Ayyappan Nair, Ph.D.
Head, Business Development (Technologies, Discovery Biology), Anthem Biosciences & DavosPharma, New Jersey, USA
Inhibition of NF-κB regulated gene expression by chrysoeriol suppresses tumorigenesis in breast cancer cells
Amrutha K1, Pandurangan Nanjan1, Sanu K Shaji1, Damu Sunilkumar1, Subhalakshmi K1, Rashmi U Nair1, Lakshmi Rajakrishna2, Asoke Banerji1, Ayyappan Ramesh Nair1*,2
- School of Biotechnology, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Amritapuri Campus, Clappana P.O., Kollam – 690 525, Kerala, India
- Anthem Biosciences, No 49, Canara Bank Road, Bommasandra Industrial Area, Phase 1, Hosur Road, Bangalore – 560 099, Karnataka, India
Abstract: A large number of effective cancer-preventing compounds inhibit the activation of nuclear factor-κ B (NF-κB). It has been previously demonstrated that some flavonoids that are a vital component of our diet inhibits this pathway. As a consequence, many flavonoids inhibit genes involved in various aspects of tumorigenesis and have thus emerged as potential chemopreventive candidates for cancer treatment. We studied the effect of 17 different flavonoids, including the highly evaluated quercetin on the NF-κB pathway, and on the expression of MMP-9 and COX-2 (two NF-κB regulated genes involved in metastasis) in the highly invasive human breast cancer cell line MDA-MB-231. The findings suggest that not all the quercetin like flavone backbone compounds inhibit the NF-κB pathway, and that the highly hydoxylated flavonols quercetagetin and gossypetin did not inhibit this pathway, nor did it inhibit the expression of MMP-9 and COX-2. This indicates a correlation between inhibition of NF-κB and subsequent suppression of these NF-κB regulated genes. Here, we also report the novel observation that the not so well characterized methoxylated flavone chrysoeriol inhibited the NF-κB pathway, and was most potent in reducing the expression of MMP-9 and COX-2. Based on these observations, the cellular effects of chrysoeriol were evaluated in MDA-MB-231. Chrysoeriol caused cell cycle arrest at G2/M, inhibited migration and invasion, and caused cell death of macrophages that contributed to migration of these cancer cells. These effects of chrysoeriol make it a potential therapeutic candidate for breast cancer metastasis.
K. P. Mohanakumar, Ph.D.
Chief Scientist, Cell Biology & Physiology Division, Indian Institute of Chemical Biology, Kolkata
Neuroprotective and neurodestructive effects of Ayurvedic drug constituents: Parkinson’s disease
The present study reports the good and the bad entities in an Indian traditional medicine used for treating Parkinson’s disease (PD). A prospective clinical trial on the effectiveness of Ayurvedic medication in a population of PD patients revealed significant benefits, which has been attributed to L-DOPA present in the herbs [1]. Later studies revealed better benefits with one of the herbs alone, compared to pure L-DOPA in a clinical trial conducted in UK [2], and in several studies conducted on animal models of PD in independent laboratories world over [3-5]. We have adapted strategies to segregate molecules from the herb, and then carefully removed L-DOPA contained therein, and tested each of these sub-fractions for anti-PD activity in 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine, rotenone and 6-hydroxydopamine -induced parkinsonian animal models, and transgenic mitochondrial cybrids. We report here two classes of molecules contained in the herb, one of which possessed severe pro-parkinsonian (phenolic amine derivatives) and the other having excellent anti-parkinsonian potential (substituted tetrahydroisoquinoline derivatives). The former has been shown to cause severe dopamine depletion in the striatum of rodents, when administered acutely or chronically. It also caused significant behavioral aberrations, leading to anxiety and depression [6]. The latter class of molecules administered in PD animal model [7], caused reversal of behavioral dysfunctions and significant attenuation of striatal dopamine loss. These effects were comparable or better than the effects of the anti-PD drugs, selegiline or L-DOPA. The mechanism of action of the molecule has been found to be novel, at the postsynaptic receptor signaling level, as well as cellular α-synuclein oligomerization and specifically at mitochondria. The molecule helped in maintaining mitochondrial ETC complex activity and stabilized cellular respiration, and mitochondrial fusion-fission machinery with specific effect on the dynamin related protein 1. Although there existed significant medical benefits that could be derived to patients due to the synergistic actions of several molecules present in a traditional preparation, accumulated data in our hands suggest complicated mechanisms of actions of Ayurvedic medication. Our results also provide great hope for extracting, synthesizing and optimizing the activity of anti-parkinsonian molecules present in traditional Ayurvedic herbs, and for designing novel drugs with novel mechanisms of action.
- N, Nagashayana, P Sankarankutty, MRV Nampoothiri, PK Mohan and KP Mohanakumar, J Neurol Sci. 176, 124-7, 2000.
- Katzenschlager R, Evans A, Manson A, Patsalos PN, Ratnaraj N, Watt H, Timmermann L, Van der Giessen R, Lees AJ. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry.75, 1672-7, 2004.
- Manyam BV, Dhanasekaran M, Hare TA. Phytother Res. 18, 706-12, 2004.
- Kasture S, Pontis S, Pinna A, Schintu N, Spina L, Longoni R, Simola N, Ballero M, Morelli M. Neurotox Res. 15, 111-22, 2009.
- Lieu CA, Kunselman AR, Manyam BV, Venkiteswaran K, Subramanian T. Parkinsonism Relat Disord.16, 458-65, 2010.
- T Sengupta and KP Mohanakumar, Neurochem Int. 57, 637-46, 2010.
- T Sengupta, J Vinayagam, N Nagashayana, B Gowda, P Jaisankar and KP Mohanakumar, Neurochem Res 36, 177-86, 2011
![Delegate Talk: AIB1 Mediated Modulation of CXCR4-SDF1 Signaling in Breast Cancer @ Acharya Hall | Vallikavu | Kerala | India](http://www.amritabioquest.org/conference/2013/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2015/02/gtm.jpg)
Binu K Aa, Jem Prabhakarb, Thara Sc and Lakshmi Sd,∗
aDepartment of Clinical Diagnostics Services and Translational Research, Malabar Cancer Centre, Thalassery, Kerala, India.
bDivision of Surgical Oncology, Division of Pathology
dDivision of Cancer Research, Regional Cancer Centre, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India.
Introduction
AIB1, a member of the nuclear co activators, promotes the transcriptional activity of multiple nuclear receptors such as the ER and other transcription factors. Chemokines produced by stromal cells have potential to influence ERα-positive breast cancer progression to metastasis. CXCR4 is the physiological receptor for SDF1, together shown to stimulate the chemotactic and invasive behavior of breast cancer cells to serve as a homing mechanism to sites of metastasis. We propose that over expression of AIB1 in breast cancer cells leads to increased SDF1 and CXCR4 expression, which induces invasion and metastasis of cancer cells.
Materials and Methods
Breast tumor and normal breast tissues from patients in Regional Cancer Centre, Thiruvananthapuram were used for study. The modulatory effect of AIB1 was studied in MCF-7 cells with AIB1 siRNA transfection along with treatment of 17β-Estradiol (E2), 4-hydroxytamoxifen (4OHT), combinations of E2 and 4OHT. The gene expression pattern and protein localization were assessed by RT-PCR and immunofluorescence microscopy respectively. The metastatic and invasive properties were assessed by wound healing assay. Quantitative colocalization analyses were done to assess the association of proteins using Pearson’s correlation coefficient.
Result and Conclusion
The mRNA and protein level expression of AIB1, CXCR4 and SDF1 were higher in tumor samples than in normal samples. AIB1 was localized to the nuclei whereas CXCR4 and SDF1 immunoreactivity were observed in the cytoplasm and to a lesser extent in the nuclei of tumor epithelial cells. In tumor samples the gene level expressions of AIB1 showed significant positive correlations with SDF1(r = 0.213, p = 0.018). CXCR4 showed significant positive correlation with SDF1 in gene (r = 0.498, p = 0.000) and protein levels(r = 0.375, p = 0.002). Quantitative colocalization analyses showed a marked reduction in expression of CXCR4 and SDF1 in siAIB1MCF-7 cells than MCF-7 cells with different treatment groups. Wound healing assay shows reduced wound healing in siAIB1 treated MCF-7 cells.
In recent years, targeting specific cancer pathways and key molecules to arrest tumor growth and achieve tumor eradication have proven a challenge; due to acquired resistance and homing of cancer cells to various metastatic sites. The present study revealed that silencing AIB1 can prevent the over expression of SDF1 and CXCR4. Co activator levels determine the basal and estrogen-inducible expression of SDF1, a secreted protein that controls breast cancer cell proliferation and invasion through autocrine and paracrine mechanisms (Hall et al. 2003). The effects of CXCR4 overexpression has been correlated with SDF1 mediated activation of downstream signaling via ERK1/2 and p38 MAPK and with an enhancement of ER-mediated gene expression (Rhodes et al. 2011). It is possible that over expression of AIB1 as a stimulant involved in the expression of CXCR4 might up-regulate the expression of prometastatic and angiogenic genes. Thus based on these observations it can be concluded that SDF1/CXCR4 overexpression, with significant association with AIB1 expression, itself contribute to the development of mammary cancer and metastatic progression.
Leland H. Hartwell Ph.D.
2001 Nobel Laureate, Physiology & Medicine
Dr. Lee Hartwell received the 2001 Nobel Prize in Physiology / Medicine for his discovery of protein molecules that control the division of cells. He was the President and Director of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, Washington before moving to Arizona State University’s Center for Sustainable Health.
Dr. Hartwell is also adjunct faculty at Amrita University. He spoke to the delegates at Bioquest from his office in the US, over Amrita’s e-learning platform A-View. Given below are excerpts from his address.
I would like to address the young people in the audience. I know that many of you may have come to this meeting wondering, “How can I become a successful scientist? How can I prepare myself to make a contribution in this world?”
These questions are interesting to me also.
Believe it or not, I am still trying to be a successful scientist. That may surprise you since you probably think that a Nobel laureate must have found the answers. But the problem is that the answers to these questions change with time and the answers are different today than what they were when I began my career fifty years ago. The strategy of the 1960’s doesn’t work so well anymore. What is different now?
First, what we know now is much more. For example, by 1970, no genes from any organisms were sequenced. In 2013, we have the complete sequence of the human genome. Second, not only do we know much more today, accessing that knowledge is easy. Third, obtaining new information is much faster today.
Our rich understanding of science and technology is now needed to solve many serious problems. The human population has reached the size where we are utilizing all available resource of the planet. We are utilizing all of the agricultural land, all of the water, all of the forest and fishing resources. We are also polluting the planet that we live on.
We are polluting the land with fertilizers and pesticides; the oceans with acids and the atmosphere with carbon dioxide. We are using up top soil and ground water, thereby reducing our capacity to feed ourselves. We are using up petroleum, the energy source that our entire economy is dependent on. These are problems we were largely unaware of, fifty years ago. But these are problems that must be solved in your life times.
The big question facing your generation is, how can human beings live sustainably on planet earth. Your two broad goals on sustainability are 1) leave the planet as you first found it for your future generations; don’t use up the resources and don’t pollute the planet 2) everyone deserves to have an equal share of the earth’s resources.
Income strongly determines one’s opportunities in life. Many poor people succumb to chronic diseases and unhealthy environments. This inequality undermines our ability to live sustainably. We can’t ask the poor to leave the planet as they found it if they can’t support their families. Education, healthcare, employment are essential to having a sustainable society.
How can we be a successful scientist in 2013?
1. First choose a problem to solve
2. Ask questions to understand why it is not solved
3. Collaborate with those who can help
4. Develop a solution that works in the real worldChronic diseases are our major burden and this burden will get worse. Heart disease, diabetes, cancer, dementia and other diseases. The good news is that the chronic diseases are largely preventable and more easily curable if detected early. One question that attracts me is how can we detect disease earlier when it can be more easily cured?
Can we use our increasing knowledge in molecular biology to identify biomarkers for early disease detection?
We need to collaborate very closely with clinicians who care for patients to find out exactly where they need help.
I think if we apply our technology to important clinical questions we will actually save medical expenditure and be well on our way to making a great contribution to society.
Seeram Ramakrishna, Ph.D.
Director, Center for Nanofibers & Nanotechnology, National University of Singapore
Biomaterials: Future Perspectives
From the perspective of thousands of years of history, the role of biomaterials in healthcare and wellbeing of humans is at best accidental. However, since 1970s with the introduction of national regulatory frameworks for medical devices, the biomaterials field evolved and reinforced with strong science and engineering understandings. The biomaterials field also flourished on the backdrop of growing need for better medical devices and medical treatments, and sustained investments in research and development. It is estimated that the world market size for medical devices is ~300 billion dollars and for biomaterials it is ~30 billion dollars. Healthcare is now one of the fastest growing sectors worldwide. Legions of scientists, engineers, and clinicians worldwide are attempting to design and develop newer medical treatments involving tissue engineering, regenerative medicine, nanotech enabled drug delivery, and stem cells. They are also engineering ex-vivo tissues and disease models to evaluate therapeutic drugs, biomolecules, and medical treatments. Engineered nanoparticles and nanofiber scaffolds have emerged as important class of biomaterials as many see them as necessary in creating suitable biomimetic micro-environment for engineering and regeneration of various tissues, expansion & differentiation of stem cells, site specific controlled delivery of biomolecules & drugs, and faster & accurate diagnostics. This lecture will capture the progress made thus far in pre-clinical and clinical studies. Further this lecture will discuss the way forward for translation of bench side research into the bed side practice. This lecture also seeks to identify newer opportunities for biomaterials beyond the medical devices.
Tim Guilliams, Ph.D.
Junior Associate Fellow at the Centre for Science and Policy, University of Cambridge
From Camels to Worms: Novel Approaches for Drug Discovery in Parkinson’s Disease
The discovery of novel treatments for neurodegenerative diseases, such as Parkinson’s disease, represents one of the biggest scientific challenges of the 21st century. The development of new tools and models to study the mechanisms underlying neurotoxicity is therefore essential. During my talk, I will outline new strategies for drug design and innovation used during my PhD at the University of Cambridge, which include the combination of fluorescent nematode worms, camelid antibody fragment technology and chemical compounds. These novel approaches will help us to gain insights into the key pathogenic steps involved in Parkinson’s disease and potentially lead to new therapeutic strategies.
Shrikant Anant, Ph.D.
The Department of Molecular & Integrative Physiology, Kansas University Medical Center, USA
Cancer Stem Cells: Target Colon Cancers
Shrikant Anant, Deep Kwatra and Dharmalingam Subramaniam
Colon cancer is a leading cause of cancer related deaths in the US, and its rate is increasing at an alarming rate in lndia. Recent studies have suggested the drug resistance role for a mall number of cells within a tumor called cancer stem cells. We identified the colon cancer stem cell marker DCLK1, a member of the protein kinase superfamily and the doublecortin family. The protein encodes a Cterminal serinethreonine protein kinase domain, which shows substantial homology to Ca2calmodulindependent protein kinase. Our current studies have been to identify compounds that can either affect DCLK1 expression or inhibits its activity as a way to inhibit cancer stem cells. Honokiol is a biphenolic compound that has been used in the traditional Chinese Medicine for treating various ailments. In vitro kinase assays with recombinant DCLK1 demonstrated that honokiol inhibits its kinase activity in a dose dependent manner. We therefore determined the effect of honokiol on stem cells. One method to look at effects on stem cells is perform a spheroid assay, where spheroids formation is suggested to maintain stemlike characteristic of cancer cells. Honokiol significantly suppressed colonosphere formation of two colon cancer cell lines HCT116 and SW480. Flow cytometry studies confirmed that honokiol reduced the number of DCLK1cells. A critical signaling pathway known to modulate intestinal stem cell proliferation is the Hippo signaling pathway, and deregulation of the pathway leads to tumor development. DCLK1cells had high levels of YAP1, the nuclear target of Hippo signaling. We determined the effect of honokiol on components of the hipposignaling pathway. Honokiol reduced the phosphorylation of Mst1/2, Lats1/2 and YAP1. Furthermore, honokiol treatment resulted in downregulation of YAPTEAD complex protein TEAD-1. Ectopic expression of the TEAD-1 partially rescued the cells from honokiol mediated growth suppression. To determine the effect of honokiol on tumor growth in vivo, nude mice harboring HCT116 tumor xenografts in their flanks were administered the compound intraperitoneally every day for 21 days. Honokiol treatment significantly inhibited tumor xenograft growth. Western blot and immunohistochemistry analyses demonstrated significant inhibition in the expression of stem marker and Hippo signaling proteins in the honokioltreated xenograft tissues. Taken together, these data suggest that honokiol is a potent inhibitor of colon cancer that targets DCLK1 stem cells by inhibiting Hippo signaling pathway.