Science China Life Sciences

, Volume 56, Issue 11, pp 1020–1027 | Cite as

Potential antitumor mechanisms of phenothiazine drugs

  • Lu Qi
  • YanQing Ding
Open Access
Research Paper


In this study, three kinds of phenothiazine drugs were analyzed to explore their potential antitumor mechanisms. First, target proteins that could interact with chlorpromazine, fluphenazine and trifluoperazine were predicted. Then, the target proteins of the three drugs were intersected. Cell signaling pathway enrichment and related disease enrichment were conducted for the intersected proteins to extract the enrichment categories associated with tumors. By regulation network analysis of the protein interactions, the mechanisms of action of these target proteins in tumor tissue were clarified, thus confirming the potential antitumor mechanisms of the phenothiazine drugs. The final results of cell signaling pathway enrichment and related disease enrichment showed that the categories with the highest score were all found in tumors. Target proteins belonging to the tumor category included signaling pathway members such as Wnt, MAPK and retinoic acid receptor. Moreover, another target protein, MAPK8, could indirectly act on target proteins CDK2, IGF1R, GSK3B, RARA, FGFR2 and MAPK10, thereby affecting tumor cell division and proliferation. Therefore, phenothiazine drugs may have potential antitumor effects, and tumor-associated target proteins play important roles in the process of cell signaling transduction cascades.


phenothiazines antitumor bioinformatics target proteins 


  1. 1.
    Yde C W, Clausen M P, Bennetzen M V, et al. The antipsychotic drug chlorpromazine enhances the cytotoxic effect of tamoxifen in tamoxifen-sensitive and tamoxifen-resistant human breast cancer cells. Anticancer Drugs, 2009, 20: 723–735PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Eriksson A, Yachnin J, Lewensohn R, et al. DNA-dependent protein kinase is inhibited by trifluoperazine. Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 2001, 283: 726–731PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Liang W, Yang C Z. Effects of phenothiazine derivatives on protein kinase C and multidrug resistance of tumor cells. Chin Sci Bull, 1998, 43: 1179–1183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lee M S, Johansen L, Zhang Y, et al. The novel combination of chlorpromazine and pentamidine exerts synergistic antiproliferative effects through dual mitotic action. Cancer Res, 2007, 67: 11359–11367PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wiklund E D, Catts V S, Catts S V, et al. Cytotoxic effects of antipsychotic drugs implicate cholesterol homeostasis as a novel chemotherapeutic target. Int J Cancer, 2010, 126: 28–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhelev Z, Ohba H, Bakalova R, et al. Phenothiazines suppress proliferation and induce apoptosis in cultured leukemic cells without any influence on the viability of normal lymphocytes. Phenothiazines and leukemia. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol, 2004, 53: 267–275PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fond G, Macgregor A, Attal J, et al. Antipsychotic drugs: Pro-cancer or anti-cancer? A systematic review. Med Hypotheses, 2012, 79: 38–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Burgess D J. Anticancer drugs: Antipsychotic to anticancer agent? Nat Rev Drug Discov, 2012, 11: 516PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Barrett T, Suzek T O, Troup D B, et al. NCBI GEO: Mining millions of expression profiles-database and tools. Nucleic Acids Res, 2005, 33: D562–D566PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shi Q, Pavey E S, Carter R E. Bonferroni-based correction factor for multiple, correlated endpoints. Pharm Stat, 2012, 11: 300–309PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Orlov Y L, Zhou J, Lipovich L, et al. Quality assessment of the Affymetrix U133A&B probesets by target sequence mapping and expression data analysis. In Silico Biol, 2007, 7: 241–260PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lamb J, Crawford E D, Peck D, et al. The Connectivity Map: Using gene-expression signatures to connect small molecules, genes, and disease. Science, 2006, 313: 1929–1935PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Luo H, Chen J, Shi L, et al. DRAR-CPI: A server for identifying drug repositioning potential and adverse drug reactions via the chemical-protein interactome. Nucleic Acids Res, 2011, 39: W492–W498PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dennis G J, Sherman B T, Hosack D A, et al. DAVID: Database for annotation, visualization, and integrated discovery. Genome Biol, 2003, 4: P3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Warde-Farley D, Donaldson S L, Comes O, et al. The GeneMANIA prediction server: Biological network integration for gene prioritization and predicting gene function. Nucleic Acids Res, 2010, 38: W214–W220PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hu Z, Snitkin E S, Delisi C. VisANT: An integrative framework for networks in systems biology. Brief Bioinform, 2008, 9: 317–325PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hu Z, Mellor J, Wu J, et al. VisANT: Data-integrating visual framework for biological networks and modules. Nucleic Acids Res, 2005, 33: W352–W357PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hu Z, Mellor J, Wu J, et al. VisANT: An online visualization and analysis tool for biological interaction data. BMC Bioinformatics, 2004, 5: 17PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ogino S, Shima K, Baba Y, et al. Colorectal cancer expression of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARG, PPARgamma) is associated with good prognosis. Gastroenterology, 2009, 136: 1242–1250PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Girnun G. PPARG: A new independent marker for colorectal cancer survival. Gastroenterology, 2009, 136: 1157–1160PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Clarke N, Germain P, Altucci L, et al. Retinoids: Potential in cancer prevention and therapy. Expert Rev Mol Med, 2004, 6: 1–23PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Papi A, Rocchi P, Ferreri A M, et al. RXRgamma and PPARgamma ligands in combination to inhibit proliferation and invasiveness in colon cancer cells. Cancer Lett, 2010, 297: 65–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chang J T, Nevins J R. GATHER: A systems approach to interpreting genomic signatures. Bioinformatics, 2006, 22: 2926–2933PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Pathology, School of Basic Medical SciencesSouthern Medical UniversityGuangzhouChina
  2. 2.Department of Pathology, Nanfang HospitalSouthern Medical UniversityGuangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations