Jill M. Wagner

Eosinophil infiltration and degranulation in normal human tissue

Localization of eosinophil granule major basic protein by immunofluorescence permits recognition of both eosinophil infiltration and degranulation. Over the past decade and a half, our laboratory has shown that eosinophil infiltration and degranulation occur in many diseased tissues in humans; among normal tissues studied as controls, only the gut showed striking eosinophil infiltration and degranulation. Using an indirect immunofluorescence procedure for the detection of major basic protein, we extended our analyses of normal human tissues to include tissues from essentially all body organs; a total of 117 biopsy/ autopsy specimens were analyzed. To determine whether the method of tissue procurement affected the level of eosinophil degranulation in the normal gastrointestinal tract, normal proximal jejunum from six patients was biopsied using either an endoscopic forceps or a scalpel at the time of elective surgery and examined by immunofluorescence. Spleen, lymph node, and thymus tissues showed eosinophil infiltration with scant evidence of degranulation, but the only organ showing both eosinophil infiltration and remarkable degranulation was the gastrointestinal tract. Eosinophil degranulation was significantly increased in specimens obtained by endoscopic forceps compared to those obtained by scalpel (P = 0.021). These results indicate that tissue procurement methods affect the degree of eosinophil degranulation in the gut. Thus, among normal human body organs, both eosinophil infiltration and appreciable degranulation consistently occur only in the gut. Anat. Rec. 252:418–425, 1998.

Localization of eosinophil-derived neurotoxin and eosinophil cationic protein in neutrophilic leukocytes.

Eosinophil‐derived neurotoxin (EDN) and eosinophil cationic protein (ECP) are generally regarded as eosinophil‐specific proteins. We tested whether EDN and ECP are present in mature neutrophils. By indirect immunofluorescence, both eosinophils and neutrophils stained with antibodies to EDN and ECP. Lysates of purified (<0.1% eosinophil contamination) neutrophils contained EDN, 112 ± 4 ng/106 cells, and ECP, 163 ± 2 ng/106 cells, whereas eosinophil major basic protein (MBP) was not detectable. Electron microscopic examination of immunogold‐labeled buffy coat cells stained with EDN antibody showed that EDN is localized to neutrophil granules. Finally, EDN mRNA was detected in lysates of highly purified neutrophils (0.001% eosinophil contamination) by the reverse transcription‐polymerase chain reaction. We conclude that proteins that are either identical to or immunologically cross‐reactive with EDN and ECP are present in neutrophils and that EDN is synthesized and localized to neutrophil granules. Thus, caution must be exercised in interpreting the presence of EDN and ECP as specific markers of eosinophil‐associated inflammation in human disease. J. Leukoc. Biol. 63: 715–722; 1998.

Pharmacological Abrogation of S-Phase Checkpoint Enhances the Anti-Tumor Activity of Gemcitabine In Vivo

Chk1 and Chk2 kinases are critically involved in modulating DNA damage checkpoints. In particular, Chk1, a key activator of the S-phase DNA damage response, may be involved in resistance to genotoxic therapies that target DNA synthesis. We studied the in vitro and in vivo effects of EXEL-9844 (XL844), a potent, orally available, and specific inhibitor of Chk1 and Chk2, in combination with gemcitabine. In clonogenic assays using multiple cell lines in vitro, EXEL-9844 had only minor effects as a single agent but substantially enhanced gemcitabine-induced cell killing. Correspondingly, in PANC-1 cells, EXEL-9844 increased gemcitabine-induced H2AX phosphorylation, blocked Cdc25A phosphorylation, and induced premature mitotic entry. In a PANC-1 xenograft model, EXEL-9844 significantly enhanced gemcitabine antitumor activity but had limited effect as a single agent. Together, these data show that cell cycle checkpoint inhibitors may have significant clinical utility in potentiating the activity of gemcitabine.

Cisplatin-Induced DNA Damage Activates Replication Checkpoint Signaling Components that Differentially Affect Tumor Cell Survival

Cisplatin and other platinating agents are some of the most widely used chemotherapy agents. These drugs exert their antiproliferative effects by creating intrastrand and interstrand DNA cross-links, which block DNA replication. The cross-links mobilize signaling and repair pathways, including the Rad9-Hus1-Rad1-ATR-Chk1 pathway, a pathway that helps tumor cells survive the DNA damage inflicted by many chemotherapy agents. Here we show that Rad9 and ATR play critical roles in helping tumor cells survive cisplatin treatment. However, depleting Chk1 with small interfering RNA or inhibiting Chk1 with 3-(carbamoylamino)-5-(3-fluorophenyl)-N-(3-piperidyl)thiophene-2-carboxamide (AZD7762) did not sensitize these cells to cisplatin, oxaliplatin, or carboplatin. Moreover, when Rad18, Rad51, BRCA1, BRCA2, or FancD2 was disabled, Chk1 depletion did not further sensitize the cells to cisplatin. In fact, Chk1 depletion reversed the sensitivity seen when Rad18 was disabled. Collectively, these studies suggest that the pharmacological manipulation of Chk1 may not be an effective strategy to sensitize tumors to platinating agents.

Chaperoning Checkpoint Kinase 1 (Chk1), an Hsp90 Client, with Purified Chaperones

Checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1), a serine/threonine kinase that regulates DNA damage checkpoints, is destabilized when heat shock protein 90 (Hsp90) is inhibited, suggesting that Chk1 is an Hsp90 client. In the present work we examined the interplay between Chk1 and Hsp90 in intact cells, identified a source of unchaperoned Chk1, and report the in vitro chaperoning of Chk1 in reticulocyte lysates and with purified chaperones and co-chaperones. We find that bacterially expressed Chk1 is post-translationally chaperoned to an active kinase. This reaction minimally requires Hsp90, Hsp70, Hsp40, Cdc37, and the protein kinase CK2. The co-chaperone Hop, although not essential for the activation of Chk1 in vitro, enhanced the chaperoning process, whereas the co-chaperone p23 did not stimulate the chaperoning reaction. Additionally, we found that the C-terminal regulatory domain of Chk1 affects the association of Chk1 with Hsp90. Collectively these results provide new insights into Hsp90-dependent chaperoning of a client kinase and identify a novel, biochemically tractable model system that will be useful to further dissect the Hsp90-dependent chaperoning of this important and ubiquitous class of Hsp90 clients.

Prospects for the Use of ATR Inhibitors to Treat Cancer.

ATR is an apical kinase in one of the DNA-damage induced checkpoint pathways. Despite the development of inhibitors of kinases structurally related to ATR, as well as inhibitors of the ATR substrate Chk1, no ATR inhibitors have yet been developed. Here we review the effects of ATR downregulation in cancer cells and discuss the potential for development of ATR inhibitors for clinical use.

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibition synergizes with 5-fluorodeoxyuridine but not 5-fluorouracil in ovarian cancer cells

5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) and 5-fluorodeoxyuridine (FdUrd, floxuridine) have activity in multiple tumors, and both agents undergo intracellular processing to active metabolites that disrupt RNA and DNA metabolism. These agents cause imbalances in deoxynucleotide triphosphate levels and the accumulation of uracil and 5-FU in the genome, events that activate the ATR- and ATM-dependent checkpoint signaling pathways and the base excision repair (BER) pathway. Here, we assessed which DNA damage response and repair processes influence 5-FU and FdUrd toxicity in ovarian cancer cells. These studies revealed that disabling the ATM, ATR, or BER pathways using small inhibitory RNAs did not affect 5-FU cytotoxicity. In stark contrast, ATR and a functional BER pathway protected FdUrd-treated cells. Consistent with a role for the BER pathway, the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors ABT-888 (veliparib) and AZD2281 (olaparib) markedly synergized with FdUrd but not with 5-FU in ovarian cancer cell lines. Furthermore, ABT-888 synergized with FdUrd far more effectively than other agents commonly used to treat ovarian cancer. These findings underscore differences in the cytotoxic mechanisms of 5-FU and FdUrd and suggest that combining FdUrd and PARP inhibitors may be an innovative therapeutic strategy for ovarian tumors.

The proform of eosinophil major basic protein: a new maternal serum marker for Down syndrome

The proform of eosinophil major basic protein (proMBP), the most abundant protein in the eosinophil specific granule, is synthesized by the placenta and secreted into the maternal circulation, where it is found complex‐bound to pregnancy‐associated plasma protein‐A (PAPP‐A) and other proteins. We examined the potential of proMBP as a maternal serum marker for fetal Down syndrome (DS) by determining its maternal serum concentration (MSpMBP) in 25 Down syndrome (DS) pregnancies and 152 control pregnancies in the first trimester, and in 105 DS pregnancies and 156 control pregnancies in the second trimester. The median (95 per cent confidence interval) MSpMBP MoM in DS pregnancies (n=15) was 0.66 (0.49–0.79) in gestational weeks 5–9; 1.06 (0.71–1.97) in weeks 10–12 (n=10) and 1.62 (1.18–1.98) in weeks 14–20 (n=105). Using parameterized receiver operator characteristics analysis for proMBP as a single marker for DS, detection rates (DRs) of 22 per cent and 38 per cent, for false‐positive rates (FPRs) of 5 per cent, were found in weeks 5–9 (using MSpMBP⩽cut‐off) and weeks 14–20 (using MSpMBP⩾cut‐off), respectively. When age and MSpMBP were used as markers in combination, a DR of 36.8 per cent for an FPR of 5.5 per cent was obtained in weeks 5–9 using a risk cut‐off of 1:250. In weeks 14–20 the DR was 48.4 per cent for an FPR of 5.3 per cent using the same risk cut‐off. This makes proMBP a marker comparable in diagnostic efficiency to human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), and exceeding that of alpha‐fetoprotein (AFP) and unconjugated oestriol (uE3), in the second trimester. Copyright

Identification of DNA repair pathways that affect the survival of ovarian cancer cells treated with a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor in a novel drug combination

Floxuridine (5-fluorodeoxyuridine, FdUrd), a U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved drug and metabolite of 5-fluorouracil, causes DNA damage that is repaired by base excision repair (BER). Thus, poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, which disrupt BER, markedly sensitize ovarian cancer cells to FdUrd, suggesting that this combination may have activity in this disease. It remains unclear, however, which DNA repair and checkpoint signaling pathways affect killing by these agents individually and in combination. Here we show that depleting ATR, BRCA1, BRCA2, or RAD51 sensitized to ABT-888 (veliparib) alone, FdUrd alone, and FdUrd + ABT-888 (F+A), suggesting that homologous recombination (HR) repair protects cells exposed to these agents. In contrast, disabling the mismatch, nucleotide excision, Fanconi anemia, nonhomologous end joining, or translesion synthesis repair pathways did not sensitize to these agents alone (including ABT-888) or in combination. Further studies demonstrated that in BRCA1-depleted cells, F+A was more effective than other chemotherapy+ABT-888 combinations. Taken together, these studies 1) identify DNA repair and checkpoint pathways that are important in ovarian cancer cells treated with FdUrd, ABT-888, and F+A, 2) show that disabling HR at the level of ATR, BRCA1, BRCA2, or RAD51, but not Chk1, ATM, PTEN, or FANCD2, sensitizes cells to ABT-888, and 3) demonstrate that even though ABT-888 sensitizes ovarian tumor cells with functional HR to FdUrd, the effects of this drug combination are more profound in tumors with HR defects, even compared with other chemotherapy + ABT-888 combinations, including cisplatin + ABT-888.

Checkpoint signaling, base excision repair, and PARP promote survival of colon cancer cells treated with 5-fluorodeoxyuridine but not 5-fluorouracil.

The fluoropyrimidines 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and FdUrd (5-fluorodeoxyuridine; floxuridine) are the backbone of chemotherapy regimens for colon cancer and other tumors. Despite their widespread use, it remains unclear how these agents kill tumor cells. Here, we have analyzed the checkpoint and DNA repair pathways that affect colon tumor responses to 5-FU and FdUrd. These studies demonstrate that both FdUrd and 5-FU activate the ATR and ATM checkpoint signaling pathways, indicating that they cause genotoxic damage. Notably, however, depletion of ATM or ATR does not sensitize colon cancer cells to 5-FU, whereas these checkpoint pathways promote the survival of cells treated with FdUrd, suggesting that FdUrd exerts cytotoxicity by disrupting DNA replication and/or inducing DNA damage, whereas 5-FU does not. We also found that disabling the base excision (BER) repair pathway by depleting XRCC1 or APE1 sensitized colon cancer cells to FdUrd but not 5-FU. Consistent with a role for the BER pathway, we show that small molecule poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase 1/2 (PARP) inhibitors, AZD2281 and ABT-888, remarkably sensitized both mismatch repair (MMR)-proficient and -deficient colon cancer cell lines to FdUrd but not to 5-FU. Taken together, these studies demonstrate that the roles of genotoxin-induced checkpoint signaling and DNA repair differ significantly for these agents and also suggest a novel approach to colon cancer therapy in which FdUrd is combined with a small molecule PARP inhibitor.