“Synthetic Lethality”: Molecular Co-targeting to Restore the DNA Repair Mechanisms in Prostate Cancer Cells
Resistance to anticancer radiation treatment has a strong negative impact upon morbidity and mortality related to prostate cancer (Liu et al., Radiother Oncol 88(2):258–268, 2008).
This justifies the great interest in the advancing efforts toward the design of new molecularly-targeted agents which could improve the therapeutic ratio for aggressive prostate cancers via tumor radio-sensitization (Fan et al., Cancer Res 64(23):8526–8533, 2004).
Tumor progression of prostate cancer is associated, as in most of human malignancies, with the sequential loss of function of genes that normally protect against DNA damage.
Malignant prostate cells respond to both endogenous and exogenous DNA damage through complex signaling responses. Due to a specific genetic background, or in an acquired manner during tumor progression, PC cell clones show defect in either DNA single-strand break (SSB) and/or double-strand break (DSB) repair, and/or base damage repair (Stewart et al., Biochem Pharmacol 81(2):203–210, 2011), DSBs are the principal responsible for cell killing due to ionizing radiation (Ward 1988).
A defective DNA double-strand break repair increases genetic instability of PC cells, could be considered as part of their “mutator” phenotype (Tyson et al., Prostate 67:1601–1613, 2007).
During the last decades, it has emerged the concept of “synthetic lethality” (Chalmers et al., Semin Radiat Oncol 20(4):274–281, 2010).
This concept derives from the observation that the use of a single inhibitor of a DNA repair enzyme leads to the selective killing of tumor cells, bearing a second DNA repair defect (Bryant et al., Nature 434(7035):913–917, 2005; Jones and Plummer, Br J Radiol 81(Spec No 1):S2–S5, 2008; Fong et al., N Engl J Med 361:123–134, 2009).
To this end, PARP inhibitors are the well-known class of drugs that have recently been proposed to reach synthetic lethality in DNA repair-defective, radio-resistant prostate tumors.
This chapter aims to provide a framework for understanding the recent therapeutic trends designed to overcome radioresistance in prostate cancer via synthetic lethality, we review what it is actually known about the structures and functions of the members of the PARP family of enzymes, outlining a series of open questions that should be addressed in the short time to better guide the development (and the safe clinical use) of PARP inhibitors as new anticancer agents for prostate cancer (Cybulski et al., Cancer Res 64:1215–1219, 2004; Stewart et al., Biochem Pharmacol 81(2):203–210, 2011).
KeywordsProstate Cancer Homologous Recombination Prostate Cancer Cell Prostate Cancer Patient Replication Fork
- Bristow RG, Hill P (1998) Molecular and cellular basis of radiotherapy. In: Tannock IF, Hill RP (eds) The basic science of oncology. McGraw-Hill, Toronto, pp 295–321Google Scholar
- Cohen-Armon M et al (2004) Long-term memory requires polyADP-ribosylation. Science 304:1820–1822Google Scholar
- Curtin NJ (2005) PARP inhibitors for cancer therapy. Expert Rev Mol Med 7:1–20. Together with reference 15, excellent reviews describing the therapeutic promise of PARP Identification of a PAR-binding motif that mediates selective interaction between PAR and protein partners. inhibitors in cancer treatment or in inflammatory diseasesGoogle Scholar
- Curtin NJ (2012) Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) and PARP inhibitors. Drug Discov Today Dis Mod Target DNA Repair 9(2):e51–e58Google Scholar
- David KK, Andrabi SA, Dawson TM, Dawson VL (2009) Parthanatos, a messenger of death. Front Biosci 14:1116–1128Google Scholar
- Esgueva R, Park K, Kim R, Kitabayashi N, Barbieri CE, Dorsey PJ Jr, Abraham C, Banerjee S, Leung RA, Tewari AK, Terry S, Shevchuk MM, Rickman DS, Rubin MA, Weill Cornell Medical College (2012) Next-generation prostate cancer biobanking: toward a processing protocol amenable for the International Cancer Genome Consortium. Diagn Mol Pathol 21(2):61–68PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hakame A et al (2008) The expanding field of poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation reactions. EMBO Rep 9:1094–1100Google Scholar
- Hoeijmakers JH (2001) Genome maintenance mechanisms for preventing cancer. Nature 411:360–374Google Scholar
- Horton JK, Wilson SH (2007) Hypersensitivity phenotypes associated with genetic and synthetic inhibitor-induced base excision repair deficiency. DNA Repair (Amst) 6:530–543Google Scholar
- Menissier de Murcia J et al (1997) Requirement of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase in recovery from DNA damage in mice and in cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:7303–7307Google Scholar
- Pfieffer R et al (1999) Quantitative nonisotopic immuno-dot-blot method for the assessment cellular poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation capacity. Anal Biochem 275:118–122Google Scholar
- Sonoda E, Hochegger H, Saberi A, Taniguchi Y, Takeda S (2006) Differential usage of non-homologous end-joining and homologous recombination in double strand break repair. DNA Repair (Amst) 5:1021–1029Google Scholar
- Stewart GD, Nanda J, Katz E, Bowman KJ, Christie JG, Brown DJ, McLaren DB, Riddick AC, Ross JA, Jones GD, Habib FK (2011) DNA strand breaks and hypoxia response inhibition mediate the radiosensitisation effect of nitric oxide donors on prostate cancer under varying oxygen conditions. Biochem Pharmacol 81(2):203–210PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Tannock IF, Hill RP, Bristow RG, Harrington L (2005) The basic science of oncology. McGraw-Hill Professional, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Weterings E, van Gent DC (2004) The mechanism of non-homologous end-joining: a synopsis of synapsis. DNA Repair (Amst) 3:1425–1435Google Scholar
- Wong CS, Hill RP (1998) Experimental radiotherapy. In: Tannock IF, Hill RP (eds) The basic science of oncology, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, Toronto, pp 322–349Google Scholar