Total cellular iron as a marker of cancer stem cells and uses thereof
11573241 · 2023-02-07
Assignee
- Institute National De La Sante Et De La Recherche Medicale (Inserm) (Paris, FR)
- Centre National De La Recherche Scientifique (Cnrs) (Paris, FR)
- Université de Paris (Paris, FR)
Inventors
- Maryam Mehrpour (L'hay les Roses, FR)
- Raphael Rodriguez (Vers-Pont-du-Gard, FR)
- Ahmed Hamai (Villetaneuse, FR)
- Trang Mai (Ho Chi Minh Ville, VN)
Cpc classification
A61K31/7048
HUMAN NECESSITIES
International classification
A61K31/7048
HUMAN NECESSITIES
Abstract
The present invention relates to a novel use of total cellular iron, preferably under the form of ferrous iron (Fe.sup.2+), as a marker of cancer stem cells (CSCs). The invention also relates to methods using said iron marker, in particular for metastatic cancer diagnosis or treatment, for screening for compounds of interest, as well as for killing CSCs.
Claims
1. A method for selectively killing CSCs in a mammal, comprising administering to said mammal an iron-chelating pharmaceutical composition, comprising at least one component selected from 20-alkyl-amino derivatives of salinomycin of formula (I′) ##STR00003## wherein: X is selected from the group consisting of OH and ═O, Y is selected from the group consisting of —NR.sub.1R.sub.2; —NR.sub.3—(CH.sub.2).sub.n—NR.sub.4R.sub.5; —O—(CH.sub.2).sub.n—NR.sub.4R.sub.5; —NR.sub.3—(CH.sub.2).sub.n—N.sup.+R.sub.6R.sub.7R.sub.8; and —O—(CH.sub.2).sub.n—N.sup.+R.sub.6R.sub.7R.sub.8; and R.sub.1 and R.sub.2, identical or different, are selected from the group consisting of H; (C.sub.1-C.sub.16)-alkyl; (C.sub.3-C.sub.16)-alkenyl; (C.sub.3-C.sub.16)-alkynyl; aryl; heteroaryl; (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)-alkyl-aryl; (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)-alkyl-heteroaryl; or R.sub.1 represents H and R.sub.2 represents OR.sub.9, where R.sub.9 is H, (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)-alkyl, aryl and (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)-alkyl-aryl; R.sub.3 is selected from the group consisting of H; (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)-alkyl; (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)-alkyl-aryl; R.sub.4 and R.sub.5, identical or different, are selected from the group consisting of H; (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)-alkyl; aryl; (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)-alkyl-aryl; R.sub.6, R.sub.7 and R.sub.8, identical or different, are selected from the group consisting of (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)-alkyl; aryl; (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)-alkyl-aryl; n=2, 3, 4, 5 or 6, Z is a functional group capable of chelating iron salts such as OH: NHNR.sub.9R.sub.10 (hydrazine), NHOC(O)R.sub.11 (O-Acyl hydroxylamine), N(OH)—C(O)R.sub.11 (N-acyl hydroxylamine), OOH, SR.sub.12; 2-aminopyridine; 3-aminopyridine; —NR.sub.3—(CH.sub.2).sub.n—NR.sub.4R.sub.5; —NR.sub.3—(CH.sub.2).sub.n—OH; where: R.sub.9 and R.sub.10, identical or different, are selected from the group consisting of H, (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)-alkyl, aryl and (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)-alkyl-aryl; R.sub.11 is selected from the group consisting of H; (C.sub.1-C.sub.16)-alkyl; (C.sub.3-C.sub.16)-alkenyl; (C.sub.3-C.sub.16)-alkynyl; aryl; heteroaryl; (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)-alkyl-aryl; (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)-alkyl-heteroaryl; R.sub.12 is selected from the group consisting of H; (C.sub.1-C.sub.16)-alkyl; (C.sub.3-C.sub.16)-alkenyl; (C.sub.3-C.sub.16)-alkynyl; aryl; heteroaryl; (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)-alkyl-aryl; (C.sub.1-C.sub.6)-alkyl-heteroaryl, n=0, 2, 3 or 4, AM5, AM23, AM23S, and combinations thereof.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein said iron-chelating pharmaceutical composition binds total cellular iron under the form of ferrous (Fe.sup.2+) and ferric (Fe.sup.3+) iron in said mammal, thereby inducing ferritinophagy and reactive oxygen species (ROS) production responsible for specific and/or selective CSC death in said mammal.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein said iron-chelating pharmaceutical composition binds total cellular iron under the form of ferrous (Fe.sup.2+) and ferric (Fe.sup.3+) iron in said mammal while preventing drug-resistance in said mammal by selectively targeting CSCs.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein said iron-chelating pharmaceutical composition binds total cellular iron under the form of ferrous (Fe.sup.2+) and ferric (Fe.sup.3+) iron in said mammal while preventing drug-resistance in said mammal by selectively targeting CSCs.
5. A method according to claim 1, wherein the mammal having CSCs is selected according to an in vitro method for diagnosing cancer having a high risk of recurrence, a high risk of metastasis, and/or a cancer with resistance to therapy, in a subject, comprising at least: a) measuring the amount of total cellular iron, preferably under the form of ferrous iron (Fe.sup.2+), in a biological sample from a subject; and b) comparing said amount measured in step a) to a reference value range for total cellular iron, wherein an amount of total cellular iron as measured in step a) is higher than said reference value range is indicative of the presence of CSCs, thereby indicating that said subject has a cancer.
6. A method according to claim 5, wherein the amount of total cellular iron as measured in step a) of the in vitro method, which is indicative of the presence of CSCs, is superior or equal to 0.05 pg/cell, preferably superior to 0.06 pg/cell, preferably superior to 0.07 pg/cell, preferably superior to 0.08 pg/cell, preferably superior to 0.09 pg/cell, preferably superior to 0.10 pg/cell, preferably superior to 0.11 pg/cell, preferably superior to 0.12 pg/cell, preferably superior to 0.13 pg/cell, preferably superior to 0.14 pg/cell, preferably superior to 0.20 pg/cell, preferably superior to 0.24 pg/cell, more preferably higher than 0.30 pg/cell.
7. A method according to claim 1, wherein said composition is co-administered with radiation therapy or chemotherapy.
8. A method according to claim 1, for selectively killing breast CSCs in a mammal.
Description
FIGURES
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5) a, .sup.1H-NMR spectra of 5 mM Sal+/−FeCl.sub.3 (0.5 mol equiv.). Spectra were recorded in CD.sub.3CN at 298 K. Arrows indicate proton signals affected by the presence of iron. The signal at 7.4 ppm is characteristic hydrogen bonding and a more rigid supramolecular assembly of Sal with iron. b, Photographs of methanolic solutions of the indicated small molecules+/−iron(II). Color changes indicate the formation of distinct iron complexes. Picture was taken 1 minute after addition of DFO or 2,2′-bipyridyl (Bipy) when these compounds were added to vials already containing Sal and FeCl.sub.2. The appearance of a color in the middle and far right vials indicates that Bipy and DFO outcompete Sal to form a complex with iron. c, Schematic illustration of the fluorogenic reduction of RhoNox-1 by iron (II) that can be inhibited by DFO. d, Quantification of the fluorogenic reduction of RhoNox-1 in the presence of iron (II) showing that DFO but not Sal poisons iron.
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
(14)
(15)
(16)
(17)
EXAMPLES
(18) Material and Methods:
(19) Cell culture. Dulbecco's Phosphate-Buffered Saline (14190-094, 500 mL, Gibco), DMEM/F12 (31331-028, 500 mL, Gibco), DMEM high glucose with UltraGlutamine (BE12-604F/U1, BioWhittaker, Lonza), McCoy's 5A (Modified) Medium (26600-023, Gibco), RPMI 1640 with L-glutamine (BE12-702F/U1, BioWhittaker, Lonza), Fetal Bovine Serum (FBS, 10270-106, Gibco), Hydrocortisone (H0888, Sigma), Insulin (10516, Sigma or 19278, Sigma), BD human recombinant Epidermal growth factor (hEGF, 354052, BD Biosciences), PEN-STREP (DE17-602E, BioWhittaker, Lonza), Puromycin dihydrochloride (A11138-02, Life Technologies). Human osteosarcoma U2OS cell line (ATCC®, HTB-96™) was cultured in McCoy's 5A medium supplemented with 1×PEN-STREP and 10% FBS. MCF-7 (ATCC®, HTB-22™) was maintained in RPMI medium supplemented with 1×PEN-STREP and 10% FBS. The human mammary epithelial cell line infected with a retrovirus carrying hTERT, SV40 and the oncogenic allele HrasV12, named HMLER CD44.sup.high/CD24.sup.low cells, not expressing E-cadherin and expressing Vimentin (referred to as HMLER CD24.sup.low) was a generous gift from A. Puisieux (INSERM). See ref 5 of the main text. HMLER CD24.sup.low cells or isogenic non-stem HMLER CD24.sup.high cells were cultured in DMEM/F12 supplemented with 10% FBS, 10 μg/mL insulin, 0.5 μg/mL hydrocortisone, 10 ng/mL hEGF, and 0.5 μg/mL puromycin. A mycoplasma test was performed using PCR mycoplasma detection kit (G238, Applied Biological Materials).
(20) Cell viability assay. Cell viability assay was carried out by plating 1000 cells/well in 96-well plates. Cells were treated as indicated for 72 h. CellTiter-Blue® Reagent (G8081, Promega) was added after 72 h treatment and cells were incubated for 1 h before recording fluorescence intensities (Excitation, 560/20 nm; Emission, 590/10 nm) using a Perkin Elmer Wallac 1420 Victor2 Microplate Reader.
(21) Clonogenic assay. HMLER CD24.sup.low cells were plated in 6-well plates and incubated with various concentrations of Sal and derivatives for 72 h. Single-cell suspensions were mixed with an equal volume of 0.7% soft agar and plated in 6-well plates (2500 cells/well) for 10 days. After staining with 3-(4,5-dimethyl-2-thiazolyl)-2,5-diphenyl-2H-tetrazolium bromide (MTT, M2128, Sigma). Colonies with a diameter of more than 0.5 mm were counted.
(22) Chemical labeling of Sal derivatives and fluorescence microscopy. U2OS cells were cultured at ˜80% confluence and were treated for 6 h with 2 M compounds unless stated otherwise. LysoTracker® Deep Red (L12492, Molecular Probes®) and MitoTracker Red CMXRos (M7512, Molecular probes) were added 1 h prior cell fixation. Cells were fixed 12 min with 2% PFA/PBS, washed with PBS and permeabilized for 10 min with 0.1% Triton X-100/PBS, then washed three times with 1% BSA/PBS. Methanol fixation was used instead of formaldehyde fixation for specific antibodies according to the manufacturer protocol. Briefly, cells were incubated in absolute methanol (HPLC grade) at −20° C. for 15 min prior permeabilization. The click reaction cocktail was prepared from Click-iT® EdU Imaging kits (C10337, Life Technologies) according to the manufacturer's protocol. Briefly, mixing 430 μL of 1× Click-iT® reaction buffer with 20 μL of CuSO.sub.4 solution, 1.2 μL Alexa Fluor® azide, 50 μL reaction buffer additive (sodium ascorbate) to reach a final volume of ˜500 μL. Cover-slips were incubated with the click reaction cocktail in the dark at RT for 30 min, then washed three times with PBS. For immunofluorescence, cells were blocked with 5% BSA, 0.2% Tween-20/PBS (blocking buffer) for 10 min at RT. Cover-slips were incubated with 100 μL of diluted primary antibodies in blocking buffer (e.g., ERp72, RCAS1, LC3, Ferritin) overnight at 4° C. Cover-slips were then washed three times with blocking buffer and incubated as described above with the appropriate secondary antibodies for 30 min. Cover-slips were washed three times with PBS and mounted using Vectashield Mounting Medium with DAPI (H-1200, VECTOR Laboratories). High resolution fluorescence images were acquired using a Deltavision real-time microscope (Applied Precision). 60×/1.4NA and 100×/1.4NA objectives were used for 2D and 3D acquisitions that were deconvoluted using SoftWorx software (Ratio conservative—15 iterations, Applied Precision). ImageJ was used for further image processing.
(23) Tumorsphere assay. HMLER CD24.sup.low cells were plated as single-cell at 10.sup.3 cells/mL in ultra-low attachment culture dishes using serum-free DMEM/F12 supplemented with B-27 (17504044, Invitrogen, 1:50), 20 ng/mL hEGF, 4 μg/mL insulin and 0.5 μg/mL hydrocortisone. After 7 days, tumorspheres were enzymatically dissociated with 0.05% trypsin (15090, Gibco) for 15 minutes at 37° C. to obtain a single-cell suspension. Sphere formation was assessed 7 days after seeding cells individually in 96-well ultralow attachment plates (Corning), which were treated as indicated. The number and the size of tumorspheres were analyzed under a light microscope.
(24) Xenograft tumor formation experiments. MCF-7 cell cultures were collected, enzymatically dissociated, washed with PBS, and re-suspended in a PBS/Matrigel mixture (1:1 v/v). The mixture (0.1 mL) was then implanted in the mammary fat pad of 5-week-old female AthymicNude-Fox1nu mice bilaterally (Harlan, France). Mice were maintained in individually-ventilated cages (Tecniplast, France) under constant temperature and humidity. All experiments were performed under laminar flow (Tecniplast France). Mice received estradiol supplementation (0.4 mg/kg) the same day and 7 days from cell injection, and were observed and palpated for tumor appearance. Mice were treated with AM5 (3 mg/kg body weight/day) by means of intraperitoneal injections every 5 opened days of the week. Tumor growth was measured weekly using calipers. Tumor volume was determined using the standard formula: L×W.sup.2×0.52, where L and W are the longest and shortest diameters, respectively. All animal studies were approved by the Direction des services Vétérinaires, Prefecture de Police, Paris, France (authorization number A75-14-08) and the ethical committee (number 34) of Paris Descartes University. No randomization was used and experimenters were blinded to drug treatments and tissue analyses.
(25) Patient derived xenografts (PDXs). PDXs were established as previously described in Charafe-Jauffret et al., Cancer Res. 73, 7290-7300 (2013) from tissue samples collected prospectively at the Institut Paoli-Calmettes (IPC). Samples of human origin and associated data were obtained from the IPC/CRCM Tumor Bank that operates under authorization #AC-2007-33 granted by the French Ministry of Higher Education and Research. Before scientific use of samples and data, patients were appropriately informed and asked to consent in writing, in compliance with French and European regulations. The project was approved by the IPC Institutional Review Board. Cells from 2 different patient-derived xenografts (PDX 1 and 2) were transplanted orthotopically into fat pads of 4-week-old female non-obese diabetic/severe combined immunodeficient (NOD/SCID) mice (NOD.CB17-Prkdcscid/J, Charles River France) after mechanical treatment and enzymatic digestion using collagenase/hyaluronidase (StemCell Technologies) to generate single-cell suspension suitable for implantation in vivo. PDXs were primarily established as previously described in Caraft-Jauffret et al., and evaluated for ALDEFLUOR-positive CSCs. We injected single cancer cells into fat pads of NOD/SCID mice and monitored tumor growth. When tumor size reached approximately 150 mm.sup.3, Sal and AM5 treatments were performed as indicated above for
(26) Aldefluor assay. The analysis was processed on single-cell suspension from the PDXs obtained as described above. The ALDEFLUOR Kit (Stemcell™ Technologies) was used to isolate the population with high aldehyde dehydrogenase enzymatic activity using an LSR2 cytometer (Becton Dickinson Biosciences), as previously described in Charafe-Jauffret et al. To eliminate cells of mouse origin from the PDXs, we used staining with an anti-H2Kd antibody (BD Biosciences, 1:200, 20 min on ice) followed by staining with a secondary antibody labeled with phycoerythrin (PE; Jackson Laboratories, 1:250, 20 min on ice).
(27) Limiting dilution assay. Cells from 4-week treated mice were re-implanted into one to four secondary NOD/SCID mice with injection of 10, 50, 500 or 5000 cells for each treated tumor to functionally evaluate the proportion of residual CSCs in each treatment group (Unt., Doc, Sal, AM5) for the PDX 1 and 2. Each mouse that developed a tumor reaching a size of 10 mm was considered as a tumor-bearing mouse.
(28) Estimation of number of CSCs in vivo. The number of mammary gland outgrowths obtained in a fat pad after cell re-implantation is currently used to evaluate the number of stem cells able to repopulate this fat pad. It is based on self-renewal and differentiation abilities, two hallmarks of stem cells. In the same manner, estimation of the number of CSCs can be obtained from tumor outgrowth data collected after limited dilution re-implantation of each group of treatments, based on tumor-initiating capacities of CSCs. For calculation, an online tool is available using Extreme Limiting Dilution Analysis (ELDA) (http://bioinf.wehi.edu.au/software/elda/) for limiting dilution analysis based on the Poisson single-hit model according to the number of outgrowths observed and the number of pat pad re-implanted for each cell dilution.
(29) Histology. Organs from mice were removed at time of sacrifice. For morphological analyses, organs were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde, paraffin embedded, and 4-μm sections were stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E). Sections were scanned at high resolution using a slide scanner (NanoZoomer 2.0-HT, Hamamatsu, Massy, France).
(30) Localization of intracellular iron(II). RhoNox-1 was synthesized according to the original procedure described in Naujokat and Steinhart, J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2012. Cells were seeded on p-Dishes, then treated as indicated in
(31) Immunoblotting. Cells were treated as indicated, then washed twice with PBS and lysed with 2× Laemmli buffer. Cell extracts were heated at 95° C. for 5 min, sheared through a 26-gauge needle and quantified with a Nanodrop 2000 (Thermo Scientific). Protein lysates (˜100 μg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE electrophoresis and transferred onto PVDF membranes (Amersham). Membranes were blocked with 5% BSA, 0.1% Tween-20/TBS for 1 h. The blots were then probed with the relevant primary antibodies in 5% BSA, 0.1% Tween-20/TBS at 4° C. overnight with gentle agitation. Membranes were washed with 0.1% Tween-20/TBS for 30 min and were incubated with secondary antibodies for 1 h at RT. Antigens were detected by ECL (Amersham). Imaging was performed using a ChemiDoc™ XRS+ System (Biorad).
(32) Perl's reaction. Tumors from mice were removed at time of sacrifice. Tumors were fixed with 4% PFA and embedded in paraffin. To monitor accumulation of ferric iron, 4-μm sections were processed for standard Prussian blue staining. Briefly, slides were deparaffinized in xylenes, rehydrated through a graded ethanol series, and subjected to a 1:1 potassium ferrocyanide solution (2%)/hydrochloric acid solution (2%) for 20 min. Then, slides were washed with distilled water (5 min). Nuclear fast red solution was used to stain nuclei. Images were acquired by light microscopy using an inverted microscope (Eclipse Ti—S, Nikon) and 10×/0.30, 20×/0.50 or 40×/0.785 Plan Fluor objectives (Nikon). Images were captured using a Super high definition cooled colour camera head DS-Ri1 (Nikon) and NIS Elements software (Nikon).
(33) This allows the detection of iron III in tumor tissue.
(34) Lysosomal membrane permeabilization assay. Lysosomal membrane permeabilization (LMP) was assessed by monitoring the release of FITC-Dextran (FD10S, 10 kDa, Sigma) from lysosomes. In brief, cells were incubated with 1 mg/mL FITC-Dextran for 2 h at 37° C. Cells were washed, chased with culture medium for 2 h and treated as indicated for 48 h or with CQ (positive control) for 3 h. Cells were then fixed with 2% formaldehyde/PBS, washed with PBS, mounted and acquired with a 60×APO TIRF oil immersion objective of Nipkow Spinning Disk confocal system.
(35) Annexin V/PI assay. Cells were treated as indicated. After treatment, cell death was quantified using Annexin V-FITC/Propidium Iodide (PI) assay according to the manufacturer's protocol (FITC Annexin V Apoptosis Detection Kit II, 556570, BD Pharmingen™) and analyzed by a LSRFortessa™ flow cytometer (BD Bioscience, San Jose, Calif.). The data were processed using Cell Quest software (BD Biosciences).
(36) Lipid ROS measurements. Cells were treated with Sal or AM5 (0.5 μM) as indicated. Then, cells were trypsinized and washed with PBS. Subsequently, cells were incubated with Bodipy-C11® (D3861, Thermo Fisher Scientific, 2 μM) at 37° C. for 60 min. Next, cells were washed twice with PBS. Oxidation of Bodipy-C11 resulted in a shift of the fluorescence emission peak from 590 nm to 510 nm proportional to lipid ROS generation that was analyzed by LSRFortessa™ flow cytometer (BD Biosciences, San Jose, Calif.). The data were processed using Cell Quest software (BD Biosciences) and FlowJo software (FLOWJO, LLC). For cell imaging, cells were treated as indicated in the main figure (Bodipy-C11®, 1 μM, 1 h), then fixed with formaldehyde (2% in PBS, 12 min) and analyzed by fluorescence microscopy (ex. 488 nm).
(37) Intracellular GSH level quantification. Cells were treated with Sal or AM5 (0.5 μM) as indicated, then harvested and counted. The intracellular GSH level was measured using a commercial kit (ab205811, Abcam) according to the manufacturer's protocol.
(38) RhoNox-1 reduction assay. Experiments were carried in 96-well plate dishes. Reagent stock solutions were freshly prepared using Milli-Q water. 50 μL of solutions of Sal (800 μM), DFO (800 μM) and FeSO4 (80 μM) were mixed prior to addition of 50 μL of RhoNox-1 (40 μM) and completed with the appropriate volume of water to reach a final volume of 200 μL per well. Measurements were performed 30 min after addition of RhoNox-1 to the mix and were recorded using the PARADIGM™ Microplate Detection Platform (ex. 492 nm; em. 580 nm).
(39) Electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry. Cells were harvested, the supernatant was removed, cell pellets were dried and mineralized by adding 100 μL of concentrated nitric acid (PlasmaPure® 67-69% HNO.sub.3, SCP Science, Baie-d'Urfé, Canada) at 80° C. and further diluted with 400 μL of ultrapure water (Milli-Q®, Millipore, Molsheim, France). Iron was determined in cell mineralizates by means of Electrothermal Atomic Absorption Spectrometry (ETAAS) on a PinAAcle® 900Z spectrometer (Perkin Elmer, Les Ulis, France). This method allows the quantification of cellular iron (total iron).
(40) Small interfering RNA transfection. Suitable small interfering RNAs (siRNA) were designed with the Qiagen RNA interference designer tool for specific down-regulation of FTH1. The sequence used for FTH1 was 5′-GUCCAUGUCUUACUACUUUTT-3′ (S100300251) targeting the sequence following 5′-CTGTCCATGTCTTACTACTTT-3′ and a negative control siRNA for FTH1 (5′-CAUUAGUUUGGGCAGUAUATT-3′, (S103089212). Subconfluent cells were transfected with siRNA in Opti-MEM using the Oligofectamine™ reagent (Invitrogen) for 48 h. Then, cells were treated with OSM (100 ng/mL for 48 h) prior to protein or RNA extraction and flow cytometry analysis for markers as indicated.
(41) Statistical analysis. Data were compared using a two-tailed Student's t-test or a one-way ANOVA as indicated. Data are presented as mean values. Two groups were considered to be significantly different if P<0.05.
Example 1: Lysosomal Iron Localization
(42) The inventors functionalized alkynes in cells by means of in situ click chemistry to detect otherwise invisible compounds, a strategy virtually applicable to any molecule (
(43) In particular, the closely related derivative AM4, devoid of a protonable amine, also accumulated in lysosomes lending strong support to the notion that Sal targets lysosomes. In comparison, AM5 did not target the other organelles studied. Since Sal can interact with alkali metals, and given that intracellular iron is tightly regulated and transits through the lysosomal compartment, we explored the effect of Sal on iron homeostasis starting with the subcellular localization of iron(II) using the specific RhoNox-1 fluorogenic probe. While the staining of iron(II) was diffuse in both untreated HMLER CD24.sup.low cells and in cells treated with AM9, treatment with Sal or AM5 led to a staining that was restricted to the lysosomal compartment (
(44) These results were consistent with the idea that Sal prevented the release of iron(II) from lysosomes. Remarkably, AM5 promoted a re-localization of ferritin to the lysosomal compartment (
(45) Altogether, these data supported a model whereby the lipophilic natural product accumulated in the lysosomal compartment and interacted with iron, thereby preventing release of the metal into the cytosol and initiating the appropriate response to replenish the available pool of iron.
Example 2: Iron Concentration, Iron Chelation and Iron Related Biomarkers
(46) Iron can catalyze the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) via Fenton chemistry. Treatment of U2OS, HMLER CD24.sup.low, and iCSCL-10A2 cells with Sal and AM5 led to a significant increase in lysosomal ROS in all cell lines, which mirrored the accumulation of iron in this organelle (data not shown).
(47) The implication of iron and ROS in the phenotype induced by Sal and AM5 hinted towards the activation of a regulated form of necrotic cell death, termed ferroptosis, detected in HMLER CD24.sup.low and iCSCL-10A2 cells after 72 h treatment (
(48) Sal and AM5 also induced a permeabilization of the lysosomal membrane of HMLER CD24.sup.low cells as observed from the release of bulky lysosomal dextran into the cytosol (data not shown). Co-treatment with the ROS scavenger N-acetyl-L-cysteine (NAC) partly prevented Sal and AM5 from killing these cells (data not shown), and DFO reduced ROS levels in treated cells (data not shown), exhibiting a protective effect against Sal and AM5 (
(49) Wnt1 protein level was higher in HMLER CD24.sup.low compared to control cells pointing towards iron as a potential driver of CSCs (
Example 3: Sal and Sal Analogs Alter CSC Maintenance in the In Vivo PDX Model
(50) AM5 selectively targeted the ALDH+ subpopulation of another model of CSCs, namely iCSCL-10A2 cells, more effectively than Sal (
Example 4: Effect of AM5, Taxol and Combination Thereof on the Proliferation of HMLER Cd24-Cells
(51) AM5, Taxol and a combination of AM5 and Taxol were also assessed for their capability to inhibit cell proliferation and formation of mammospheres (
Example 5: Iron Concentration in Various Breast Cells Lines and Tumorsphere Formation
(52) Table 1 below represents the measurement of iron in a wide range of cell lines. Iron concentration is measured as in Example 2.
(53) TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Iron Total Iron Total Iron per 3 × 10.sup.6 cells per cell Sensibility Tumor cell Subtype Cell model (ng) (pg) Sphere to AM5 Non-tumoral HBL100 114 0.04 + First Immortalized HMLE W2 99 0.03 +++ h Tert + Tand t SV40 + ras HMLER CD24.sup.low 290 0.10 +++ h Tert + T and t de HMLER shECAD 150 0.05 ++ SV40 + ras + sh ECAD h Tert+T and t HMLER shGFP 115 0.04 ++ SV40 + ras + sh gfp CSTN BT549 116 0.04 ++ Resistant MDA-MB-361 120 0.04 +++ Second h Tert + T and t SV40 + ras HMLER CD24.sup.high 69 0.02 ++ First H+ MCF-7 83 0.03 ++ First MDA-MB-134 65 0.02 ++ Second CSTN MDA-MD-157 79 0.03 +/− Second BT474 60 0.02 + Second H+ T47D 97 0.03 ++ Resistant H+ Zr75.1 57 0.02 +/− First CSTN MDA-MB-231 34 0.01 − Second Colon SW620 38 0.01 + Third Colon SW480 52 0.02 ++ Third Iron Total iron Total iron per 7 × 10.sup.6 cells per cell Subtype Cell model (ng) (pg) h Tert + Tand t SV40 + ras HMLER CD24l.sup.ow 553 ± 29 0.08 h Tert + T and t SV40 + ras HMLER CD24.sup.high 143 ± 20 0.02
(54) TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Name Essential specificities HBL100 Human mammary epithelial cell line obtained from primary cultures of cells derived from an early lactation sample of human milk (from ATCC). HMLE W2 Human mammary epithelial cell line infected with a retrovirus carrying hTERT, SV40 (R. A. Weinberg, Whitehead Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA) HMLER ID2 Human mammary epithelial cell line infected with a retrovirus carrying hTERT, SV40 and the oncogenic allele HrasV12 (R. A. Weinberg, Whitehead Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA) HMLER CD24.sup.low HMLER CD44.sup.high/CD24.sup.low not expressing E-cadherin and expressing Vimentin (was obtained from A. Puisieux INSERM) HMLER shGFP HMLER cells expressing a control shRNA (shCtrl). (ctrl) Generated by infection with retrovirus encoding the pWZL-GFP plasmid. (R. A. Weinberg, Whitehead Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA) HMLER shECAD Transformed HMLER breast cancer cells displaying a short hairpin RNA (shRNA)-mediated inhibition of the human CDH1 gene, which encodes E-cadherin. Generated by infection with retrovirus encoding the pWZL-GFP plasmid. (R. A. Weinberg, Whitehead Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA) MCF-7 Human ductal breast epithelial tumor cell line classified in Estrogen/Progesterone Receptor (ER/PR) positive group and luminal A (from ATCC). Zr75.1 Human ductal breast epithelial tumor cell line, classified in Estrogen/Progesterone Receptor (ER/PR) and HER-2 positive group and luminal A (from ATCC). MDA-MB-361 Human ductal breast epithelial tumor cell line, classified in Progesterone Receptor (PR) and HER-2 positive group and luminal B (from ATCC). These cells were isolated from a metastatic site in the brain. MDA-MB-134 Human ductal breast epithelial tumor cell line classified in Estrogen/Progesterone Receptor (ER/PR) positive group and luminal B (from ATCC). MDA-MD-157 Human ductal breast epithelial tumor cell line, classified in Estrogen/Progesterone Receptor (ER/PR) and HER-2 negative group and Basal (from ATCC). MDA-MB-231 Human ductal breast epithelial tumor cell line, classified in Estrogen/Progesterone Receptor (ER/PR) and HER-2 negative group and Basal (from ATCC). BT474 Human ductal breast epithelial tumor cell line, classified in Progesterone Receptor (PR) and HER-2 positive group and luminal B (from ATCC). Hs578T Human ductal breast epithelial tumor cell line, classified in Estrogen/Progesterone Receptor (ER/PR) and HER-2 negative group and Basal (from ATCC). BT20 Human ductal breast epithelial tumor cell line, classified in Estrogen/Progesterone Receptor (ER/PR) and HER-2 negative group and Basal (from ATCC). SW620 Colon tumor cells; derived from metastatic site: lymph node (from ATCC). SW480 Colon tumor cells; derived from a primary adenocarcinoma of the colon (from ATCC). BT549 Human ductal breast epithelial tumor cell line, classified in Estrogen/Progesterone Receptor (ER/PR) and HER-2 negative group and Basal (from ATCC). T47D Human ductal breast epithelial tumor cell line classified in Estrogen/Progesterone Receptor (ER/PR) positive group and luminal A (from ATCC).
These results highlight the link between the concentration of iron and tumorsphere formation.
Example 6: Iron Homeostasis would be a Driver of Cancer Stem Cell Phenotype
(55) 1. Wnt1 protein level was higher in HMLER CD24.sup.low compared to control cells (
REFERENCES
(56) Perou et al. 2000, Molecular portraits of human breast tumours, Nature 406, 747-752. Gusterson et al. 2005, Immunohistochemistry: Basics and Methods, Cancer treatment: the combination of vaccination with other therapies. Andersen et al. 2008, Cancer Immunology Immunotherapy, 57(11): 1735-1743. Horan P K et al, Fluorescent cell labeling for in vivo and in vitro cell tracking Methods Cell Biol. 1990. Quoix et al. 2011, Therapeutic vaccination with TG4010 and first-line chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a controlled phase 2B trial., Lancet Oncol. 12(12): 1125-33. Liseth et al. 2010, Combination of intensive chemotherapy and anticancer vaccines in the treatment of human malignancies: the hematological experience. Hirooka et al. 2009, A combination therapy of gemcitabine with immunotherapy for patients with inoperable locally advanced pancreatic cancer, Pancreas 38(3): e69-74. Baskar et al., Cancer and Radiation Therapy: Current Advances and Future Directions, Int. J Med Sci. 9(3): 193-199. Gupta et al., 2009, Identification of Selective Inhibitors of Cancer Stem Cells by High-Throughput Screening, Cell, vol. 138, p. 645-659. Charafe-Jauffret et al., 2013, ALDH1-positive cancer stem cells predict engraftment of primary breast tumors and are governed by a common stem cell program. Cancer Res. 73, 7290-7300. Naujokat and Steinhart, 2012, Salinomycin as a drug for targeting human cancer stem cells. J. Biomed. Biotechnol. DOI: 10.1155/2012/950658. Miller et al., 2011, An Iron Regulatory Gene Signature Predicts Outcome in Breast Cancer, Cancer Res. 71(21): 6728-6737.