Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Ex vivo programmed cell death and the prediction of response to chemotherapy

  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

Since the earliest introduction of cytotoxic chemotherapy, investigators have pursued laboratory techniques designed to match patients to available drugs. Most of the work, published through the 1980s, reflected the prevailing view of cancer as a disease of dysregulated cell proliferation. Noteworthy, the description of apoptosis and programmed cell death, fundamental to our modern understanding of human tumor biology, did not occur until well after the heyday of in vitro chemosensitivity testing. By incorporating the modern tenets of carcinogenesis associated with perturbations in cell survival we can now re-examine laboratory assays of drug response in the context of drug-induced programmed cell death. Although there is interest in the use of genomic analyses for the prediction of chemotherapy response, the painful recognition that genotype does not equal phenotype will continue to limit broad application of these platforms. Biosystematics instructs that biological pathways rarely follow predicted routes. Efforts to force human biology to behave according to preconceived scientific dictates have proven costly and unsuccessful. Whole-cell experimental models with the capacity to evaluate all the operative mechanisms of cellular response to injury, acting in concert, provide valid tools for the study of human cancer. Educated by cellular behavior, we can expeditiously examine molecular processes of interest. This article briefly reviews the history of whole-cell experimental models of in vitro chemosensitivity testing then focuses on cell-death measures as the most robust predictors of clinical outcome in human cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Black MM, Spear FD: Further observations on the effects of cancer chemotherapeutic agents on the in vitro dehydrogenase activity of cancer tissue. J Natl Cancer Inst 1954, 14:1147–1158.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Salmon SE, Hamburger AW, Soehnlen BS, et al.:Quantitation of differential sensitivity of human-tumor stem cells to anticancer drugs. N Engl J Med 1978, 298:1321–1327.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kerr JFR, Wyllie AH, Currie AR: Apoptosis: a basic biological phenomenon with wide ranging implications in tissue kinetics. Br J Cancer 1972, 26:239–257. This landmark paper describes the discovery of apoptosis as a biological process of profound importance in human disease. The authors coined the term “apoptosis” from the Greek, regarding the orchestrated elimination of abnormal or unnecessary cells in metazoan species.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Reed JC: Dysregulation of apoptosis in cancer. J Clin Oncol 1999, 17:2941–2953. This excellent overview of the dysregulation of apoptosis establishes the primacy of survival pathways in human carcinogenesis.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ellis HM, Horvitz HR: Genetic control of programmed cell death in the nematode C. Elegans. Cell 1986, 44:817–829.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hengartner HO, Horvitz HR: C. Elegans cell survival gene ced-9 encodes a functional homolog of the mammalian proto-oncogene bcl-2. Cell 1994, 76:665–676.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Sperandio, de Belle I, Bredesen DE: An alternative, non-apoptotic form of programmed cell death. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2000, 97:14376–14381. Crucial to the understanding of programmed cell death is the realization that apoptosis is but one of many mechanisms of controlled cell deletion. This study examines non-apoptotic pathways that become operative when the apoptotic cascade is inhibited.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Nagourney RA, Evans SS, Messenger JC, et al.:2 Chlorodeoxyadenosine activity and cross resistance patterns in primary cultures of human hematologic neoplasms. Br J Cancer 1993, 67:10–14.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Nagourney RA, Link JS, Blitzer JB, et al.: Gemcitabine plus cisplatin repeating doublet therapy in previously treated, relapsed breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 2000, 18:2245–2249.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Nagourney RA, Brewer CA, Radecki SR, et al.:Phase II trial of gemcitabine plus cisplatin repeating doublet therapy in previously treated, relapsed ovarian cancer patients. Gynecol Oncol 2003, 88:35–39.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Nagourney RA, Sommers BL, Harper SM, et al.:Ex vivo analysis of topotecan: advancing the application of laboratory-based clinical therapeutics. Br J Cancer 2003, 89:1789–1795.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Nagourney RA, Chow C, Su YZ, et al.: Activity of ZD1839 (Iressa) alone and combined with cytotoxic drugs in human tumor primary cultures [abstract 3902]. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res 2002, 43:787.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Nagourney RA, Chow C, Kollin C, et al.: Effect of gefitinib (Iressa, ZD1839) in human tumor primary cultures: possible insights into drug actions [abstract 3801]. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res 2003, 44:870.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Pieters R, Kaspars GJL, Veerman AJ, et al.: In vitro cellular drug resistance and prognosis in newly diagnosed childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood 1997, 90:2723–2729.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Holleman A, Cheok MH, den Boer ML, et al.:Gene-expression patterns in drug-resistant acute lymphoblastic leukemia cells and response to treatment. N Engl J Med 2004, 351:533–542.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Peng L, Wang B, Ren P: Reduction of MTT by flavonoids in the absence of cells. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 2005, 45:108–111.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Weisenthal LM, Marsden JA, Dill PL, et al.: A novel dye exclusion method for testing in vitro chemosensitivity of human tumors. Cancer Res 1983, 43:749–757.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Catchpoole DR, Stewart BW: Etoposide-induced cytotoxicity in two human T-cell leukemic lines: delayed loss of membrane permeability rather than DNA fragmentation as an indicator of programmed cell death. Cancer Res 1993, 53:4287–4296.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Kurnick NB, Coates HA, de Jesus I: A new method for in vitro chemosensitivity assay: inhibition of metabolic CO2 production. Biomed Pharmacother 1983, 37:351–353.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Blackman KE, Fingert HJ, Fuller AF, Meitner PA: The fluorescent cytoprint assay in gynecologic malignancies and breast cancer: methodology and results. In Chemosensitivity Testing in Gynecologic Malignancies and Breast Cancer. Edited by Koechli OR, Sevin BU, Haller U. Basel, Switzerland: Karger; 1994:53–64.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Cree IA, Kurbacher CM, Untch M, et al.: Correlation of the clinical response to chemotherapy in breast cancer with ex vivo chemosensitivity. Anticancer Drugs 1996, 7:630–635.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Koechli OR, Avner BP, Sevin BU, et al.: Application of the adenosine triphosphate-cell viability assay in human breast cancer chemosensitivity testing: a report on the first results. J Surg Oncol 1993, 54:119–125.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Xu JM, Song ST, Tang ZM, et al.: Predictive chemotherapy of advanced breast cancer directed by MTT assay in vitro. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1999, 53:77–85.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Weisenthal LM, Marsden JA, Dill PL, Macaluso CK:A novel dye exclusion method for testing in vitro chemosensitivity of human tumors. Cancer Res 1983, 43:749–757.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Nagourney RA, Link JS, Blitzer JB, et al.: Gemcitabine plus cisplatin repeating doublet therapy in previously treated, relapsed breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 2000, 18:2245–2249.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Furukawa T, Kubota T, Hoffman RM: Clinical applications of the histoculture drug response assay. Clin Cancer Res 1995, 1:305–311.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Imai S, Mochizuki F, Fujii M: Comparative study of histopathological effects of preoperative chemotherapy using UFT and in vitro MTT assay of colonoscopy specimens from patients with colorectal cancer. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho 1999, 26:1289–1293.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Leone LA, Meitner PA, Myers TJ, et al.: Predictive value of the fluorescent cytoprint assay (FCA): a retrospective correlation study of in vitro chemosensitivity and individual responses to chemotherapy. Cancer Invest 1991, 9:491.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Smit EF, De Vries EGE, Meijer C, et al.: Limitations of the fast green assay for chemosensitivity testing in human lung cancer. Chest 1991, 100:1358–1363.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Wilbur DW, Camacho ES, Hilliard DA, et al.: Chemotherapy of non-small cell lung carcinoma guided by an in vitro drug resistance assay measuring total tumour cell kill. Br J Cancer 1992, 65:27–32.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Carstensen H, Tholander B: Chemosensitivity of ovarian carcinoma: in vitro/in vivo correlations using the dye exclusion assay of Weisenthal [meeting abstract]. Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Clinical Oncology. Stockholm: 1985:206.

  32. Ng TY, Ngan HY, Cheng DKL, Wong LC: Clinical applicability of the ATP cell viability assay as a predictor of chemoresponse in platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer using nonsurgical tumor cell samples. Gynecol Oncol 2000, 76:405–408.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Konecny G, Crohns C, Pegram M, et al.: Correlation of drug response with the ATP tumor chemosensitivity assay in primary FIGO stage III ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2000, 77:258–263.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Ohie S, Udagawa Y, Kozu A, et al.: Cisplatin sensitivity of ovarian cancer in the histoculture drug response assay correlates to clinical response to combination chemotherapy with cisplatin, doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide. Anticancer Res 2000, 20:2049–2054.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Sargent J, Elgie A, Taylor CG, et al.: The identification of drug resistance in ovarian cancer and breast cancer; application of the MTT assay. In Chemosensitivity Testing in Gynecologic Malignancies and Breast Cancer. Edited by Koechli OR, Sevin BU, Haller U. Basel, Switzerland:Karger; 1994:64–75.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Sevin BU, Perras JP, Averette HE, et al.: Chemosensitivity testing in ovarian cancer. Cancer 1993, 71(Suppl):1613–1620.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Sevin BU, Perras JP, Koechli OR: Current status and future directions of chemosensitivity testing. In Chemosensitivity Testing in Gynecologic Malignancies and Breast Cancer. Edited by Koechli OR, Sevin BU, Haller U. Basel, Switzerland: Karger; 1994:179–194.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Taylor CG, Sargent JM, Elgie AW, et al.: The clinical relevance of chemosensitivity testing in ovarian cancer. Cancer Detect Prev 1998, 22:305–312.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Beksac M, Kansu E, Kars A, et al.: A rapid drug sensitivity assay for neoplasmatic cells. Med Oncol Tumor Pharmacother 1988, 5:253–257.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Cree IA, Kurbaucher CM, Lamont A, et al.: A prospective randomized controlled trial of ATP-based tumor chemosensitivity assay (ATP-TCA) directed chemotherapy versus physician’s choice in patients with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer [abstract 5008]. Paper presented at the 2005 ASCO Meeting. Orlando, FL, May 13–17, 2005.

  41. CortazarP, Johnson BE: Review of the efficacy of individualized chemotherapy selected by in vitro drug sensitivity testing for patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol 1999, 17:1625–1631. An examination of the available data by these investigators concludes that assay-directed clinical trials should be a priority in resolving the utility of these techniques.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nagourney, R.A. Ex vivo programmed cell death and the prediction of response to chemotherapy. Curr. Treat. Options in Oncol. 7, 103–110 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-006-0045-2

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-006-0045-2

Keywords

Navigation