A flow cytometry-based screen to identify compounds that inhibit DNA repair after radiation
Gro Elise Rødland,
Norway
PD-0486
Abstract
A flow cytometry-based screen to identify compounds that inhibit DNA repair after radiation
Authors: Gro Elise Rødland1, Christian Naucke1, Sissel Hauge1, Trond Stokke2,1, Randi G. Syljuåsen1
1Institute for Cancer Research, The Norwegian Radium Hospital, Radiation Biology, Oslo, Norway; 2Institute for Cancer Research, The Norwegian Radium Hospital, Core Facilities, Oslo, Norway
Show Affiliations
Hide Affiliations
Purpose or Objective
Radiotherapy works by
causing lethal DNA damage to cancer cells. However, in response to the DNA
damage, cancer cells can activate DNA repair mechanisms, which may limit
treatment efficacy. One promising strategy is thus to combine radiotherapy with
inhibitors of DNA damage repair. Interestingly, recent studies suggest
that inhibition of DNA repair can also affect anti-tumor immunity. Here, we
have developed a large-scale flow cytometry screening method to identify
compounds that inhibit DNA damage repair after radiation. Our aim is to explore
how these DNA repair inhibitors affect tumor radiosensitivity and anti-tumor
immune effects.
Material and Methods
Cancer cells were harvested at
30 minutes and six hours after treatment with radiation and compound libraries,
and DNA repair was assessed by levels of the DNA damage marker γH2AX. Barcoding with pacific blue staining was
included to achieve highly accurate measurements of γH2AX levels. A pipetting robot and a flow cytometer
equipped with a plate loader were used for screen automation. In follow-up
studies of candidate hits, cell death was monitored by clonogenic survival, and
DNA repair and immune signaling were investigated by immunoblotting and flow
cytometry.
Results
The screen was performed with
more than 1900 compounds, from the Biomol kinase inhibitor, Enzo target and
pathway, Cancer Selleck and Prestwick compound libraries, in A549 lung cancer
and/or Reh leukemia cells. To verify the feasibility of our screening method
for DNA repair, two repetitive screens were conducted in both cell lines with
357 of the compounds. The results were highly reproducible, and among the
candidate hits were known regulators of DNA repair such as multiple HDAC
inhibitors (e.g. SAHA). In addition, several previously unknown regulators of
DNA repair were identified. Notably, largely similar results were obtained for
the two cell lines. Results of screens performed in a single cell line will
thus likely be widely applicable. A549 cells were further screened with
the Cancer Selleck library, and Reh cells with the Prestwick library. Several
screen results were validated by acquiring compounds from an independent source
and testing the screen endpoints in independent experiments. Preliminary
results suggest that some of the DNA repair inhibitors also promote anti-tumor
immune effects after irradiation.
Conclusion
Altogether, our screens have
identified more than 70 candidate hits. After further preclinical and clinical
testing, the identified compounds may potentially be useful in combination with
radiotherapy in future treatment approaches.