Effect of combining glucocorticoids with compound a on glucocorticoid receptor responsiveness in lymphoid malignancies

8Citations
Citations of this article
25Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Glucocorticoids (GCs) are a cornerstone in the treatment of lymphoid malignancies such as multiple myeloma (MM) and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Yet, prolonged GC use is hampered by deleterious GC-related side effects and the emergence of GC resistance. To tackle and overcome these GC-related problems, the applicability of selective glucocorticoid receptor agonists and modulators was studied, in search of fewer side-effects and at least equal therapeutic efficacy as classic GCs. Compound A (CpdA) is a prototypical example of such a selective glucocorticoid receptor modulator and does not support GR-mediated transactivation. Here, we examined whether the combination of CpdA with the classic GC dexamethasone (Dex) may improve GC responsiveness of MM and ALL cell lines. We find that the combination of Dex and CpdA does not substantially enhance GC-mediated cell killing. In line, several apoptosis hallmarks, such as caspase 3/7 activity, PARP cleavage and the levels of cleaved-caspase 3 remain unchanged upon combining Dex with CpdA. Moreover, we monitor no additional inhibition of cell proliferation and the homologous downregulation of GR is not counteracted by the combination of Dex and CpdA. In addition, CpdA is unable to modulate Dex-liganded GR transactivation and transrepression, yet, Dex-mediated transrepression is also aberrant in these lymphoid cell lines. Together, transrepression-favoring compounds, alone or combined with GCs, do not seem a valid strategy in the treatment of lymphoid malignancies.

Figures

  • Fig 1. CpdA does not support GR nuclear accumulation yet induces HSP70 gene expression in MM1.S cells. (A) MM1.S cells were treated for 2h with Dex (10-6M) or CpdA (5.10-6M) and Nucleus (N)–Cytoplasm (C) fractionation was performed. Protein lysates were prepared and WB analysis was performed, detecting the protein levels of GR (90- 95kDa) and PARP (89 and 113 kDa, N fraction control), with tubulin (55kDa, C fraction control) serving as loading control. WB results are representative of 2 independent experiments. (B) MM1.S cells were treated for 6h with CpdA (10-5M). RNA was isolated and subjected to RT-QPCR, detecting the mRNA levels of HSPA1A with SDHA, YWHAZ and RPL13A serving as reference genes. The bar plot represents the mean +/- SEM of 5 biological replicates. A twotailed unpaired t-test was performed on log transformed data using GraphPad Prism 7. = P< 0.001.
  • Fig 2. Adding CpdA to Dex treatment does not substantially enhance GC-induced cell killing in GC-sensitive and GC-resistant MM and ALL cells. (A) MM1.S and (B) C7-14 cells, (C) MM1.R and (D) C1-15 cells were treated for 72h with a concentration range (10-4M-10-10M) of Dex, CpdA or Dex/CpdA combinations (equimolar concentrations). Cell viability was determined using MTT assays. (E) MM1.S cells were treated for 72h with fixed concentration CpdA (10-6M) and/or with a concentration range (10-5M-10-9M) of Dex. Cell viability was determined using a CellTiter-Glo assay. The cell viability of the solvent control (EtOH) was set at 100% and all other cell viabilities were normalized accordingly. The scatter plots represent the mean +/- SEM of 4 independent experiments. Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism 7, using a two-way ANOVA with Tukey’s (A-D) or Sidak’s (E) multiple comparison post-test, comparing Dex vs. CpdA or Dex vs. Dex/CpdA per concentration. Only significant differences are displayed: = P< 0.05, = P< 0.01, = P< 0.001, = P< 0.0001.
  • Fig 3. Adding CpdA to Dex treatment neither increases GC-induced apoptosis nor additionally inhibits cell proliferation of GC-sensitive MM and ALL cells.
  • Fig 4. GR protein levels are not preserved by combining Dex with CpdA in GC-sensitive MM and ALL cells, or in GC-resistant ALL cells. MM1.S, C7-14 and C115 cells were treated for 72h with (A) a concentration range (10-5M-10-9M) of Dex, CpdA or Dex/CpdA combination or (B) a concentration range of Dex (10-6M10-9M), CpdA (5.10-6M) or Dex/CpdA combination. Protein lysates were prepared and WB analysis was performed, detecting the protein levels of GR (90-95kDa), with GAPDH (37kDa) serving as a loading control. WB results are representative of 3 independent experiments.
  • Fig 5. CpdA does not modulate Dex-induced GR transactivation of GRE-driven genes in GC-sensitive MM and ALL cells. (A) MM1.S and (B) C7-14 cells were treated for 6h with Dex (10-6M), CpdA (10-5M) or Dex/CpdA combination. RNA was isolated and subjected to RT-QPCR, detecting the mRNA levels of GILZ, FKBP5 and GR and with SDHA, YWHAZ and RPL13A serving as reference genes. The dot plots represent the mean +/- SEM of 5 biological replicates, with the open circles (o) representing the mean of each biological experiment. A two-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparison post-test was performed on log transformed data using GraphPad Prism 7. = P< 0.01, = P< 0.0001, ns = non-significant.
  • Fig 6. CpdA does not transrepress pro-inflammatory genes in GC-sensitive MM and ALL cells, in absence or presence of Dex. (A) MM1.S and (B) C7-14 cells were pretreated with Dex (10-6M), CpdA (10-5M) or Dex/CpdA combination for 1h, followed by or not treatment with TNFα (2000IU/ml) for another 5h. RNA was isolated and subjected to RT-QPCR, detecting the mRNA levels of A20, NFKBIA, ICAM and RANTES, with SDHA, YWHAZ and RPL13A serving as reference genes. The dot plots represent the mean +/- SEM of 3 biological replicates, with the open circles (o) representing the mean of each biological experiment. A two-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparison post-test was performed on log transformed data using GraphPad Prism 7. = P< 0.05, = P< 0.01, ns = non-significant.

References Powered by Scopus

qBase relative quantification framework and software for management and automated analysis of real-time quantitative PCR data

3373Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Mechanisms involved in the side effects of glucocorticoids

1546Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The heat shock protein 70 family: Highly homologous proteins with overlapping and distinct functions

938Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Glucocorticoids in multiple myeloma: past, present, and future

80Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The long winding road to the safer glucocorticoid receptor (GR) targeting therapies

26Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Potential dissociative glucocorticoid receptor activity for protopanaxadiol and protopanaxatriol

25Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Clarisse, D., Van Wesemael, K., Tavernier, J., Offner, F., Beck, I. M., & De Bosscher, K. (2018). Effect of combining glucocorticoids with compound a on glucocorticoid receptor responsiveness in lymphoid malignancies. PLoS ONE, 13(5). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197000

Readers over time

‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24036912

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 7

64%

Researcher 3

27%

Professor / Associate Prof. 1

9%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 5

42%

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 4

33%

Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceut... 2

17%

Nursing and Health Professions 1

8%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0