A Chemical Genetic Screen for Modulators of Asymmetrical 2,2′-Dimeric Naphthoquinones Cytotoxicity in Yeast

BACKGROUND: Dimeric naphthoquinones (BiQ) were originally synthesized as a new class of HIV integrase inhibitors but have shown integrase-independent cytotoxicity in acute lymphoblastic leukemia cell lines suggesting their use as potential anti-neoplastic agents. The mechanism of this cytotoxicity is unknown. In order to gain insight into the mode of action of binaphthoquinones we performed a systematic high-throughput screen in a yeast isogenic deletion mutant array for enhanced or suppressed growth in the presence of binaphthoquinones. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Exposure of wild type yeast strains to various BiQs demonstrated inhibition of yeast growth with IC(50)s in the microM range. Drug sensitivity and resistance screens were performed by exposing arrays of a haploid yeast deletion mutant library to BiQs at concentrations near their IC(50). Sensitivity screens identified yeast with deletions affecting mitochondrial function and cellular respiration as having increased sensitivity to BiQs. Corresponding to this, wild type yeast grown in the absence of a fermentable carbon source were particularly sensitive to BiQs, and treatment with BiQs was shown to disrupt the mitochondrial membrane potential and lead to the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Furthermore, baseline ROS production in BiQ sensitive mutant strains was increased compared to wild type and could be further augmented by the presence of BiQ. Screens for resistance to BiQ action identified the mitochondrial external NAD(P)H dehydrogenase, NDE1, as critical to BiQ toxicity and over-expression of this gene resulted in increased ROS production and increased sensitivity of wild type yeast to BiQ. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: In yeast, binaphthoquinone cytotoxicity is likely mediated through NAD(P)H:quonine oxidoreductases leading to ROS production and dysfunctional mitochondria. Further studies are required to validate this mechanism in mammalian cells

Antidepressants and Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk: A Review of the Literature and Researchers' Financial Associations with Industry

BACKGROUND: Antidepressant (AD) use has been purported to increase the risk of breast and ovarian cancer, although both epidemiological and pre-clinical studies have reported mixed results. Previous studies in a variety of biomedical fields have found that financial ties to drug companies are associated with favorable study conclusions. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We searched English-language articles in MEDLINE, PsychINFO, the Science Citations Index and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials (through November 2010). A total of 61 articles that assessed the relationship between breast and ovarian cancer and AD use and articles that examined the effect of ADs on cell growth were included. Multi-modal screening techniques were used to investigate researchers' financial ties with industry. A random effects meta-analysis was used to pool the findings from the epidemiological literature. Thirty-three percent (20/61) of the studies reported a positive association between ADs and cancer. Sixty-seven percent (41/61) of the studies reported no association or antiproliferative effect. The pooled odds ratio for the association between AD use and breast/ovarian cancer in the epidemiologic studies was 1.11 (95% CI, 1.03-1.20). Researchers with industry affiliations were significantly less likely than researchers without those ties to conclude that ADs increase the risk of breast or ovarian cancer. (0/15 [0%] vs 20/46 [43.5%] (Fisher's Exact test P = 0.0012). CONCLUSIONS: Both the pre-clinical and clinical data are mixed in terms of showing an association between AD use and breast and ovarian cancer. The possibility that ADs may exhibit a bi-phasic effect, whereby short-term use and/or low dose antidepressants may increase the risk of breast and ovarian cancer, warrants further investigation. Industry affiliations were significantly associated with negative conclusions regarding cancer risk. The findings have implications in light of the 2009 USPSTF guidelines for breast cancer screening and for the informed consent process