5
64
Vol. 28, No. 3
Fig. 2. Time Course Curves of Inhibition of Tubulin Poly-
merization Monitored in Terms of Turbidity (Absorbance at
400 nm)
A tubulin preparation was incubated at 37 °C in the presence or ab-
sence (control) of test compound. The test concentration was 50 mM for
Thal (1), 5-HT (2) and N-HT (3), and 10 mM for rhizoxin.
Fig. 3. Effects of Thal (1), 5-HT (2) and N-HT (3) on ATRA-Induced HL-60 Cell Dif-
ferentiation
Panels a—c: percentage of NBT-positive cells treated with the indicated concentration of Thal (1),
5-HT (2), or N-HT (3) in the presence or absence of 2 nM ATRA. Panels d—h: typical morphology of
HL-60 cells treated with the compound(s) indicated.
(3) increased the amount of NBT-positive cells to 22% and metabolites, 5-HT (2) and N-HT (3), and the cell differentia-
32 %, respectively (Fig. 3), which exceeds the HL-60 cell tion-enhancing activity of Thal (1), 5-HT (2) and N-HT (3),
differentiation-inducing effect elicited by 5 nM ATRA (15% (ii) application of thalidomide to ATRA differentiation-in-
NBT-positive cells, vide supra). Differentiation-enhancing ducing therapy should make it possible to lower the neces-
activity could be observed at 1 mM 5-HT (2) and N-HT (3). sary dose of ATRA, and (iii) Thal (1) therapy might result in
Although differentiation-inducing activity of 5-HT (2) and cell differentiation induction, because normal serum contains
N-HT (3) had been expected on the basis of their tubulin nanomolar order of ATRA, at which concentration Thal (1),
polymerization-inhibiting activity, the much higher activity 5-HT (2) and N-HT (3) would increase ATRA-induced cell
of N-HT (3) than that of 5-HT (2) cannot be interpreted in differentiation to the level induced by pharmacological doses
terms of their similar potency of tubulin polymerization-in- of ATRA.
hibiting activity (Fig. 2). Moreover, unexpectedly, Thal (1),
which does not possess tubulin polymerization-inhibiting ac-
Acknowledgements The work described in this paper
tivity, also showed an enhancing effect on ATRA-induced was partially supported by Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Re-
HL-60 cell differentiation (Fig. 3, panel a). The results indi- search from The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Sci-
cate that the tested compounds elicit differentiation-enhanc- ence and Technology, Japan, and the Japan Society for the
ing activity through a mechanism other than tubulin poly- Promotion of Science.
merization-inhibiting activity, even though this activity might
play a role to some extent in the cases of 5-HT (2) and N-HT REFERENCES
(
3).
Another possible mechanism of enhancement of ATRA-in-
1) Bartlett J. B., Dredge K., Dalgleish A. G., Nat. Rev. Cancer, 4, 314—
22 (2004).
3
duced cell differentiation is activation of nuclear receptor
RXR. RXR agonists have been established to act as syner-
gists of ATRA. However, Thal (1), 5-HT (2) and N-HT (3)
did not activate RXRs as far as investigated by a reporter
gene assay method.
In conclusion, we found that Thal (1) and its two metabo-
lites, 5-HT (2) and N-HT (3), possess an enhancing effect on
ATRA-induced HL-60 cell differentiation. Although differ-
entiation-enhancing activity has been demonstrated to be a
general feature of tubulin disruptors, only 5-HT (2) and N-
HT (3) were found to possess tubulin polymerization-inhibit-
ing activity. The lack of tubulin polymerization activity of
Thal (1), as well as its differentiation-enhancing activity, sug-
2)
3)
4)
Hashimoto Y., Curr. Med. Chem., 5, 163—178 (1998).
Hashimoto Y., Bioorg. Med. Chem., 10, 461—479 (2002).
Hashimoto Y., Mini-Rev. Med. Chem., 2, 543—551 (2002).
13)
5) Hashimoto Y., Tanatani A., Nagasawa K., Miyachi H., Drugs Future,
29, 383—391 (2004).
6
)
)
Hideshima T., Chauhan D., Shima Y., Raje N., Davies F. E., Tai Y.-T.,
Treon S. P., Lin B., Schlossman R. L., Richardson P., Muller G., Stir-
ling D. I., Anderson K. C., Blood, 96, 2943—2950 (2000).
Noguchi T., Shimazawa R., Nagasawa K., Hashimoto Y., Bioorg. Med.
Chem. Lett., 12, 1043—1046 (2002).
7
10)
8) Sano H., Noguchi T., Tanatani A., Miyachi H., Hashimoto Y., Chem.
Pharm. Bull., 52, 1021—022 (2004).
9)
Inatsuki S., Noguchi T., Miyachi H., Oda S., Iguchi T., Kizaki M.,
Hashimoto Y., Kobayashi H., Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett., 15, 321—325
(2005).
gest that these compounds enhance differentiation through 10) Nakajima O., Sugishita Y., Hashimoto Y., Iwasaki S., Biol. Pharm.
Bull., 17, 742—744 (1994).
1) Nishimura K., Hashimoto Y., Iwasaki S., Biochem. Biophys. Res. Com-
mun., 199, 455—460 (1994).
2) Robin S., Zhu J., Galons H., Pham-Huy C., Claude J. R., Tomas A.,
Viossat B., Tetrahedron Asymm., 6, 1249—1252 (1995).
some other mechanism than tubulin polymerization-inhibit-
ing activity. Further investigation is in progress.
Our results have some implications for thalidomide, i.e.,
1
1
(i) the anti-MM activity of Thal (1) might be partly explained
by the tubulin polymerization-inhibiting activity of its 13) Kagechika H., Curr. Med. Chem., 9, 591—608 (2002).