Suicide Gene Therapy

  • Ion Niculescu-Duvaz
  • Caroline J. Springer
Chapter

Abstract

The most outstanding progress in molecular biology during the twentieth century led from the understanding of the genetic code, to the development of DNA technology, which led ultimately to gene therapy. These advances raised hopes that cancer could be cured using such an approach. The area of cancer gene therapy is vast and targets both malignant and nonmalignant cells for therapeutic gain. Gene therapy that targets malignant cells embraces a large spectrum of methods including the insertion of tumor suppressor genes (TSGs), cytokine genes, toxin genes, and prodrug-activating genes. This chapter deals with the latter, also termed suicide gene therapy. Basically, this approach uses DNA technology to transduce in cancer cells a gene able to activate a nontoxic prodrug into a cytotoxic drug able to kill the cancer cell population. This area of research is considered one of the most popular because this technique is represented by 52 clinical protocols (10.4%) including a total of 567 patients (16.5%) in 2001; some protocols are reported as combination suicide gene therapy (83 protocols).

Keywords

Gene Therapy Adenoviral Vector Bystander Effect Cancer Gene Therapy Purine Nucleoside Phosphorylase 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bridgewater G, Springer CJ, Knox R, Minton N, Michael P, Collins M. Expression of the bacterial nitroreductase enzyme in mammalian cells renders them selectively sensitive to killing by the prodrug CB 1954. Eur J Cancer. 1995; 31A: 2362–2370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marais R, Spooner RA, Light Y, Martin J, Springer CJ. Gene-directed enzyme prodrug therapy with a mustard prodrug/carboxypeptidase G2 combination. Cancer Res. 1996; 56: 4735–4742.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Huber BE, Richards CA, Austin EA. VDEPT: An enzyme/prodrug gene therapy approach for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Adv Drug Del Rev. 1995; 17: 279–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Eaton JL, Perry MJA, Todryk SM, et al. Genetic prodrug activation therapy (GPAT) in two rat prostate models generates an immune bystander effect and can be monitored by magnetic resonance techniques. Gene Ther. 2001; 8: 557–567.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hermiston, T. Gene-delivery from replication-selective viruses: arming guided missiles in the war against cancer. J Clin Investig. 2000; 105: 1169–1172.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Green NK, Seymour LW. Adenoviral vectors: Systemic delivery and tumor targeting. Cancer Gene Ther. 2002; 9: 1036–1042.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ponnazhagan S, Curiel DT, Shaw DR, Alvarez RD, Siegal GP. Adeno-associated virus for cancer gene therapy. Cancer Res. 2001; 61: 6313–6321.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Glorioso JC, De Luca NA, Fink DJ. Development and application of herpes simplex virus vector for gene therapy. Annu Rev Microbiol. 1995; 49: 675–710.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Spooner RA, Deonarain MP, Epenetos AA. DNA vaccination for cancer treatment. Gene Ther. 1995; 2: 173–180.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ilies MA, Seitz MA, Balaban AT. Cationic lipids in gene delivery: principles, vector design and therapeutical application. Curr Pharm Des. 2002; 8: 2441–2247.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Miller AD. Cationic liposomes for gene therapy. Angewandte Chem Intl Ed. 1998; 37: 1768–1785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schatzlein, AG. Non-viral vectors in cancer gene therapy: principles and progress. Anticancer Drug Des. 2001; 12: 275–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Curiel DT, Gerritsen WR, Krul MR. Progress in cancer gene therapy. Cancer Gene Ther. 2000; 7: 1197–1199.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Krasnykh V, Dmitriev I, Navarro J-G, et al. Advanced generation adenoviral vectors possess augmented gene transfer efficiency based upon coxsackies adenovirus receptor-independent cellularn entry capacity. Cancer Res. 2000; 60: 6784–6787.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Heideman DAH, Snijders PJF, Craanen MW, et al. Selective gene delivery toward gastric and esophageal adenocarcinoma cells via EpCAM-targeted adenoviral vectors. Cancer Gene Ther. 2001; 8: 342–351.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kleeff J, Fukahi K, Lopez ME, et al. Targeting of suicide gene delivery in pancreatic cancer cells via FGF receptors. Cancer Gene Ther. 2002; 9: 522–532.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wesseling JC, Bosma PJ, Krasnykh V, et al. Improved gene transfer efficiency to primary and established human pancreatic carcinoma target cells via epidermal growth factor receptor and integrin-targeted adenoviral vector. Gene Ther. 2001; 8: 969–976.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pan Y, Zhai P, Dashti AM, Wu S, Lin X, Wu M. A combined gene delivery by co-transduction of adenoviral and retroviral vectors for cancer gene therapy. Cancer Lett. 2002; 184: 179–188.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kitazono M, Goldsmith ME, Aikou T, Bates S, Fojo T. Enhanced adenovirus transgene expression in malignant cellstreated with the histone deacetylase inhibitor FR901228. Cancer Res. 2001; 61: 6328–6330.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Heise C, Kirn HD Replication-selective adenoviruses as oncolytic agents. J Clin Invest. 2000; 105: 847–851.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hermiston TV, Kuhn I. Armed therapeutic viruses: strategies and challenges to arming oncolytic viruses with therapeutic genes. Cancer Gene Ther. 2002; 9: 1022–1035.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kirn D. Clinical research results with dI 1520 (ONYX-015), a replication selective adenovirus for the treatment of cancer: what have we learned? Gene Ther. 2001; 8: 89–98.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Martuza RL. Conditionally replicating herpes vector for gene therapy. J Clin Invest. 2000; 105: 841–846.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ichikawa T, Tamiya T, Adachi Y, et al. In vivo efficacy and toxicity of 5-flourocytosine/ cytosine deaminase gene therapy for malignant gliomas mediated by adenovirus. Cancer Gene Ther. 2000; 7: 74–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Todo T, Rabkin SD, Martuza RL. Evaluation of ganciclovir-mediated enhancement of the antitumoral effect in oncolytic, multimutated herpes simplex virus type 1 (G207) therapy of brain tumor. Cancer Gene Ther. 2000; 7: 939–946.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Aghi M, Chou TC, Suling K, Breakefield XO, Chiocca IA. Multimodal cancer treatment mediated by a replicating oncolytic virus that delivers the oxazaphosphorine/rat cytochrome P450 2B1 and ganciclovir/herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase gene therapies. Cancer Res. 1999; 59: 3861–3865.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nakamura H, Mullen JT, Chanrasekhar S, Pawlik TM, Yoon SS, Tanabe KK. Multimodality therapy with a replication-conditional herpes simplex virus 1 mutant that express yeast cytosine deaminase for intratumoral conversion of 5-fluorocytosine to 5-fluorouracil. Cancer Res. 2001; 61: 5447–5452.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wildner O, Morris JC. The role of the E1B 55 kDa gene product in oncolytic adenoviral vectors expressing herpes simplex virus-tk: assessment of antitumor efficacy and toxicity. Cancer Res. 2000; 60: 4167–4174.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wildner O, Morris JC, Vahanian NN, Ford H, Ramsey WJ, Blaese RM. Adenoviral vectors capable of replication improve the efficacy of HSVtk/GCV suicide gene therapy of cancer. Gene Ther. 1999; 6: 57–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Freytag SO, Rogulski KR, Paielli DL, Gilbert JD, Kim JH. A novel three-pronged approach to kill cancer cells selectively: Concomitant viral, double suicide gene, and radiotherapy. Human Gene Ther. 1998; 9: 1323–1333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lambright ES, Amin K, Wiewrodt R, et al. Inclusion of the herpes simplex thymidine kinase gene in a replicating adenovirus does not augment antitumor efficacy. Gene Ther. 2001; 8: 946–953.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rogulski KR, Wing MS, Paielli DL, Gilbert JD, Kim JH, Freytag SO. Double suicide gene therapy augments the antitumor activity of a replication-competent lytic adenovirus through enhanced cytotoxicity and radiosensitization. Human Gene Ther. 2000; 11: 67–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Pawelek JM, Low KB, Bermudes D. Tumor-targeted Salmonella as a novel anticancer vector. Cancer Res. 1997; 57: 4537–4544.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tjuvaev J, Blasberg R, Luo X, Zheng LM, King I, Bermudes D. Salmonella-based tumor-targeted cancer therapy: tumor amplified protein expression therapy (TAPETTM) for diagnostic imaging. J Control Release. 2001; 74: 313–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yazawa K, Fujimori M, Amano J, Kano Y, Taniguchi S. Bifidobacterium longum as a delivery system for cancer gene therapy: Selective localization and growth in hypoxic tumors. Cancer Gene Ther. 2000; 7: 269–274.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Nuyts S, Theys J, Landuyt W, Van Mellaert L, Lambin P, Anne J. Increasing specificity of anti-tumour therapy: cytotoxic proteins delivery by non-pathogenic Clostridia under regulation of radio-induced promoter. Anticancer Res. 2001; 21: 857–862.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Nuyts S, Van Mellaert L, Theys J, Landuyt W, Lambin P, Anne J. The use of radiation-induced bacterial promoters in anaerobic-conditions: a means to control gene expression in Clostridium-mediated gene therapy. Radiat Res. 2001; 155: 716–723.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Liu S-C, Minton NP, Giaccia AJ, Brown JM. Anticancer efficacy of systemically delivered anaerobic bacteria as gene therapy vectors targeting tumor hypoxia/necrosis. Gene Ther. 2002; 9: 291–296.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Luo D, Salzman WM. Synthetic DNA delivery systems. Nat Biotechnol. 2000; 18: 33–37.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Djeha AH, Hulme A, Dexter MT, et al. Expression of Escherichia coli B nitroreductase in established human tumor xenografts in mice results in potent antitumoral and bystander effects upon systemic administration of CB1954. Cancer Gene Ther. 2000; 7: 721–731.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Lohr F, Lo DY, Zaharoff DA, et al. Effective tumor therapy with plasmid cytokines combined with in vivo electroporation. Cancer Res. 2001; 61: 3281–3284.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bentires-Alj M, Helin A-C, Lechanteur C, et al. Cytosine deaminase suicide gene therapy for peritoneal carcinomatosis. Cancer Gene Ther. 2000; 7: 20–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Harada Y, Iwai M, Tanaka S, et al. Highly efficient suicide gene expression in hepatocellular carcinoma cells by Epstein-Barr virus-based plasmid vectors combined with polyamidoamine dendrimer. Cancer Gene Ther. 2000; 7: 27–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hasegawa H, Shimada M, Yonemitsu Y, et al. Preclinical and therapeutic utility of HVJ liposomes as a gene transfer vector for hepatocellular carcinoma using herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase. Cancer Gene Ther. 2001; 8: 252–258.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kanyama H, Tomita N, Yamano T, et al. Usefulness of repeated intratumoral gene transfer using hemagglutinating virus of Japan-liposome method for cytosine deaminase suicide gene therapy. Cancer Res. 2001; 61: 14–18.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hagihara Y, Saitoh Y, Kaneda Y, Kohmura E, Yoshimine T. Widespread gene transfection into the central nervous system of primates. Gene Ther. 2000; 7:759– 763.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Mc Kay TR, MacVinish LJ, Carpenter B, et al. Selective in vivo transfection of murine biliary ephitelia using polycation-enhanced adenovirus. Gene Ther. 2000; 7: 644–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Xu L, Pirollo KF, Rait A, Murray AL, Chang EH. Systemic p53 gene therapy in combination with radiation results in human tumor regression. Tumor Targeting. 1999; 4: 92–104.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Dachs GU, Dougherty GJ, Stratford IJ, Chaplin DJ. Targeting gene therapy for cancer. Oncol Res. 1997; 9: 313–325.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hayes GM, Carpenito C, Davis PD, Dougherty ST, Dirks GF, Dougherty GH. Alternative splicing as a novel means of regulating the expression of therapeutic genes. Cancer Gene Ther. 2002; 9: 133–141.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    De Fatta RJ, Chervenack RP, De Benedetti A. A cancer gene therapy approach through translational control of a suicide gene. Cancer Gene Ther. 2002; 9: 502–505.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    De Fatta RJ, Li Y, De Benedetti A. Selective killing of cancer cells based on translational control of suicide gene therapy. Cancer Gene Ther. 2002; 9: 573–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Spear MA. Gene therapy of gliomas: receptors and transcriptional targeting. Anticancer Res. 1998; 18: 3223–3232.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Adachi Y, Reynolds PN, Yamamoto M. Midkine promoter-based adenoviral vector gene delivery for pediatric solid tumors. Cancer Res. 2000; 60: 4305–4310.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Koshikawa N, Takenaga K, Tagawa M, Sakiyama S. Therapeutic efficacy of the suicide gene driven the promoter of vascular endothelial growth factor gene against hypoxic tumor cells. Cancer Res. 2000; 60: 2936–2941.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Latham JPF, Searle PF, Mautner V, James ND. Prostate-specific antigen promoter/enhancer driven gene therapy for prostate cancer: construction and testing of a tissue specific adenovirus vector. Cancer Res. 2000; 60: 334–341.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Ido A, Uto H, Moriuchi A, et al. Gene therapy targeting for hepatocellular carcinoma: selective and enhanced suicide gene expression regulated by a hypoxia-inducible enhancer linked to a human a-fetoprotein promoter. Cancer Res. 2001; 61:3016– 3021.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Peng XY, Won JH, Rutherford T, et al. The use of L-plastin promoter for adenoviral-mediated, tumor-specific gene-expression in ovarian and bladder cancer cell lines. Cancer Res. 2001; 61: 4405–4413.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Plumb GA, Bilsland A, Kakani R, et al. Telomerase-specific suicide gene therapy vectors expressing bacterial nitroreductase sensitize human cancer cells to the pro-drug CB1954. Oncogene. 2001; 20: 7797–7803.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Scarpini CG, May J, Lachman RH, et al. Latency associated promoter transgene expression in the central nervous system after stereotaxic delivery of replication-defective HSV-1-based vectors. Gene Ther. 2001; 8: 1057–1071.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Nishino K, Osaki T, Kumagai T, et al. Adenovirus-mediated gene therapy specific for small cell lung cancer cells using a myc-max binding motif. Intl J Cancer. 2001; 91: 851–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ueda K, Iwahashi M, Nakamori M., et al. Carcinoembryonic antigen-specific suicide gene therapy of cytosine deaminase/5-fluoro-cytosine enhanced by the Cre/loxP system in the orthotopic gastric carcinoma model. Cancer Res. 2001; 61: 6158–6162.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Matsubara S, Wada Y, Gardner TA, et al. A conditional replication-competent vector, Ad-OC-E1a, to cotarget prostate cancer and bone stroma in an experimental model of androgen-independent prostate cancer bone metastasis. Cancer Res. 2001; 61: 6012–6019.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Scanlon I, Lehouritis P, Niculescu-Duvaz I, Marais R, Springer CJ. Gene regulation in cancer gene strategies. Curr Med Chem. 2003; 10: 2175–2184.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Luna M, Chen X, Wong S, et al. Enhanced photodynamic therapy efficacy with inducible suicide gene theray controlled by the grp promoter. Cancer Res. 2002; 62: 1458–1461.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Springer CJ, Niculescu-Duvaz I. Gene-directed enzyme prodrug therapy. In: Anticancer Drug Development ( Baguley B, ed.), Academic, New York, NY, 2001.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Trudeau C, Yuan S, Galipeau J, Benlimame N Alaoui-Jamali MA, Batist G. A novel parasite-derived suicide gene for cancer gene therapy with specificity for lung cancer cells. Hum Gene Ther. 2001; 12: 1673–1680.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Simonova M, Wall A, Weissleder R, Bogdanov A. Tyrosinase mutants are capable of prodrug activation in transfected non-melanotic cells. Cancer Res. 2000; 60: 6656–6662.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Cortes ML, de Felipe P, Martin V, Hughes MA, Izquierdo M. Successful use of a plant gene in the treatment of cancer in vivo. Gene Ther. 1998; 5: 1499–1507.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Aghi M, Hochberg F, Breakfield XO. Prodrug activation enzymes in cancer gene therapy. J Gene Med. 2000; 2: 148–164.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Greco O, Dachs GU. Gene directed enzyme/prodrug therapy of cancer: historical appraisal and future prospectives. J Cell Physiol. 2001; 187: 22–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Maria BL, et al. Prospective, open-label, parallel-group, randomized multicenter trial comparing the efficiency of surgery, radiation, and injection of murine cells producing herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase vector followed by intravenous ganciclovir against the efficacy of surgery and radiation in the treatment of newly diagnosed, previously untreated glioblastoma. NIH OBA Human Gene Transfer Clinical Trials Database, website: http:// www4.od.nih.gov/oba/rac/clinicaltrial.htm.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Spooner RA, Maycroft KA, Paterson H, Friedlos F, Springer CJ, Marais R. Appropriate sub-cellular location of prodrug-activating enzymes has important consequences for suicide gene therapy. Int J Cancer. 2001; 93: 123–130.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Hamstra DA, Page M, Maybaum J, Rehemtulla A. Expression of endogenously activated secreted or cell surface carboxypeptidase A sensitizes tumor cells to methotrexate-a-peptide prodrugs. Cancer Res. 2000; 60: 657–665.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Heine D, Muller R, Brusselbach S. Cell surface display of a lysosomal enzyme for extra-cellular gene-directed enzyme prodrug therapy. Gene Ther. 2001; 8: 1005–1010.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Weyel D, Sedlacek HH, Muller R, Brusselbach S. Secreted human b-glucuronidase: a novel tool for gene-directed enzyme prodrug therapy. Gene Ther. 2000; 7: 224–231.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Marais R, Spooner RA, Stribbling SM, Light Y, Martin J, Springer CJ. A cell surface tethered enzyme improves efficiency in gene-directed enzyme prodrug therapy. Nat Biotechnol. 1997; 15: 1373–1377.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Connors TA. The choice of prodrugs for gene directed enzyme prodrug therapy of cancer. Gene Ther. 1995; 2: 702–709.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Niculescu-Duvaz I, Spooner R, Marais R, Springer CJ. Gene-directed enzyme prodrug therapy. Bioconjugate Chem. 1998; 9: 4–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Chen L, Waxman DJ, Chen D, Kufe DC. Sensitization of human breast cancer cells to cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide by transfer of a liver cytochrome P-450 gene. Cancer Res. 1996; 56: 1331–1340.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Kojima A, Hackett NR, Ohwada A, Crystal RG. In vivo human carboxylesterase cDNA gene transfer to activate the prodrug CPT-11 for local treatment of solid tumors. J Clin Invest. 1998; 101: 1789–1796.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Griffiths L, Binley K, Iqball S, et al. The macrophage—a novel system to deliver gene therapy to pathological hypoxia. Gene Ther. 2000; 7: 255–262.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    McCart JA, Puhlmann M, Lee J, et al. Complex interaction between the replicating oncolytic effect and the enzyme/prodrug effect of vaccinia-mediated tumor regression. Gene Ther. 2000; 7: 1217–1223.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Denny WA, Wilson WR. The design of selectively-activated anti-cancer prodrugs for use in antibody-directed and gene-directed enzyme prodrugs therapies. J Pharm Pharmacol. 1998; 50: 387–394.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Niculescu-Duvaz I, Baracu I, Balaban AT. Alkylating agents. In: Chemistry of Antitumour Agents. ( Wilman, DEV, ed.), Blackie, London, UK, 1990; pp. 63–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Secrist JA, Parker, WB, Allan PW, et al. Gene therapy of cancer: activation of nucleoside prodrugs with E. coli purine nucleoside phosphorylase. Nucleosides Nucleotides. 1999; 18: 745–757.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Denny WA. The design of selectively-activated prodrugs for cancer chemotherapy. Curr Pharm Des. 1996; 2: 281–294.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Springer CJ, Dowell R, Burke PJ, et al. Optimization of alkylating agent prodrug derived from phenol and aniline mustards: a new clinical candidate prodrug (ZD2767) for antibody-directed prodrug therapy (ADEPT). J Med Chem. 1995; 38: 5051–5065.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Nakamuro K, Okuno T, Hasegawa T. Metabolism of selenoamino acids and contribution of selenium methylation to their toxicity. J Health Sci. 2000; 46: 418–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Wolf, CR, Statham, CN, McMenamin, MG, Bend, JR, Boyd MR, Philpot RM. The relationship between the catalytic activities of rabbit pulmonary cytochrome P-450 isozymes and the lung-specific toxicity of the furan derivative, 4-ipomeanol. Mol Pharmacol. 1982; 22: 738–744.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Ellard S, Parry JM. A comparative study of the use of primary Chinese-hamster liver cultures and genetically-engineered immortal V79 Chinese-hamster cell-lines expressing rat liver CYP1A1, 1A2 and 2B1 cDNAs in micronucleus assays. Toxicology. 1993; 82: 131–149.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Friedlos F, Denny WA, Palmer BD, Springer CJ. Mustard prodrugs for activation by Escherichia coli nitroreductase in gene-directed enzyme prodrug therapy. J Med Chem. 1997; 40: 1270–1275.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Niculescu-Duvaz D, Niculescu-Duvaz I, Friedlos F, et al. Self-immolative nitrogen mustard prodrugs for suicide gene therapy. J Med Chem. 1998; 41: 5297–5309.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Niculescu-Duvaz I, Niculescu-Duvaz D, Friedlos F, et al. Self-immolative anthracycline prodrugs for suicide gene therapy. J Med Chem. 1999; 42: 2485–2489.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Ghosh AK, Khan S, Marini F, Nelson JA, Farquhar D. A daunorubicin b-galactoside prodrug for use in conjunction with gene-directed enzyme prodrug therapy. Tetrahedron Lett. 2000; 41: 4871–4874.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Huber BE, Austin EA, Richards CA, Davis ST, Good SS. Metabolism of 5-fluorocytidine to 5-fluorouracil in human colorectal tumor cells transduced with the cytosine deaminase gene: significant antitumor effects when only a small percentage of tumor cells express cytosine deaminase. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1994; 91: 8302–8306.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Mesnil M, Yamasachi H. Bystander effect in herpes simplex virus-thymidine kinase/ ganciclovir cancer gene therapy: role of gap-junctional intercellular communications. Cancer Res. 2000; 60: 3989–3999.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Imaizumi K, Hasegawa Y, Kawabe T, et al. Bystander tumoricidal effect and gap junctional communication in lung cancer cells. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol. 1998; 18: 205–212.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Andrade-Rosental AF, Rosental R, Hopperstad MD, Wu JK, Vrionis FD, Spray DC. Gap junctions: the “kiss of death”and the “kiss of life.” Brain Res Rev. 2000; 32: 308–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Wygoda MR, Wilson MR, Davis MA, Trosko JE, Rehemtulla A, Lawrence TS. Protection of herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase-transduced cells from ganciclovir-mediated cytotoxicity by bystander cells: the good Samaritan effect. Cancer Res. 1997; 57: 1699–1703.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Touraine RL, Ishii-Morita H, Ramsey WJ, Blaese RM. The bystander effect in the HSVtk/ ganciclovir system and its relation to gap junctional communication. Gene Ther. 1998; 5: 1705–1711.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Touraine RL, Vahanian N, Ramsey WJ, Blaese RM. Enhancement of the herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase/ganciclovir bystander effect and its antitumor efficacy in vivo by pharmacologic manipulation of gap junctions. Hum Gene Ther. 1998; 9: 2385–2391.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Grignet-Debrus C, Cool V, Baudson N, Velu T, Calberg-Bacq C-M. The role of cellular-and prodrug-associated factors in the bystander effect induced by the Varicella zoster and Herpes simplex viral thymidine kinases in suicide gene therapy. Cancer Gene Ther. 2000; 7: 1456– 1468.Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Kaneko Y, Tsukamoto A. Gene therapy of hepatoma: bystander effects and non-apoptotic cell death induced by thymidine kinase and ganciclovir. Cancer Lett. 1995; 96: 105–110.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Ramesh R, Marrogi AJ, Munshi A, Abboud CN, Freeman SM. In vivo analysis of the “bystander effect”: a cytokine cascade. Exp Hematol. 1996; 24: 829–838.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Agard C, Ligeza C, Dupas B, et al. Immune-dependent distant bystander effect after adenovirus-mediated suicide gene transfer in a rat model of liver colorectal metastasis. Cancer Gene Ther. 2001; 8: 128–136.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Jones RK, Pope IM, Kinsella AR, Watson AJM, Christmas SE. Combined suicide and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor gene therapy induces complete tumor regression and generates antitumor immunity. Cancer Gene Ther. 2000: 7: 1519–1528.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Majumdar A, Zolotorev A, Samuel, S., et al. Efficacy of herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase in combination with cytokine gene therapy in an experimental metastatic breast cancer model. Cancer Gene Ther. 2000; 7: 1086–1099.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Cao X, Huang X, Ju DW, Zhang WP, Hamada H, Wang J. Enhanced antitumoral effect of adenovirus-mediated cytosine deaminase gene therapy by induction of antigen-presenting cells through stem cell factor/granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor gene transfer. Cancer Gene Ther. 2000; 7: 177–186.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Rivas C, Chandler P, Melo JV, Simpson E, Apperley JF. Absence of in vitro or in vivo bystander effects in a thymidine kinase-transduced murine T-lymphoma. Cancer Gene Ther. 2000; 7: 954–962.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Karle P, Renner M, Salmons B, Gunzburg WH. Necrotic, rather than apoptotic death caused by cytochrome P450-activated ifosfamide. Cancer Gene Ther. 2001; 8: 220–230.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Kirn D. Replication-selective microbiological agents: fighting cancer with targeted germ warfare. J Clin Invest. 2000; 105: 837–839.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ion Niculescu-Duvaz
  • Caroline J. Springer

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations