Cell Biology and Toxicology

, Volume 35, Issue 1, pp 33–47 | Cite as

A novel and effective inhibitor combination involving bortezomib and OTSSP167 for breast cancer cells in light of label-free proteomic analysis

  • Emrah Okur
  • Azmi YerlikayaEmail author
Original Article



The 26S proteasome plays important roles in many intracellular processes and is therefore a critical intracellular cellular target for anticancer treatments. The primary aim of the current study was to identify critical proteins that may play roles in opposing the antisurvival effect of the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib together with the calcium-chelator BAPTA-AM in cancer cells using label-free LC-MS/MS. In addition, based on the results of the proteomic technique, a novel and more effective inhibitor combination involving bortezomib as well as OTSSP167 was developed for breast cancer cells.

Methods and results

Using label-free LC-MS/MS, it was found that expressions of 1266 proteins were significantly changed between the experimental groups. Among these proteins were cell division cycle 5-like (Cdc5L) and drebrin-like (DBNL). We then hypothesized that inhibition of the activities of these two proteins may lead to more effective anticancer inhibitor combinations in the presence of proteasomal inhibition. In fact, as presented in the current study, Cdc5L phosphorylation inhibitor CVT-313 and DBNL phosphorylation inhibitor OTSSP167 were highly cytotoxic in 4T1 breast cancer cells and their IC50 values were 20.1 and 43 nM, respectively. Under the same experimental conditions, the IC50 value of BAPTA-AM was found 19.9 μM. Using WST 1 cytotoxicity assay, it was determined that 10 nM bortezomib + 10 nM CVT-313 was more effective than the control, the single treatments, or than 5 nM bortezomib + 5 nM CVT-313. Similarly, 10 nM bortezomib + 10 nM OTSSP167 was more cytotoxic than the control, the monotherapies, 5 nM bortezomib + 5 nM OTSSP167, or than 5 nM bortezomib + 10 nM OTSSP167, indicating that bortezomib + OTSSP167 was also more effective than bortezomib + CVT-313 in a dose-dependent manner. Furthermore, the 3D spheroid model proved that bortezomib + OTSSP167 was more effective than the monotherapies as well as bortezomib + CVT-313 and bortezomib + BAPTA-AM combinations. Finally, the effect of bortezomib + OTSSP167 combination was tested on MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells, and it similarly determined that 20 nM bortezomib +40 nM OTSSP167 combination completely blocked the formation of 3D spheroids.


Altogether, the results presented here indicate that bortezomib + OTSSP167 is a novel and effective combination and may be tested further for cancer treatment in vivo and in clinical settings.


Proteomics Bortezomib BAPTA-AM Cancer Cdc5L DBNL 



This study was supported in part by Scientific and Research Council of Turkey (Grant No. 113S400).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Supplementary material

10565_2018_9435_MOESM1_ESM.docx (243 kb)
Supplemental Figure 1 Graphical presentation of selected proteins significantly upregulated in response to bortezomib + BAPTA-AM. The expression level of were identified by label-free LC-MS/MS. Con, control; Bor, 10 nM bortezomib; BAPTA, 5 μM BAPTA-AM. (DOCX 242 kb)
10565_2018_9435_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx (227 kb)
Supplemental Table 1 Significantly upregulated or downregulated proteins in response to bortezomib + BAPTA-AM. The analyzes were carried out by label-free LC-MS/MS. (XLSX 227 kb)


  1. Adams J. Development of the proteasome inhibitor PS-341. Oncologist. 2002;7:9–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aras B, Yerlikaya A. Bortezomib and etoposide combinations exert synergistic effects on the human prostate cancer cell line PC-3. Oncol Lett. 2016;11:3179–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bayram D, Çetin ES, Kara M, Özgöçmen M, Candan IA. The apoptotic effects of silibinin on MDA-MB-231 and MCF-7 human breast carcinoma cells. Hum Exp Toxicol. 2017;36:573–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bradford MM. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem. 1976;72:248–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chan EY, Sutton JN, Jacobs JM, Bondarenko A, Smith RD, Katze MG. Dynamic host energetics and cytoskeletal proteomes in human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected human primary CD4 cells: analysis by multiplexed label-free mass spectrometry. J Virol. 2009;83:9283–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chao A, Wang TH. Molecular mechanisms for synergistic effect of proteasome inhibitors with platinum-based therapy in solid tumors. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;55:3–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen L, Madura K. Increased proteasome activity, ubiquitin-conjugating enzymes, and eEF1A translation factor detected in breast cancer tissue. Cancer Res. 2005;65:5599–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen LY, Chiang AS, Hung JJ, Hung HI, Lai YK. Thapsigargin-induced grp78 expression is mediated by the increase of cytosolic free calcium in 91 rat brain tumor cells. J Cell Biochem. 2000;78:404–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chung CH, Aulino J, Muldowney NJ, Hatakeyama H, Baumann J, Burkey B, et al. Nuclear factor-kappa B pathway and response in a phase II trial of bortezomib and docetaxel in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Ann Oncol. 2010;21:864–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chung S, Suzuki H, Miyamoto T, Takamatsu N, Tatsuguchi A, Ueda K, et al. Development of an orally-administrative MELK-targeting inhibitor that suppresses the growth of various types of human cancer. Oncotarget. 2012;3:1629–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ding X, Matsuo K, Xu L, Yang J, Zheng L. Optimized combinations of bortezomib, camptothecin, and doxorubicin show increased efficacy and reduced toxicity in treating oral cancer. Anti-Cancer Drugs. 2015;26:547–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Frankland-Searby S, Bhaumik SR. The 26S proteasome complex: an attractive target for cancer therapy. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2012;1825:64–76.Google Scholar
  13. Freshney RI. Cytotoxicity, in culture culture of animal cells: a manual of basic technique. 5th ed. Hoboken: Wiley; 2005. p. 359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gräub R, Lancero H, Pedersen A, Chu M, Padmanabhan K, Xu X-Q, et al. Cell cycle-dependent phosphorylation of human CDC5 regulates RNA processing. Cell Cycle. 2008;7:1795–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Guarguaglini G, Duncan PI, Stierhof YD, Holmström T, Duensing S, Nigg EA. The forkhead-associated domain protein Cep170 interacts with polo-like kinase 1 and serves as a marker for mature centrioles. Mol Biol Cell. 2005;16:1095–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hambley B, Caimi PF, William BM. Bortezomib for the treatment of mantle cell lymphoma: an update. Ther Adv Hematol. 2016;7:196–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hendershot LM. The ER function BiP is a master regulator of ER function. Mt Sinai J Med. 2004;71:289–97.Google Scholar
  18. Jakobi R, McCarthy CC, Koeppel MA, Stringer DK. Caspase-activated PAK-2 is regulated by subcellular targeting and proteasomal degradation. J Biol Chem. 2003;278:38675–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kane RC, Bross PF, Farrell AT, Pazdur R. Velcade®: U.S. FDA approval for the treatment of multiple myeloma progressing on prior therapy. Oncologist. 2003;8:508–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kane RC, Dagher R, Farrell A, Ko CW, Sridhara R, Justice R, et al. Bortezomib for the treatment of mantle cell lymphoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13:5291–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kozuch PS, Rocha-Lima CM, Dragovich T, Hochster H, O'Neil BH, Atiq OT, et al. Bortezomib with or without irinotecan in relapsed or refractory colorectal cancer: results from a randomized phase II study. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:2320–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Li B, Cheng XL, Yang YP, Li ZQ. GRP78 mediates radiation resistance of a stem cell-like subpopulation within the MCF-7 breast cancer cell line. Oncol Rep. 2013;30:2119–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Li Z, Park HR, Shi Z, Li Z, Pham CD, Du Y, et al. Pro-oncogenic function of HIP-55/Drebrin-like (DBNL) through Ser269/Thr291-phospho-sensor motifs. Oncotarget. 2014;5:3197–209.Google Scholar
  24. Löffek S, Wöll S, Höhfeld J, Leube RE, Has C, Bruckner-Tuderman L, et al. The ubiquitin ligase CHIP/STUB1 targets mutant keratins for degradation. Hum Mutat. 2010;31:466–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lundberg KC, Fritz Y, Johnston A, Foster AM, Baliwag J, Gudjonsson JE, et al. Proteomics of skin proteins in psoriasis: from discovery and verification in a mouse model to confirmation in humans. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2015;14:109–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Neubert H, Bonnert TP, Rumpel K, Hunt BT, Henle ES, James IT. Label-free detection of differential protein expression by LC/MALDI mass spectrometry. J Proteome Res. 2008;7:2270–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Orlowski RZ, Kuhn DJ. Proteasome inhibitors in cancer therapy: lessons from the first decade. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:1649–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Qiu H, Zhang X, Ni W, Shi W, Fan H, Xu J, et al. Expression and clinical role of Cdc5L as a novel cell cycle protein in hepatocellular carcinoma. Dig Dis Sci. 2016a;61:795–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Qiu H, Zhang X, Ni W, Shi W, Fan H, Xu J, et al. Expression and clinical role of Cdc5L as a novel cell cycle protein in hepatocellular carcinoma. Dig Dis Sci. 2016b;61:795–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schlatzer DM, Sugalski J, Dazard JE, Chance MR, Anthony DD. A quantitative proteomic approach for detecting protein profiles of activated human myeloid dendritic cells. J Immunol Methods. 2012;375:39–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Shimada Y, Nishimura E, Hoshina H, Kobayashi H, Higuchi T, Eto Y, et al. Proteasome inhibitor bortezomib enhances the activity of multiple mutant forms of lysosomal α-glucosidase in pompe disease. JIMD Rep. 2015;18:33–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sirenko O, Mitlo T, Hesley J, Luke S, Owens W, Cromwell EF. High-content assays for characterizing the viability and morphology of 3D cancer spheroid cultures. Assay Drug Dev Technol. 2015;13:402–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tomechko SE, Liu G, Tao M, Schlatzer D, Powell CT, Gupta S, et al. Tissue specific dysregulated protein subnetworks in type 2 diabetic bladder urothelium and detrusor muscle. Mol Cell Proteomics. 2015;14:635–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wang H, Song X, Logsdon C, Zhou G, Evans DB, Abbruzzese JL, et al. Proteasome-mediated degradation and functions of hematopoietic progenitor kinase 1 in pancreatic cancer. Cancer Res. 2009;69:1063–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wiśniewski JR, Zougman A, Nagaraj N, Mann M. Universal sample preparation method for proteome analysis. Nat Methods. 2009;6:359–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yerlikaya A, Erin N. Differential sensitivity of breast cancer and melanoma cells to proteasome inhibitor velcade. Int J Mol Med. 2008;22:817–23.Google Scholar
  37. Yerlikaya A, Yöntem M. The significance of ubiquitin proteasome pathway in cancer development. Recent Pat Anticancer Drug Discov. 2013;8:298–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yerlikaya A, Erdoğan E, Okur E, Yerlikaya Ş, Savran B. A novel combination treatment for breast cancer cells involving BAPTA-AM and proteasome inhibitor bortezomib. Oncol Lett. 2016;12:323–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zhang Y, Tseng CC, Tsai YL, Fu X, Schiff R, Lee AS. Cancer cells resistant to therapy promote cell surface relocalization of GRP78 which complexes with PI3K and enhances PI(3,4,5)P3 production. PLoS One. 2013;8:e80071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Art and Science Faculty, Department of BiologyKütahya Dumlupınar UniversityKütahyaTurkey
  2. 2.Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical BiologyKütahya Health Sciences UniversityKütahyaTurkey

Personalised recommendations