Spontaneous γH2AX Foci in Human Solid Tumor-Derived Cell Lines in Relation to p21WAF1 and WIP1 Expression.

Phosphorylation of H2AX on Ser139 (γH2AX) after exposure to ionizing radiation produces nuclear foci that are detectable by immunofluorescence microscopy. These so-called γH2AX foci have been adopted as quantitative markers for DNA double-strand breaks. High numbers of spontaneous γH2AX foci have also been reported for some human solid tumor-derived cell lines, but the molecular mechanism(s) for this response remains elusive. Here we show that cancer cells (e.g., HCT116; MCF7) that constitutively express detectable levels of p21WAF1 (p21) exhibit low numbers of γH2AX foci (<3/nucleus), whereas p21 knockout cells (HCT116p21-/-) and constitutively low p21-expressing cells (e.g., MDA-MB-231) exhibit high numbers of foci (e.g., >50/nucleus), and that these foci are not associated with apoptosis. The majority (>95%) of cells within HCT116p21-/- and MDA-MB-231 cultures contain high levels of phosphorylated p53, which is localized in the nucleus. We further show an inverse relationship between γH2AX foci and nuclear accumulation of WIP1, an oncogenic phosphatase. Our studies suggest that: (i) p21 deficiency might provide a selective pressure for the emergence of apoptosis-resistant progeny exhibiting genomic instability, manifested as spontaneous γH2AX foci coupled with phosphorylation and nuclear accumulation of p53; and (ii) p21 might contribute to positive regulation of WIP1, resulting in dephosphorylation of γH2AX

The Cellular Response to DNA Damage: From DNA Repair to Polyploidy and Beyond

A major challenge in treating patients with solid tumors is posed by intratumor heterogeneity, with different sub-populations of cancer cells within the same tumor exhibiting therapy resistance through different biological processes [...

The Growing Complexity of Cancer Cell Response to DNA-Damaging Agents: Caspase 3 Mediates Cell Death or Survival?

It is widely stated that wild-type p53 either mediates the activation of cell cycle checkpoints to facilitate DNA repair and promote cell survival, or orchestrates apoptotic cell death following exposure to cancer therapeutic agents. This reigning paradigm has been challenged by numerous discoveries with different human cell types, including solid tumor-derived cell lines. Thus, activation of the p53 signaling pathway by ionizing radiation and other DNA-damaging agents hinders apoptosis and triggers growth arrest (e.g., through premature senescence) in some genetic backgrounds; such growth arrested cells remain viable, secrete growth-promoting factors, and give rise to progeny with stem cell-like properties. In addition, caspase 3, which is best known for its role in the execution phase of apoptosis, has been recently reported to facilitate (rather than suppress) DNA damage-induced genomic instability and carcinogenesis. This observation is consistent with an earlier report demonstrating that caspase 3 mediates secretion of the pro-survival factor prostaglandin E2, which in turn promotes enrichment of tumor repopulating cells. In this article, we review these and related discoveries and point out novel cancer therapeutic strategies. One of our objectives is to demonstrate the growing complexity of the DNA damage response beyond the conventional “repair and survive, or die” hypothesis

Changing the Landscape of Solid Tumor Therapy from Apoptosis-Promoting to Apoptosis-Inhibiting Strategies

The many limitations of implementing anticancer strategies under the term “precision oncology” have been extensively discussed. While some authors propose promising future directions, others are less optimistic and use phrases such as illusion, hype, and false hypotheses. The reality is revealed by practicing clinicians and cancer patients in various online publications, one of which has stated that “in the quest for the next cancer cure, few researchers bother to look back at the graveyard of failed medicines to figure out what went wrong”. The message is clear: Novel therapeutic strategies with catchy names (e.g., synthetic “lethality”) have not fulfilled their promises despite decades of extensive research and clinical trials. The main purpose of this review is to discuss key challenges in solid tumor therapy that surprisingly continue to be overlooked by the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death (NCCD) and numerous other authors. These challenges include: The impact of chemotherapy-induced genome chaos (e.g., multinucleation) on resistance and relapse, oncogenic function of caspase 3, cancer cell anastasis (recovery from late stages of apoptosis), and pitfalls of ubiquitously used preclinical chemosensitivity assays (e.g., cell “viability” and tumor growth delay studies in live animals) that score such pro-survival responses as “lethal” events. The studies outlined herein underscore the need for new directions in the management of solid tumors

When Therapy-Induced Cancer Cell Apoptosis Fuels Tumor Relapse

Most therapeutic strategies for solid tumor malignancies are designed based on the hypothesis that cancer cells evade apoptosis to exhibit therapy resistance. This is somewhat surprising given that clinical studies published since the 1990s have demonstrated that increased apoptosis in solid tumors is associated with cancer aggressiveness and poor clinical outcome. This is consistent with more recent reports demonstrating non-canonical (pro-survival) roles for apoptotic caspases, including caspase 3, as well as the ability of cancer cells to recover from late stages of apoptosis via a process called anastasis. These activities are essential for the normal development and maintenance of a healthy organism, but they also enable malignant cells (including cancer stem cells) to resist anticancer treatment and potentially contribute to clinical dormancy (minimal residual disease). Like apoptosis, therapy-induced cancer cell dormancy (durable proliferation arrest reflecting various manifestations of genome chaos) is also not obligatorily a permanent cell fate. However, as briefly discussed herein, compelling pre-clinical studies suggest that (reversible) dormancy might be the “lesser evil” compared to treacherous apoptosis

Do TUNEL and Other Apoptosis Assays Detect Cell Death in Preclinical Studies?

The terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase-mediated dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL) assay detects DNA breakage by labeling the free 3ʹ-hydroxyl termini. Given that genomic DNA breaks arise during early and late stages of apoptosis, TUNEL staining continues to be widely used as a measure of apoptotic cell death. The advantages of the assay include its relative ease of performance and the broad availability of TUNEL assay kits for various applications, such as single-cell analysis of apoptosis in cell cultures and tissue samples. However, as briefly discussed herein, aside from some concerns relating to the specificity of the TUNEL assay itself, it was demonstrated some twenty years ago that the early stages of apoptosis, detected by TUNEL, can be reversed. More recently, compelling evidence from different biological systems has revealed that cells can recover from even late stage apoptosis through a process called anastasis. Specifically, such recovery has been observed in cells exhibiting caspase activation, genomic DNA breakage, phosphatidylserine externalization, and formation of apoptotic bodies. Furthermore, there is solid evidence demonstrating that apoptotic cells can promote neighboring tumor cell repopulation (e.g., through caspase-3-mediated secretion of prostaglandin E2) and confer resistance to anticancer therapy. Accordingly, caution should be exercised in the interpretation of results obtained by the TUNEL and other apoptosis assays (e.g., caspase activation) in terms of apoptotic cell demise

What Are the Reasons for Continuing Failures in Cancer Therapy? Are Misleading/Inappropriate Preclinical Assays to Be Blamed? Might Some Modern Therapies Cause More Harm than Benefit?

Over 50 years of cancer research has resulted in the generation of massive amounts of information, but relatively little progress has been made in the treatment of patients with solid tumors, except for extending their survival for a few months at best. Here, we will briefly discuss some of the reasons for this failure, focusing on the limitations and sometimes misunderstanding of the clinical relevance of preclinical assays that are widely used to identify novel anticancer drugs and treatment strategies (e.g., “synthetic lethality”). These include colony formation, apoptosis (e.g., caspase-3 activation), immunoblotting, and high-content multiwell plate cell-based assays, as well as tumor growth studies in animal models. A major limitation is that such assays are rarely designed to recapitulate the tumor repopulating properties associated with therapy-induced cancer cell dormancy (durable proliferation arrest) reflecting, for example, premature senescence, polyploidy and/or multinucleation. Furthermore, pro-survival properties of apoptotic cancer cells through phoenix rising, failed apoptosis, and/or anastasis (return from the brink of death), as well as cancer immunoediting and the impact of therapeutic agents on interactions between cancer and immune cells are often overlooked in preclinical studies. A brief review of the history of cancer research makes one wonder if modern strategies for treating patients with solid tumors may sometimes cause more harm than benefit

Cellular Responses to Platinum-Based Anticancer Drugs and UVC: Role of p53 and Implications for Cancer Therapy

Chemotherapy is intended to induce cancer cell death through apoptosis and other avenues. Unfortunately, as discussed in this article, moderate doses of genotoxic drugs such as cisplatin typical of those achieved in the clinic often invoke a cytostatic/dormancy rather than cytotoxic/apoptosis response in solid tumour-derived cell lines. This is commonly manifested by an extended apoptotic threshold, with extensive apoptosis only being seen after very high/supralethal doses of such agents. The dormancy response can be associated with senescence-like features, polyploidy and/or multinucleation, depending in part on the p53 status of the cells. In most solid tumour-derived cells, dormancy represents a long-term survival mechanism, ultimately contributing to disease recurrence. This review highlights the nonlinearity of key aspects of the molecular and cellular responses to bulky DNA lesions in human cells treated with chemotherapeutic drugs (e.g., cisplatin) or ultraviolet light-C (a widely used tool for unraveling details of the DNA damage-response) as a function of the level of genotoxic stress. Such data highlight the growing realization that targeting dormant cancer cells, which frequently emerge following conventional anticancer treatments, may represent a novel strategy to prevent or, at least, significantly suppress cancer recurrence

Intratumor Heterogeneity and Therapy Resistance: Contributions of Dormancy, Apoptosis Reversal (Anastasis) and Cell Fusion to Disease Recurrence

A major challenge in treating cancer is posed by intratumor heterogeneity, with different sub-populations of cancer cells within the same tumor exhibiting therapy resistance through different biological processes. These include therapy-induced dormancy (durable proliferation arrest through, e.g., polyploidy, multinucleation, or senescence), apoptosis reversal (anastasis), and cell fusion. Unfortunately, such responses are often overlooked or misinterpreted as “death” in commonly used preclinical assays, including the in vitro colony-forming assay and multiwell plate “viability” or “cytotoxicity” assays. Although these assays predominantly determine the ability of a test agent to convert dangerous (proliferating) cancer cells to potentially even more dangerous (dormant) cancer cells, the results are often assumed to reflect loss of cancer cell viability (death). In this article we briefly discuss the dark sides of dormancy, apoptosis, and cell fusion in cancer therapy, and underscore the danger of relying on short-term preclinical assays that generate population-based data averaged over a large number of cells. Unveiling the molecular events that underlie intratumor heterogeneity together with more appropriate experimental design and data interpretation will hopefully lead to clinically relevant strategies for treating recurrent/metastatic disease, which remains a major global health issue despite extensive research over the past half century