Objectives Our goal was to investigate the effects of rucaparib on the proliferation of cervical cancer cells and sensitivity to radiotherapy. Methods We used the human cervical cancer cell lines Hela and Siha and evaluated their viability and activity using various methods. Cellular proliferation was assessed by CCK-8 and clonogenic assays after treatment with rucaparib. Cell cycle analysis was performed using propidium iodide staining. Western immunoblotting analysis was used to detect the expression of cyclin D1 and CDK4. Immunofluorescence staining assay was performed to detect the expression of the DNA injury marker ץ-H2AX after treatment with rucaparib and radiotherapy. Animal experiments were also performed to evaluate tumor size after treatment with rucaparib. Immunohistochemistry was performed to analyze the expression of Ki-67. Results Rucaparib suppressed proliferation, induced G2/M phase arrest, and reduced the expression of cyclin D1 and CDK4 in cervical cancer cells. When rucaparib was combined with radiotherapy in cervical cancer cells, clone formation decreased significantly and G2/M phase arrest was accentuated. The expression of the DNA-damage marker ץ-H2AX was increased significantly, and rucaparib suppressed tumor growth in vivo. Conclusions Rucaparib exerts significant anti-proliferative effects and can serve as an effective radiosensitizer in cervical cancer, suggesting its candidacy in cervical cancer treatment and worthiness for further investigation.
Rucaparib Cervical cancer Proliferation Radiosensitivity
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
We would like to thank LetPub (www.letpub.com) for providing linguistic assistance during the preparation of this manuscript.
The work was supported by the Department of Health and Planning Commission in Wuxi, the China. The work was also supported by the Department of Affilited Hospital of Jiangnan University in Wuxi, the China.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of Interest
Author Mei Tang declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Author Qiuli Liu declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Author Leyuan Zhou declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Author Ling Chen declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Author Xueqing Yang declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Author Jinjin Yu declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Author Yuan Wang declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Author Haifeng Qiu declares that he has no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors. All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.
For this type of study, formal consent is not required.
Farmer H, Mc Cabe N, Lord CJ et al (2005) Targeting the DNA repair defect in BRCA mutant cells as a therapeutic strategy [J]. Nature 434(7035):917–921CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Tentori L, Lacal PM, Muzi A et al (2007) Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase(PARP) inhibition or PARP-1 gene deletion reduces angiogenesis [J]. Eur J Cancer 43(14):2124–2133CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Tan DS, Rothermundt C, Thomas K et al (2008) “BRCAness” syndrome in ovarian cancer: a case-control study describing the clinical features and outcome of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1and BRCA2 mutations [J]. J Clin Oncol 26(34):5530–5536CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Fong PC, Boss DS, Yap TA et al (2009) Inhibition of poly(ADP-ribose)polymerase in tumors from BRCA mutation carriers [J]. N Engl J Med 361(2):123–134CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Drew Y, Plummer R (2009) PARP inhibitors in cancer therapy: two modes of attack on the cancer cell widening the clinical applications [J]. Drug Resist Updat 12(6):153–156CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar