13 research outputs found

    Difference in membrane repair capacity between cancer cell lines and a normal cell line

    Get PDF
    Electroporation-based treatments and other therapies that permeabilize the plasma membrane have been shown to be more devastating to malignant cells than to normal cells. In this study, we asked if a difference in repair capacity could explain this observed difference in sensitivity. Membrane repair was investigated by disrupting the plasma membrane using laser followed by monitoring fluorescent dye entry over time in seven cancer cell lines, an immortalized cell line, and a normal primary cell line. The kinetics of repair in living cells can be directly recorded using this technique, providing a sensitive index of repair capacity. The normal primary cell line of all tested cell lines exhibited the slowest rate of dye entry after laser disruption and lowest level of dye uptake. Significantly, more rapid dye uptake and a higher total level of dye uptake occurred in six of the seven tested cancer cell lines (p < 0.05) as well as the immortalized cell line (p < 0.001). This difference in sensitivity was also observed when a viability assay was performed one day after plasma membrane permeabilization by electroporation. Viability in the primary normal cell line (98 % viable cells) was higher than in the three tested cancer cell lines (81–88 % viable cells). These data suggest more effective membrane repair in normal, primary cells and supplement previous explanations why electroporation-based therapies and other therapies permeabilizing the plasma membrane are more effective on malignant cells compared to normal cells in cancer treatment

    Mercaptopurine/Methotrexate Maintenance Therapy of Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia:Clinical Facts and Fiction

    No full text
    The antileukemic mechanisms of 6-mercaptopurine (6MP) and methotrexate (MTX) maintenance therapy are poorly understood, but the benefits of several years of myelosuppressive maintenance therapy for acute lymphoblastic leukemia are well proven. Currently, there is no international consensus on drug dosing. Because of significant interindividual and intraindividual variations in drug disposition and pharmacodynamics, vigorous dose adjustments are needed to obtain a target degree of myelosuppression. As the normal white blood cell counts vary by patients’ ages and ethnicity, and also within age groups, identical white blood cell levels for 2 patients may not reflect the same treatment intensity. Measurements of intracellular levels of cytotoxic metabolites of 6MP and MTX can identify nonadherent patients, but therapeutic target levels remains to be established. A rise in serum aminotransferase levels during maintenance therapy is common and often related to high levels of methylated 6MP metabolites. However, except for episodes of hypoglycemia, serious liver dysfunction is rare, the risk of permanent liver damage is low, and aminotransferase levels usually normalize within a few weeks after discontinuation of therapy. 6MP and MTX dose increments should lead to either leukopenia or a rise in aminotransferases, and if neither is experienced, poor treatment adherence should be considered. The many genetic polymorphisms that determine 6MP and MTX disposition, efficacy, and toxicity have precluded implementation of pharmacogenomics into treatment, the sole exception being dramatic 6MP dose reductions in patients who are homozygous deficient for thiopurine methyltransferase, the enzyme that methylates 6MP and several of its metabolites. In conclusion, maintenance therapy is as important as the more intensive and toxic earlier treatment phases, and often more challenging. Ongoing research address the applicability of drug metabolite measurements for dose adjustments, extensive host genome profiling to understand diversity in treatment efficacy and toxicity, and alternative thiopurine dosing regimens to improve therapy for the individual patient
    corecore