Background
Despite the many advances achieved in cancer prevention, much improvement is desired for present treatment protocols, including surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. These procedures may be effective in the early stages of disease, but are always palliative and fall short of eradicating the various malignant subpopulations in neoplastic conditions [
1]. The current realities have highlighted the need for more novel cancer therapies to induce effective responses in clinical trials. Gene therapy is a promising strategy for patients resistant to traditional therapies because they target defects in malignant cells, selectively correcting or eradicating defective tissues [
2]. However, efficacy and specificity remain major challenges for existing cancer gene therapy [
3]. Oncolytic virotherapy is an attractive drug platform of cancer gene therapy consistent with the both goals [
4,
5]. The oncolytic viruses exhibit an ability to replicate selectively in tumor tissues to the exclusion of normal cells [
5]. Furthermore, they can be genetically manipulated to express multiple cancer cell-specific therapeutic elements [
6]. These characteristics demonstrate the utility of oncolytic virotherapy in the clinics and provide the basis for novel approaches to cancer gene therapy.
Adenovirus-based vectors are the most widely used platforms in gene delivery [
5]. However, non-replicating adenoviruses are seldom effective in eradicating tumor cells [
7]. Therefore, very high concentrations and multiple administrations are generally needed to produce significant anti-tumor responses; such regimens, however, often induce anti-viral immune responses that result in the neutralization of the viral vectors in subsequent immunizations and toxicity to the tissues [
8,
9]. To circumvent these limitations, conditional replication-competent adenoviruses (CRCA) have been developed and are being extensively evaluated; these viruses replicate specifically in tumor cells with subsequent oncolysis and release of virus progeny to further infect and destroy neighboring cancer cells [
7,
10]. Furthermore, it has been recently suggested that antibodies which neutralize replication-incompetent adenoviruses have limited effects on the replication-competent adenoviruses [
7,
11]. It is therefore reasonable to anticipate that replication-selective tumor-specific adenoviruses would have potent effects in cancer gene therapy.
In this study, we constructed an oncolytic adenovirus using a cancer-specific promoter (human telomerase reverse transcriptase promoter) and a cancer cell selective apoptosis-inducing gene (Apoptin) that demonstrated significant anti-tumor activity toward solid tumors and metastatic nodules. Telomerase activity is strikingly higher in about 90% of cancers than in normal cells, and it has been widely used as a tumor marker. One of the three subunits of telomerase, human telomerase reverse transcriptase (hTERT), is the determinant of the telomerase activity and is highly active in immortalized cell lines and over 85% of human cancers. Therefore, its promoter has been used for tumor specific expression of transgenes. Apoptin, the product of the chicken anemia virus VP3 gene, shows specificity and efficiency toward a wide range of transformed and malignant cells of human origin, including hepatomas, lymphomas, cholangiocarcinomas, melanomas, and breast, lung, and colon carcinomas, while sparing non-transformed primary cells such as fibroblasts, keratinocytes, or smooth muscle cells [
12‐
14]. Preliminary studies have demonstrated the effect of Apoptin inserted in various vectors on restricting manifold tumors, which make it attractive for cancer gene therapy [
15,
16].
In this study, we focused on melanoma, which has doubled over the past decades and the incidence is increasing more rapidly than any other cancer [
17]. Although melanoma skin cancer can be cured by surgical excision and efforts have been carried out to develop new therapies, the prognosis of patients are poor and the 5-year survival rates range from merely 10% to 50% [
17,
18]. Moreover, the patients with regional lymphatic or metastatic disease respond poorly to conventional radiation and chemotherapy [
18]. Here, we describe the construction of a CRCA, hereafter referred to as Ad-hTERT-E1a-Apoptin, that can target tumors systemically and selectively induce apoptosis both
in vitro and
in vivo. We showed that infection of melanoma cells with Ad-hTERT-E1a-Apoptin resulted in a significant induction of apoptosis and induced growth suppression of melanoma cells. To determine whether Ad-hTERT-E1a-Apoptin can cause tumor regression, we also performed multiple intratumoral injections or systemic administrations of Ad-hTERT-E1a-Apoptin in subcutaneous homoplastic graft or lung metastases models, respectively. Our findings indicate that Ad-hTERT-E1a-Apoptin represents a potentially applicable anti-cancer agent for the treatment of primary and metastatic melanoma and may be of clinical value toward other neoplastic diseases.
Discussion
Despite substantial progress in the development of gene therapies and traditional treatments in recent years, the prognosis for many patients with neoplastic diseases remain poor. Cancer gene therapy based on adenoviruses has been extensively studied in pre-clinical and clinical trials. In particular, CRCA has gained increased attention for a number of reasons [
6,
7]. Because the promoters in these vectors are selective for cancer cells [
6,
7], these oncolytic viruses have the ability to replicate and to spread to adjacent tumor cells [
19]. Furthermore, it has been shown that infection with CRCA generates anti-tumoral immune responses [
20] which can complement chemo- and radiotherapies [
19]. Importantly, given the proper therapeutic transgenes, CRCA are capable of achieving destruction of primary and distant tumors [
7].
In vitro studies showed that a core region of hTERT containing two E boxes and several Sp1 sites is sufficient for the major tumor-selective promoter activity. Many strategies including CRCA have been developed using the hTERT core promoter, containing two E boxes and several Sp1 sites [
21], to selectively target tumor cells. One approach being evaluated uses CNHK300, a replicative adenovirus that targets telomerase positive cancer cells [
22]. A similar replication-competent adenovirus, AdEHT2, in which hTERT promoter was used to control the expression of the adenoviral E4 gene, was capable of tumor selective replication and oncolysis [
23]. Analogous results were also obtained in other replicating adenoviruses, such as Adv-TERTp-E1a [
24], hTERT-Ad [
25], and Ad/GT-Bax [
26], which appear to be promising treatment agents for cancer.
The applicability of cancer therapies is not only determined by their efficiency in eliminating tumor cells; specificity is an equally important prerequisite [
3]. Apoptin has such properties which could potentially achieve these objectives. Various research groups have reported that more than 70 analyzed tumor cell lines were proven to be susceptible to Apoptin whereas it does not affecting variety of normal, non-transformed cells such as human endothelial cells, hepatocytes, hematopoietic stem cells, keratinocytes, or smooth muscle cells [
27,
28]. On the other hand, Apoptin become activated in SV40-transformed normal human fibroblasts or UV-irradiated cells with hereditary cancer-prone syndromes [
28,
29]. Although, Guelen et al provided data of toxicity of Apoptin towards non-cancerous cells, this study proved cell death only in a fetal cell type and not in other non-transformed cell types [
28,
30]. However, the safety of apoptin is underlined by the fact that continuous expression of Apoptin under the H2-Kb promoter in transgenic mice does not interfere with lymphocyte development and proliferation [
28,
31]. While the mechanism by which Apoptin is able to distinguish between tumor and normal cells remains unclear but seems to correlate with its cellular localization. Recently, it was shown that Apoptin-induced apoptosis essentially depends on abnormal phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3-kinase)/Akt activation, resulting in the activation of the cyclin-dependent kinase CDK2 [
32]. Maddika et al indicated that inhibitors of PI3-kinase or Akt not only inhibited CDK2 activation but also protected cells from Apoptin-induced cell death, and Akt-mediated activation of CDK2 was caused by direct phosphorylation as well as by the phosphorylation-induced degradation of its inhibitor p27 (Kip1) [
32]. They also identified CDK2 as the principal kinase that phosphorylates apoptin and is crucially required for apoptin-induced cell death [
32]. Besides the tumor-selective destruction properties, Apoptin has several important features indicating its application as a novel antitumor agent. One of these characteristics is the ability of Apoptin to induce tumor-specific apoptosis independently of p53 [
28,
33]. Thus, apoptin is similarly effective in killing tumor cells that are p53-deficient or either express wildtype or mutant p53 [
28,
33]. Although the role of anti-apoptotic molecules such as bcl-2 in Apoptin-induced apoptosis is still a matter of debate, another important feature of Apoptin is that in certain tumor cell lines it mediated cell death is independent of the Bcl-2 status and is even stimulated by bcl-2 or insensitive to bcr-Abl and bcl-xl [
28,
29,
34]. The main controversy as to the role of bcl-2 may focus on the involvement of Nur77 that can bind to bcl-2 and change its properties from an anti-apoptotic to a proapoptotic molecule [
28]. Accordingly, the different expression levels of Nur77 in various cell types might explain the opposite effects of Bcl-2 on Apoptin induced apoptosis. Based on these concepts, it therefore reasonable to anticipate that Apoptin can be used to complement radiotherapeutic and chemotherapeutic approaches.
More than a quarter (27%) of human gene transfer protocols registered with the the Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee (RAC) use adenovirus vectors [
35]. The most extensively used first generation human adenovirus (hAd) vectors are replication-incompetent viruses deleted in early region 1 (E1A and E1B) genes. E1 genes that are expressed rapidly upon adenovirus penetration into host cells, are responsible for inducing expression of further viral genes, orchestrating modifications of cellular gene expression and protein activity to favor viral replication [
36]. Two genes of this group, E1A and E1B, act in inactivating tumor suppressor Rb and p53 genes that are frequently mutated in cancer cells [
7]. Following the generation of E1 deleted hAd vectors, others hAd vectors (e.g., E1 & E3, E2, E4, E2 & E4, or E1, E2 & E4-deleted vectors) were constructed [
37]. The products of the E3 gene have been described as nonessential to viral infection and play a role in modulation of the host immune response against virus-infected cells [
36]. E2 and E4 genes are involved in multiple processes, such as transcriptional regulation, DNA recombination and virus assembly [
36]. Various deleted strategies such as ONYX-015 (dl1520) [
38] have been evaluated to be effective in
in vitro and animal models and led to clinical trials [
8,
19,
39]. Until a fatality case and other reports of inflammation related to adenovirus vector, the use of adenovirus-mediated gene transfer in humans was thought to be fairly benign [
35,
40]. Because of the short circulatory half life of naked adenoviruses and the neutralizing antibodies existed in most adults, attempts to increase antitumor efficacy through the administration of high doses of adenovirus vectors can lead to liver toxicity and immune response [
41‐
43]. For these reasons, Ad has seen limited clinical use as a systemically administered gene therapy vector. To overcome the potential increased toxicity and reduced vector efficacy during the application of adenovirus vectors, it is important that identifying means to evade innate and pre-existing immunity is a major necessity. Current strategies include use of alternative adenovirus serotypes, modification or chimerism of capsid hexon proteins, generation of hybrid vectors that combine viral and non-viral elements, coating virus with PEG or similar polymers, targeting adenovirus to specific organs, tissues or cell types and so on.
In the present study, we describe the generation of a recombinant adenovirus, Ad-hTERT-E1a-Apoptin, in which replication was driven by hTERT promoter, that selectively replicates and specifically induces apoptosis in tumor cells. When administered to melanoma cells in vitro, the anti-tumor effects were evident within 24 h; a single Ad-hTERT-E1a-Apoptin treatment at 100 MOI or 10 MOI completely inhibited the growth of A375 and B16 cells 4 d later, whereas treatment at 1 MOI was less effective. In contrast, the growth inhibition was not observed in HEM cells after treatment with Ad-hTERT-E1a-Apoptin at any MOI. Furthermore, annexin V staining showed that the recombinant adenovirus treated tumors can be divided into two distinct groups: apoptotic and necrotic cells. Although the infection of the recombinant adenoviruses resulted in significant suppression in A375 and B16 cells, the infection with Ad-hTERT-E1a-Apoptin remarkably elevated the percentage of apoptotic cancer cells. These findings indicate that the Ad-hTERT-E1a-Apoptin replicates specifically and induces growth suppression selectively in cancer cells without harming the normal counterparts.
We also observed anti-tumor activity
in vivo in primary and metastatic tumors, which confirmed and extended the results of the
in vitro studies. Although the infection of Ad-hTERT-E1a-Apoptin did not lead to complete elimination of the tumors, effective inhibition was observed in both primary and metastatic tumor models. It is plausible that the application of the hTERT promoter allows the adenovirus replication, viral dispersion and transgene expression in any tumor tissues in the animal, regardless of receiving intratumoral injections or not. Additionally, apoptotic tumor cells may trigger dendritic cells to process and present cancer-specific antigens to responding T lymphocytes, resulting in a cytotoxic response and inducing apoptosis in the unaffected tumor cells [
44]. Ad-hTERT-E1a and Ad-CMV-E1a also inhibited primary transplantated tumors, but the effects on metastatic tumors were very limited. In the
in vivo experiments described here, we did not observe any toxic effects after injection of Ad-hTERT-E1a-Apoptin. Thus, our data indicate that there is great potential for improving the safety and efficacy of adenovirus vectors for wide application for treatment of neoplastic diseases.
Methods
Cell lines and animals
A375 human malignant melanoma cells, B16 mouse melanoma cells (syngeneic to C57BL/6 mice) and HEK-293 human embryonic kidney cells were obtained from the Committee on Type Culture Collection of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Shanghai, China). A375 and HEK-293 cells were cultured in DMEM. B16 cells were cultured in RPMI 1640. All media (Invitrogen, Beijing, China) above were supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS; Hyclone, Beijing, China), 100 units/mL penicillin, and 100 μg/mL streptomycin. HEM human epidermal melanocytes (primary cells isolated from normal human neonatal foreskin) were obtained from ScienCell Research Laboratories (San Diego, CA) and cultured in MelM medium (ScienCell, Carlsbad, CA) supplemented with 0.5% FBS and 100 units/mL penicillin, and 100 μg/mL streptomycin. All cell lines were passaged no more than six months after receipt. DNA-Fingerprinting (monitoring the mutation of human cell lines), isoenzyme analysis (verify the species of origin), Scharfe Casy TT system (evaluating cell proliferation) and Hoechst staining (mycoplasma detection) were used to characterize cell lines by the supplier. Six- to eight-week-old female C57BL/6 mice were purchased from the Experimental Animal Center of the Academy of Military Medical Sciences (Beijing, China) and housed in a pathogen-free facility for all experiments following institutional guidelines.
Recombinant adenoviruses
Recombinant adenoviruses used in this study were produced with the Adeno-X Expression System (BD Biosciences Clontech) following the manufacturer's instructions. Briefly, the transgene cassettes containing the hTERT core promoter (the 5' flanking region of the hTERT gene between positions -283 to -78) driving E1a and the CMV promoter driving Apoptin were subcloned into the BD Adeno-X Viral DNA (the adenoviral genome) via the shuttle vector pShuttle2. Then the infectious adenovirus designated as Ad-hTERT-E1a-Apoptin was packaged in HEK-293 cells. Similar strategies were used to generate the other recombinant adenoviruses designated as Ad-CMV-Apoptin, Ad-hTERT-Apoptin, Ad-CMV-E1a, Ad-hTERT-E1a and Ad-CMV-E1a-Apoptin, and the Ad-Mock was generated using the adenovirus backbone only (Figure
1A). The purification and titration of the amplified virus were performed using Adeno-X Virus Purification kit (BD Bioscience Clontech) and Adeno-X Rapid titer kit (BD Bioscience Clontech), respectively.
Western blot analysis
Cells were infected with the various adenoviruses at a multiplicity of infection (MOI) of 100 for 48 h. The expressions of E1a and Apoptin were analyzed by Western blot as described previously [
45]. The primary antibodies were anti-E1a (1:10,000; mouse monoclonal; Abcam, Cambridge, MA) for E1a detection and anti-Apoptin (1:1,500; rabbit polyclonal, a kind gift from Mi Zhiqiang, Jilin University, China) for Apoptin detection, and the secondary antibodies were horseradish peroxidase(HRP)'conjugated anti-mouse and anti-rabbit IgG (1:2,500; Abcam), respectively. The bands were visualized with Pierce ECL Western Blotting Substrate (Pierce, Shanghai, China). Extracts of Ad-mock-infected cells was used as negative control and detection of GAPDH was used as an internal control.
Cell viability assay
Cell viability was determined by standard 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyl tetrazolium bromide (MTT; Sigma, St. Louis, MO) assays as described previously [
45]. Cells were infected with various concentrations (1 MOI, 10 MOI, and 100 MOI) of the recombinant adenoviruses, and the cell viability was then measured every day over a 4 d period. The percent cell death was expressed with respect to control values using the following formula: [100 × (control cells -experimental cells)/(control cells)] [
46,
47].
Flow cytometry analysis
Cells were infected with the recombinant adenoviruses (100 MOI) for 48 h, trypsinized and washed once with PBS. The cells (1 × 106) were resuspend in binding buffer and stained with FITC-labeled Annexin V (Annexin V-FITC Apoptosis Detection Kit; BioVision, Mountain View, California) according to the manufacturer's protocols. To exclude late apoptotic and necrotic cells, propidium iodide (PI) was added to the FITC-Annexin V-stained samples. Then, the samples were examined by flow cytometry (FACScan, Becton Dickinson, Franklin Lakes, NJ) for apoptosis analysis.
Fluorescence assay
Fluorescent immunostaining was performed on cells double-stained with FITC-labeled Annexin V and PI following the Annexin V-FITC Apoptosis Detection Kit (BioVision) manufacturer's instructions. The cells were then observed under a fluorescence microscope (BX51; Olympus) and the images of representative cells were captured with a CCD camera (DP71; Olympus). Samples were processed simultaneously, and all images were captured with the same parameters.
Animal experiments
The
in vivo anti-tumor experiments were performed in three independent models. In the first two models, 1 × 10
6 B16 cells were implanted subcutaneously into the right flank of C57BL/6 mice. Once the tumor size reached 50 to 100 mm
3, mice were randomly assigned to 8 treatment groups (6 mice per group). After establishment of the tumors, the mice of the first model received intratumoral injections of various recombinant adenoviruses at a dose of 1 × 10
9 plaque-forming units (pfu) in 50 μl of saline, and the control group received 50 μl of saline alone. In the second model, the injections were administered via the tail vein. All injections were given every two days for the first week (day 6, 8 and 10 after implantation) and once weekly for two more weeks (day 17 and 21 after implantation). Tumor size was measured using calipers every four days and calculated with a formula of [0.52(smallest diameter )
2(largest diameter )] [
45,
48]. In the third model, 1 × 10
6 B16 cells were administered via tail vein. Six days after implantation, the mice were treated according to the injection protocol of the second model. During the tumor study, all animals were monitored daily and sacrificed at the end of the experiment.
Statistical analysis
The statistical significance of differences was done using one-way ANOVA and statistical significance was accepted as P < 0.05. Log rank tests were used for survival analysis. Data from all animals are represented in the Kaplan-Meier plots.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors' contributions
LX and JNY designed the study and wrote the manuscript. LX, LY, WZM and LC performed virus construction, LHJ, TMY, JKS and SLL performed molecular studies. LX, GP, YEC and XXH performed cell studies. LX, KSF, WZY and WYH performed animal studies. LX and JNY performed statistical analysis and data interpretation. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.