecins in Preclinical Models of Solid Tumors

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 14, 期 22, 页码 7284-7291

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-0941

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Italian Association for Cancer Research and Ministero della Salute
  2. Gilson laboratory
  3. Nationale contre le Cancer (Equipe labellisee)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: The formation of G-quadruplex structures at telomeric DNA sequences blocks telomerase activity, offering an original strategy to design and develop new antitumor agents. The pentacyclic acridinium salt RHPS4 is one of the most effective and selective G4 ligands able to rapidly disrupt telomere architecture, resulting in apoptosis of cancer cells. Here, we studied the therapeutic index of RHPS4 and its integration with chemotherapeutics in preclinical model of solid tumors. Experimental Design: The antitumoral activity of RHPS4 was evaluated on human xenografts of different histotypes and compared with that of standard antineoplastic agents. Moreover, the effect of RHPS4/chemotherapeutics combinations on cell survival was studied and the most favorable combination was evaluated on tumor-bearing mice. Results: RHPS4 was active in vivo as single agent and showed a high therapeutic efficacy when compared with conventional drugs. Moreover, RHPS4 had antitumoral activity in human melanoma xenografts inherently resistant to chemotherapy and exhibited antimetastatic activity. RHPS4 also showed a strong synergistic interaction with camptothecins and this effect was strictly dependent on the drug sequence employed. Treatment of mice with irinotecan followed by RHPS4 was able to inhibit and delay tumor growth and to increase mice survival. Conclusions: Our data show that RHPS4 has a good pharmacodynamic profile and in combination therapy produces a strong antitumoral activity, identifying this drug as promising agent for clinical development.

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

4.7
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