Research on repurposing the old alcohol-aversion drug disulfiram (DSF) for cancer treatment has identified inhibition of NPL4, an adaptor of the p97/VCP segregase essential for turnover of proteins involved in multiple pathways, as an unsuspected cancer cell vulnerability. While we reported that NPL4 is targeted by the anticancer metabolite of DSF, the bis-diethyldithiocarbamate-copper complex (CuET), the exact, apparently multifaceted mechanism(s) through which the CuET-induced aggregation of NPL4 kills cancer cells remains to be fully elucidated. Given the pronounced sensitivity to CuET in tumor cell lines lacking the genome integrity caretaker proteins BRCA1 and BRCA2, here we investigated the impact of NPL4 targeting by CuET on DNA replication dynamics and DNA damage response pathways in human cancer cell models. Our results show that CuET treatment interferes with DNA replication, slows down replication fork progression and causes accumulation of single-stranded DNA (ssDNA). Such a replication stress (RS) scenario is associated with DNA damage, preferentially in the S phase, and activates the homologous recombination (HR) DNA repair pathway. At the same time, we find that cellular responses to the CuET-triggered RS are seriously impaired due to concomitant malfunction of the ATRIP-ATR-CHK1 signaling pathway that reflects an unorthodox checkpoint silencing mode through ATR (Ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3 related) kinase sequestration within the CuET-evoked NPL4 protein aggregates.

Danish Cancer Society Research Center 2100 Copenhagen Denmark

Division of Genome Biology Department of Medical Biochemistry and Biophysics Science for Life Laboratory Karolinska Institute 171 77 Stockholm Sweden

Laboratory of Genome Integrity Institute of Molecular and Translational Medicine Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry Palacky University 77 147 Olomouc Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Collins F.S. Mining for therapeutic gold. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2011;10:397. doi: 10.1038/nrd3461. PubMed DOI PMC

McMahon A., Chen W., Li F. Old wine in new bottles: Advanced drug delivery systems for disulfiram-based cancer therapy. J. Control. Release. 2020;319:352–359. doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2020.01.001. PubMed DOI

Skrott Z., Mistrik M., Andersen K.K., Friis S., Majera D., Gursky J., Ozdian T., Bartkova J., Turi Z., Moudry P., et al. Alcohol-abuse drug disulfiram targets cancer via p97 segregase adaptor NPL4. Nature. 2017;552:194–199. doi: 10.1038/nature25016. PubMed DOI PMC

Skrott Z., Majera D., Gursky J., Buchtova T., Hajduch M., Mistrik M., Bartek J. Disulfiram’s anti-cancer activity reflects targeting NPL4, not inhibition of aldehyde dehydrogenase. Oncogene. 2019;38:6711–6722. doi: 10.1038/s41388-019-0915-2. PubMed DOI

Tacconi E.M., Lai X., Folio C., Porru M., Zonderland G., Badie S., Michl J., Sechi I., Rogier M., Matía García V., et al. BRCA1 and BRCA2 tumor suppressors protect against endogenous acetaldehyde toxicity. EMBO Mol. Med. 2017;9:1398–1414. doi: 10.15252/emmm.201607446. PubMed DOI PMC

Lorenti Garcia C., Mechilli M., Proietti De Santis L., Schinoppi A., Katarzyna K., Palitti F. Relationship between DNA lesions, DNA repair and chromosomal damage induced by acetaldehyde. Mutat. Res. Mol. Mech. Mutagen. 2009;662:3–9. doi: 10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2008.11.008. PubMed DOI

Bartkova J., Hořejší Z., Koed K., Krämer A., Tort F., Zieger K., Guldberg P., Sehested M., Nesland J.M., Lukas C., et al. DNA damage response as a candidate anti-cancer barrier in early human tumorigenesis. Nature. 2005;434:864–870. doi: 10.1038/nature03482. PubMed DOI

Bartkova J., Rezaei N., Liontos M., Karakaidos P., Kletsas D., Issaeva N., Vassiliou L.-V.F., Kolettas E., Niforou K., Zoumpourlis V.C., et al. Oncogene-induced senescence is part of the tumorigenesis barrier imposed by DNA damage checkpoints. Nature. 2006;444:633–637. doi: 10.1038/nature05268. PubMed DOI

Gorgoulis V.G., Vassiliou L.-V.F., Karakaidos P., Zacharatos P., Kotsinas A., Liloglou T., Venere M., DiTullio R.A., Kastrinakis N.G., Levy B., et al. Activation of the DNA damage checkpoint and genomic instability in human precancerous lesions. Nature. 2005;434:907–913. doi: 10.1038/nature03485. PubMed DOI

Halazonetis T.D., Gorgoulis V.G., Bartek J. An Oncogene-Induced DNA Damage Model for Cancer Development. Science. 2008;319:1352–1355. doi: 10.1126/science.1140735. PubMed DOI

Bartek J., Bartkova J., Lukas J. DNA damage signalling guards against activated oncogenes and tumour progression. Oncogene. 2007;26:7773–7779. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1210881. PubMed DOI

Jackson S.P., Bartek J. The DNA-damage response in human biology and disease. Nature. 2009;461:1071–1078. doi: 10.1038/nature08467. PubMed DOI PMC

Gaillard H., García-Muse T., Aguilera A. Replication stress and cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer. 2015;15:276–289. doi: 10.1038/nrc3916. PubMed DOI

Bartek J., Mistrik M., Bartkova J. Thresholds of replication stress signaling in cancer development and treatment. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2012;19:5–7. doi: 10.1038/nsmb.2220. PubMed DOI

Zeman M.K., Cimprich K.A. Causes and consequences of replication stress. Nat. Cell Biol. 2014;16:2–9. doi: 10.1038/ncb2897. PubMed DOI PMC

Berti M., Vindigni A. Replication stress: Getting back on track. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2016;23:103–109. doi: 10.1038/nsmb.3163. PubMed DOI PMC

Eykelenboom J.K., Harte E.C., Canavan L., Pastor-Peidro A., Calvo-Asensio I., Llorens-Agost M., Lowndes N.F. ATR Activates the S-M Checkpoint during Unperturbed Growth to Ensure Sufficient Replication Prior to Mitotic Onset. Cell Rep. 2013;5:1095–1107. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2013.10.027. PubMed DOI

Toledo L.I., Altmeyer M., Rask M.-B., Lukas C., Larsen D.H., Povlsen L.K., Bekker-Jensen S., Mailand N., Bartek J., Lukas J. ATR Prohibits Replication Catastrophe by Preventing Global Exhaustion of RPA. Cell. 2014;156:374. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.01.001. PubMed DOI

Bekker-Jensen S., Lukas C., Kitagawa R., Melander F., Kastan M.B., Bartek J., Lukas J. Spatial organization of the mammalian genome surveillance machinery in response to DNA strand breaks. J. Cell Biol. 2006;173:195–206. doi: 10.1083/jcb.200510130. PubMed DOI PMC

Jackson D.A., Pombo A. Replicon Clusters Are Stable Units of Chromosome Structure: Evidence That Nuclear Organization Contributes to the Efficient Activation and Propagation of S Phase in Human Cells. J. Cell Biol. 1998;140:1285–1295. doi: 10.1083/jcb.140.6.1285. PubMed DOI PMC

Mistrik M., Vesela E., Furst T., Hanzlikova H., Frydrych I., Gursky J., Majera D., Bartek J. Cells and Stripes: A novel quantitative photo-manipulation technique. Sci. Rep. 2016;6:19567. doi: 10.1038/srep19567. PubMed DOI PMC

Maya-Mendoza A., Moudry P., Merchut-Maya J.M., Lee M., Strauss R., Bartek J. High speed of fork progression induces DNA replication stress and genomic instability. Nature. 2018;559:279–284. doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0261-5. PubMed DOI

Budzowska M., Kanaar R. Mechanisms of Dealing with DNA Damage-Induced Replication Problems. Cell Biochem. Biophys. 2009;53:17–31. doi: 10.1007/s12013-008-9039-y. PubMed DOI

Bianco J.N., Poli J., Saksouk J., Bacal J., Silva M.J., Yoshida K., Lin Y.-L., Tourrière H., Lengronne A., Pasero P. Analysis of DNA replication profiles in budding yeast and mammalian cells using DNA combing. Methods. 2012;57:149–157. doi: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2012.04.007. PubMed DOI

Quinet A., Carvajal-Maldonado D., Lemacon D., Vindigni A. DNA Fiber Analysis: Mind the Gap! Methods Enzymology. 2017;591:55–82. PubMed

Couch F.B., Bansbach C.E., Driscoll R., Luzwick J.W., Glick G.G., Betous R., Carroll C.M., Jung S.Y., Qin J., Cimprich K.A., et al. ATR phosphorylates SMARCAL1 to prevent replication fork collapse. Genes Dev. 2013;27:1610–1623. doi: 10.1101/gad.214080.113. PubMed DOI PMC

Sogo J.M. Fork Reversal and ssDNA Accumulation at Stalled Replication Forks Owing to Checkpoint Defects. Science. 2002;297:599–602. doi: 10.1126/science.1074023. PubMed DOI

Byun T.S., Pacek M., Yee M.C., Walter J.C., Cimprich K.A. Functional uncoupling of MCM helicase and DNA polymerase activities activates the ATR-dependent checkpoint. Genes Dev. 2005;19:1040–1052. doi: 10.1101/gad.1301205. PubMed DOI PMC

Lee Z., Elledge S.J. Sensing DNA Damage Through ATRIP Recognition of RPA-ssDNA Complexes. Science. 2003;300:1542–1548. doi: 10.1126/science.1083430. PubMed DOI

Liao H., Ji F., Helleday T., Ying S. Mechanisms for stalled replication fork stabilization: New targets for synthetic lethality strategies in cancer treatments. EMBO Rep. 2018;19 doi: 10.15252/embr.201846263. PubMed DOI PMC

Petermann E., Orta M.L., Issaeva N., Schultz N., Helleday T. Hydroxyurea-Stalled Replication Forks Become Progressively Inactivated and Require Two Different RAD51-Mediated Pathways for Restart and Repair. Mol. Cell. 2010;37:492–502. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2010.01.021. PubMed DOI PMC

Whelan D.R., Lee W.T.C., Yin Y., Ofri D.M., Bermudez-Hernandez K., Keegan S., Fenyo D., Rothenberg E. Spatiotemporal dynamics of homologous recombination repair at single collapsed replication forks. Nat. Commun. 2018;9:3882. doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-06435-3. PubMed DOI PMC

Davies A.A., Masson J.Y., McIlwraith M.J., Stasiak A.Z., Stasiak A., Venkitaraman A.R., West S.C. Role of BRCA2 in control of the RAD51 recombination and DNA repair protein. Mol. Cell. 2001;7:273–282. doi: 10.1016/S1097-2765(01)00175-7. PubMed DOI

Majera D., Skrott Z., Bouchal J., Bartkova J., Simkova D., Gachechiladze M., Steigerova J., Kurfurstova D., Gursky J., Korinkova G., et al. Targeting genotoxic and proteotoxic stress-response pathways in human prostate cancer by clinically available PARP inhibitors, vorinostat and disulfiram. Prostate. 2019;79:352–362. doi: 10.1002/pros.23741. PubMed DOI

Ramadan K. p97/VCP- and Lys48-linked polyubiquitination form a new signaling pathway in DNA damage response. Cell Cycle. 2012;11:1062–1069. doi: 10.4161/cc.11.6.19446. PubMed DOI

Ramadan K., Halder S., Wiseman K., Vaz B. Strategic role of the ubiquitin-dependent segregase p97 (VCP or Cdc48) in DNA replication. Chromosoma. 2017;126:17–32. doi: 10.1007/s00412-016-0587-4. PubMed DOI

Meerang M., Ritz D., Paliwal S., Garajova Z., Bosshard M., Mailand N., Janscak P., Hübscher U., Meyer H., Ramadan K. The ubiquitin-selective segregase VCP/p97 orchestrates the response to DNA double-strand breaks. Nat. Cell Biol. 2011;13:1376. doi: 10.1038/ncb2367. PubMed DOI

Bergink S., Ammon T., Kern M., Schermelleh L., Leonhardt H., Jentsch S. Role of Cdc48/p97 as a SUMO-targeted segregase curbing Rad51–Rad52 interaction. Nat. Cell Biol. 2013;15:526–532. doi: 10.1038/ncb2729. PubMed DOI

Singh A.N., Oehler J., Torrecilla I., Kilgas S., Li S., Vaz B., Guérillon C., Fielden J., Hernandez-Carralero E., Cabrera E., et al. The p97-Ataxin 3 complex regulates homeostasis of the DNA damage response E3 ubiquitin ligase RNF8. EMBO J. 2019;38:e102361. doi: 10.15252/embj.2019102361. PubMed DOI PMC

Davis E.J., Lachaud C., Appleton P., Macartney T.J., Näthke I., Rouse J. DVC1 (C1orf124) recruits the p97 protein segregase to sites of DNA damage. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2012;19:1093–1100. doi: 10.1038/nsmb.2394. PubMed DOI

Kumar A., Mazzanti M., Mistrik M., Kosar M., Beznoussenko G.V., Mironov A.A., Garrè M., Parazzoli D., Shivashankar G.V., Scita G., et al. ATR Mediates a Checkpoint at the Nuclear Envelope in Response to Mechanical Stress. Cell. 2014;158:633–646. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.05.046. PubMed DOI PMC

Woerner A.C., Frottin F., Hornburg D., Feng L.R., Meissner F., Patra M., Tatzelt J., Mann M., Winklhofer K.F., Hartl F.U., et al. Cytoplasmic protein aggregates interfere with nucleocytoplasmic transport of protein and RNA. Science. 2016;351:173–176. doi: 10.1126/science.aad2033. PubMed DOI

Yasuda S., Tsuchiya H., Kaiho A., Guo Q., Ikeuchi K., Endo A., Arai N., Ohtake F., Murata S., Inada T., et al. Stress- and ubiquitylation-dependent phase separation of the proteasome. Nature. 2020;578:296–300. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-1982-9. PubMed DOI

Wang Y., Li W., Patel S.S., Cong J., Zhang N., Sabbatino F., Liu X., Qi Y., Huang P., Lee H., et al. Blocking the formation of radiation induced breast cancer stem cells. Oncotarget. 2014;5:3743–3755. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.1992. PubMed DOI PMC

Lun X., Wells J.C., Grinshtein N., King J.C., Hao X., Dang N.-H., Wang X., Aman A., Uehling D., Datti A., et al. Disulfiram when Combined with Copper Enhances the Therapeutic Effects of Temozolomide for the Treatment of Glioblastoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 2016;22:3860–3875. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-1798. PubMed DOI

Huang J., Campian J.L., Gujar A.D., Tsien C., Ansstas G., Tran D.D., DeWees T.A., Lockhart A.C., Kim A.H. Final results of a phase I dose-escalation, dose-expansion study of adding disulfiram with or without copper to adjuvant temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma. J. Neurooncol. 2018;138:105–111. doi: 10.1007/s11060-018-2775-y. PubMed DOI

Huang J., Campian J.L., Gujar A.D., Tran D.D., Lockhart A.C., DeWees T.A., Tsien C.I., Kim A.H. A phase I study to repurpose disulfiram in combination with temozolomide to treat newly diagnosed glioblastoma after chemoradiotherapy. J. Neurooncol. 2016;128:259–266. doi: 10.1007/s11060-016-2104-2. PubMed DOI

Jakola A.S., Werlenius K., Mudaisi M., Hylin S., Kinhult S., Bartek J.J., Salvesen O., Carlsen S.M., Strandeus M., Lindskog M., et al. Disulfiram repurposing combined with nutritional copper supplement as add-on to chemotherapy in recurrent glioblastoma (DIRECT): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. F1000Research. 2018;7:1797. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.16786.1. PubMed DOI PMC

Nechushtan H., Hamamreh Y., Nidal S., Gotfried M., Baron A., Shalev Y.I., Nisman B., Peretz T., Peylan-Ramu N. A Phase IIb Trial Assessing the Addition of Disulfiram to Chemotherapy for the Treatment of Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Oncologist. 2015;20:366–367. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2014-0424. PubMed DOI PMC

Actionable cancer vulnerability due to translational arrest, p53 aggregation and ribosome biogenesis stress evoked by the disulfiram metabolite CuET

A drug repurposing strategy for overcoming human multiple myeloma resistance to standard-of-care treatment

Effect of Sepatronium Bromide (YM-155) on DNA Double-Strand Breaks Repair in Cancer Cells