Purpose: We sought to examine the synergistic antipancreatic cancer effect by simultaneously targeting hypoxic cancer cells with heat-shock protein 90 (HSP90) inhibitor and blockade of energy production.

Experimental Design: The anticancer effects of an HSP90 inhibitor (geldanamycin) in pancreatic cells were investigated in hypoxia and normoxia. A hexokinase II inhibitor, 3-broma-pyruvate (3BrPA), was evaluated for selective glycolysis inhibition in hypoxia as a sensitizer of HSP90 inhibitor against pancreatic cancer. The HSP90 client protein degradation was monitored by Western blot. The synergistic antitumor effect of geldanamycin and 3BrPA was evaluated in a xenograft pancreatic cancer model and monitored by a noninvasive dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.

Results: Hypoxia enhanced HIF-1α expression by 11-fold in pancreatic cancer cells, and HSP90 inhibitor exhibited a seven- to eightfold higher anticancer effect in hypoxia compared with normoxia via HSP90 client protein degradation. 3BrPA selectively inhibited glycolysis and sensitized geldanamycin against pancreatic cancer cells by 17- to 400-fold through HSP90 client protein degradation. The synergistic anticancer effect of reduced doses of geldanamycin and 3-BrPA was confirmed in xenograft models in vivo by more than 75% tumor growth inhibition.

Conclusions: The combination of HSP90 inhibitors and glycolysis inhibitors provides preferential inhibition of cancer cells in hypoxia through HSP90 client protein degradation and selective glycolysis inhibition. This may provide a new therapeutic regimen to battle chemotherapy-resistant pancreatic cancers, by enhancing the synergistic therapeutic efficacy and reducing dose-limiting toxicity.

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer death in the United States (1). The high mortality rate is mostly due to the high rate of metastasis and severe resistance to both chemotherapy and radiation. Recently, the combination of gemcitabine and monoclonal antibody against VEGF, EGFR, and Her-2 has been evaluated in several clinical trials in pancreatic cancers (24). However, the response and survival rates of treated patients have remained at low levels. A number of biochemical and genetic abnormalities contribute to this low response rate of target-specific therapeutic strategies. First, mutations in both oncogenes (such as K-Ras) and tumor-suppressor genes (such as P53) have been identified in pancreatic cancers. Second, overexpression of growth factors (such as VEGF) and growth factor receptors (such as EGFR), have also been linked to the metastasis and disease progression (5). In addition, the hypoxic microenvironment, induced by hypovascular system in pancreatic tumors, further exacerbates the high rate of metastasis and drug resistance in pancreatic cancer therapy (6).

Due to the complexity of pancreatic cancer, a single drug targeting a particular oncogene is unlikely to be entirely effective for pancreatic cancer therapy. The ansamycin antibiotic geldanamycin provides new therapeutic schemes for pancreatic cancer by inhibiting the molecular chaperone function of heat-shock protein 90 (HSP90), which can downregulate multiple oncogenic proteins simultaneously via proteasomal degradation (7). Most of those proteins, such as hypoxia-inducible factor 1-α (HIF-1α), AKT, K-Ras, v-Src, Raf-1, Bcr-Abl, ErbB2, mutant P53, and EGFR (8), are involved in the regulatory pathways of pancreatic tumor development progress. Thus, HSP90 inhibitors might be able to provide more favorable strategies for pancreatic tumor therapy through simultaneously downregulated multiple targets, especially under hypoxia.

Geldanamycin and 17-AAG have been shown to have antitumor activity against breast cell culture and xenograft animal models. Geldanamycin derivative 17-(allylamino)-17-demethoxygeldanamycin (17-AAG) and 17-dimethylaminoethylamino-17-demethoxygeldanamycin (17-DMAG) was studied in clinical trials for melanoma, breast, and colon cancer (912). Currently, both 17-AAG and 17-DMAG are under clinical trials for solid tumors and leukemia in the National Institute of Health and our institution.6

However, two challenges still remain for these compounds: (1) Can HSP90 inhibitor be used for pancreatic cancer therapy? (2) Can HSP90 inhibitor be used as a stand-alone agent for cancer therapy, in which dose-limiting toxicity may still be a challenge? Combination with other therapeutic agents may provide benefit for its clinical use.

Inhibition of high-rate glycolysis under hypoxic conditions may provide a sensitization effect for cancer chemotherapy (1315). The hypoxic environment in solid tumors changes the energy metabolism pathway in cancers and correlates with overexpressed glucose transporters and high rates of glycolysis (16). This metabolism alteration is known as the Warburg effect and has been clinically applied to tumor imaging with positron emission tomography (PET; ref. 17). Cancer cells heavily rely on glucose transporters for glucose uptake and subsequent glycolysis through hexokinase and other glycolytic enzymes for their survival and proliferation. These characteristics are also associated with increased metastasis and poor survival rates in cancer patients (18). Thus, selective inhibition of glucose uptake and/or glycolysis rate in cancer cells provides another novel therapeutic target in pancreatic cancer.

In this study, we intend to test the synergistic effect of HSP90 inhibitors and glycolysis inhibitors in pancreatic cancer cells under hypoxia in vitro and xenograft models in vivo. We hypothesize that glycolysis inhibitors may block the energy production to sensitize anticancer efficacy of the HSP90 inhibitor. We first identified the anticancer efficacy of HSP90 inhibitors (geldanamycin) in human pancreatic cells (Panc-1, BxPC3, MiaPaCa-2) under a hypoxic environment. Then, we evaluated 3-bromopyruvate (3BrPA), a hexokinase II inhibitor as a sensitizer of HSP90 inhibition in pancreatic cancer cells in vitro. Finally, we investigated the synergistic effect of the HSP90 inhibitor and glycolysis inhibitor to target hypoxic cells in a xenograft pancreatic cancer model in vivo.

Cell cultures and reagents. Human pancreatic cancer cell lines MiaPaCa-2, BxPC3, and Panc-1 were cultured by 10% FBS RPMI-1640 or 10% FBS DMEM media at 37°C and 5% CO2. All the antibodies for Western blot analysis were from Cell Signaling Technology. The glycolysis inhibitor 3BrPA, proteasome inhibitors, MG132 and lactacystin were from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). The compound 3BrPA was dissolved in normal saline and neutralized to pH 7.4 with NaOH and further filtered through a 0.2-μm filter to prepare injectable solution for in vivo studies. HSP90 inhibitor, geldanamycin, was kindly provided by Dr. George Wang in the Department of Chemistry, Ohio State University. Geldanamycin was dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) for in vitro experiment, and geldanamycin was freshly prepared in 10% DMSO, 70% cremophor/ethanol (3:1), and 20% phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) for in vivo experiment. The animal study protocol was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee at Ohio State University.

Hypoxic environment. Hypoxic conditions were maintained with 1% O2, 5% CO2, and 94% N2 in a modular incubator chamber (Billupus-Rottemberg, Inc., Del Mar, CA). The hypoxic chamber was flushed with the hypoxic air for 15 minutes according to the protocol and was then reflushed every 8 hours. The hypoxia was further confirmed and monitored by the measurement of hypoxia-induced lactate production and intracellular HIF-1α protein levels.

Tetrazolium [3-(4,5-dimethythiazol-2-yl)]-5-(3-carboxymethoxy-phenyl)-2-(4-sulfophenyl)-2H-tetrazolium assay. The cytotoxicity of a single treatment or combination treatment was measured by tetrazolium [3-(4, 5-dimethythiazol-2-yl)]-5-(3-carboxymethoxy-phenyl)-2-(4-sulfophenyl)-2H-tetrazolium (MTS) assay (19). Briefly, a total of 2,000 to 5,000 cells were cultured in a 96-well plate for 24 hours. Glycolysis inhibitors (3BrPA, pH 7.0, 1-100 μmol/L) and chemotherapeutic drugs (daunorubicin or geldanamycin, 0.001-10 μmol/L) were added to the cell cultures. The cells were maintained at either a normoxia condition (5% CO2 and 95% air) or in a hypoxia chamber (1% O2 and 5% CO2, 94% N2). After 3 days, MTS (2 mg/mL) and phenazine methosulfate (25 μmol/L) were added directly to the cell culture and incubated for 2 hours at 37°C. The absorbance of formazan (the metabolite of MTS by viable cells) was measured at 490 nm to quantify the number of surviving cells. The IC50 values of the different treatments for cytotoxicity were calculated by WinNonlin software from the dose-response curves of percentage of cell growth versus drug concentration.

Western blot analysis. Cells were washed twice with PBS, collected in serum-free media, and lysed in cell lysis buffer (50 mmol/L pH 7.6 Tris-HCl, 250 mmol/L NaCl, 5 mmol/L EDTA, 2 mmol/L Na3VO4, 50 mmol/L NaF) with a 1% protease inhibitor cocktail (P8340, Sigma-Aldrich) for 30 minutes on ice and sonicated three times for 20 seconds. Human or mouse tissues were first homogenized in lysis buffer and then are subjected to the same process of cell lysate preparation. Supernatants were collected after 10 minutes centrifugation at 4°C. Protein concentration was determined using BCA protein assay methods (Pierce Biotechnology). The cell lysates were incubated with 2× SDS loading buffer and boiled for 5 minutes. Then, 30 μg of total protein was subjected to electrophoresis and separated in 10% SDS-polyacrylamide gels (Bio-Rad), transferred to nitrocellulose filters, probed with the antibodies of interest, and developed by enhanced chemiluminescence system ECL (Amersham Biosciences, Piscataway, NJ). The ECL signal was quantified using a scanner and a densitometry program (Scion Image, Scion, Frederick, MD).

Real-time PCR. Total cellular RNA was extracted and purified using the TRIzol reagent (Invitrogen). One μg of total RNA was used to transcribe the first-strand cDNA with SuperScript II reverse transcriptase (Invitrogen). The real-time PCR was completed on the ABI PRISM Sequence Detector 7000 (PerkinElmer, Branchburg, NJ) using Sequence Detector version 1.7 software (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA). SYBR Green PCR Master Mix was purchased from Applied Biosystems. Forward and reverse primers for targeted mRNA were designed using Primer Express version 1.0 software (ABI PRISM, PerkinElmer) based on the human HIF-1α, AKT or actin gene sequence. Fold change of mRNA level was calculated as follows: after completion of the PCR, the baselines and thresholds were set for both samples and internal beta-actin controls. Using Ct values (cycle number in which the sample crosses the threshold value) for samples (sam) and controls, the ΔCt was calculated: ΔCt = Ctsam − Ctactin. The values for each sample were then compared with the control sample (ctl): ΔΔCt = ΔCt sam − ΔCt ctl. The fold change of the mRNA level to the control is 2−ΔΔCt.

Measurement of intracellular ATP and lactate generation. The cellular ATP content was determined using a bioluminescence assay kit (Sigma-Aldrich). Briefly, 106 cells were treated with a different concentration of 3BrPA under either normoxic or hypoxic conditions. After the indicated times, cells were washed with PBS, lysed in 0.5% Triton X-100, 10 mmol/L Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 1 mM EDTA and incubated for 30 minutes on ice. After removal of cell debris, the total protein concentration was calculated, and 10 μL whole-cell lysate was subject to the luminescence kit. ATP content was measured with a luciferin/luciferase assay using a luminometer (model ML2200; Dynatech Deutschland GmbH, Denkendorf, Germany). At the same time, the medium was removed and saved for analysis of lactate generation using an Accutrend lactate analyzer according to the manufacturer's instructions (Roche). The ATP content was calculated using an internal standard, and the data were further normalized by total protein as concentration per microgram total proteins.

Xenograft models. The cancer cells (BxPC3 or Panc-1, 107 cells) in matrigel/medium (1:1, 200 μL) were injected subcutaneously into female Nu/Nu nude mice. Tumors were allowed to grow for 3 to 4 weeks. The tumor volumes were measured twice per week with calculated tumor volume [(W2 × L)/2]. When tumors reached 100 to 150 mm3, animals were randomized into different groups for single treatment or combination treatment with at least five mice per group. All compounds and placebo were freshly prepared and injected intraperitoneally twice per week for 3 weeks except the gemcitabine control group, which was injected three times per week. Tumor growth was measured once every 3 days after drug administration and normalized to the initial volumes.

Noninvasive in vivo tumor image by magnetic resonance imaging. At the end of the in vivo experiments, all mice were subjected to a 3-tesla clinical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) system (Achieva, Philips Medical Systems) for a noninvasive in vivo tumor image. The subjects were scanned in a prone position, using a dedicated mouse coil (Philips Research laboratory). High-quality T2-weighted axial and coronal images were obtained using a turbo spin echo sequence (TR/TE = 6,752/77 ms; field of view = 60 × 60 mm2; matrix = 512 × 512 with in-plane resolution 0.12 × 0.12 mm2; number of excitations = 1; 20 slices; 1-mm slice thickness; gap between slices = 0.3 mm). The image postprocessing and three-dimensional visualization were carried out using the MIPAV software package (20). The calculated tumor sizes were correlated to those measured in ex vivo volumes.

Evaluate the synergistic effect of combination treatment. The combination effect of HSP90 inhibitor and glycolysis inhibitor was determined by combination index (CIx) according to the literature (21): Cix = D1, comb/D1 + D2,comb/D2; in which D1 and D2 are drug concentration that produce x% of cell growth inhibition when used alone; D1, comb and D2, comb are drug concentrations that produce x% of effect when used in combination. The synergism, additivity, and antagonism of the combination effect will be shown when CIx is less than, equal to, or greater than 1, respectively.

Statistics. All experiments were performed independently at least three times. Means and standard deviations are plotted in curves and bar graphs. Statistical differences of the interested means were determined by the two-sided Mann-Whitney U or the Student t test, and values of P < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Geldanamycin exhibits better anticancer effect in pancreatic cancer cells through induction of more client protein degradation under hypoxia. To test whether geldanamycin can have a higher antipancreatic cancer effect in hypoxia than in normoxia, we tested cytotoxicity (MTS assay) of geldanamycin against human pancreatic cells (Panc-1, MiaPaCa-2, BxPC3) with different sensitivity to geldanamycin under a hypoxic environment in comparison with the normoxic condition. The cytotoxicity of the drugs was measured after 72 hours of incubation under a hypoxic chamber flushed with 1% O2, 5% CO2, and 94% N2. As shown in Table 1, under hypoxia, the IC50 for geldanamycin against pancreatic cancer cells (BxPC3, MiaPaca-2, Panc-1) decreased by six- to 11-fold (P < 0.001). A hypoxic condition significantly enhances the sensitivity of pancreatic cancer cells to geldanamycin. The drug resistance index ([RI] calculated by IC50 under hypoxia over IC50 under normoxia) showed the seven- to eightfold sensitization of pancreatic cancer cells to geldanamycin in hypoxia compared with normoxia.

Table 1.

IC50 of daunorubicin and geldanamycin in pancreatic cancer cells under normoxia and hypoxia

Human pancreatic cancer cell linesDaunorubicin
Geldanamycin
Normoxia IC50 (umol/L)Hypoxia IC50 (umol/L)RINormoxia IC50 (umol/L)Hypoxia IC50 (umol/L)RI
BxPC-3 0.33 ± 0.11 0.95 ± 0.13 2.89 ± 1.03 0.85 ± 0.12 0.13 ± 0.11 0.15 ± 0.13 
Panc-1 2.52 ± 0.32 7.74 ± 0.4 3.1 ± 0.42 >10 4.4 ± 2.2 <0.4 
MiaPaCa-2 0.016 ± 0.017 0.026 ± 0.016 1.63 ± 2.0 6.5 ± 3.5 0.71 ± 0.38 0.12 ± 0.08 
Human pancreatic cancer cell linesDaunorubicin
Geldanamycin
Normoxia IC50 (umol/L)Hypoxia IC50 (umol/L)RINormoxia IC50 (umol/L)Hypoxia IC50 (umol/L)RI
BxPC-3 0.33 ± 0.11 0.95 ± 0.13 2.89 ± 1.03 0.85 ± 0.12 0.13 ± 0.11 0.15 ± 0.13 
Panc-1 2.52 ± 0.32 7.74 ± 0.4 3.1 ± 0.42 >10 4.4 ± 2.2 <0.4 
MiaPaCa-2 0.016 ± 0.017 0.026 ± 0.016 1.63 ± 2.0 6.5 ± 3.5 0.71 ± 0.38 0.12 ± 0.08 

NOTE: The cytotoxicity of daunorubicin and geldanamycin under both normoxia and hypoxia were measured by MTS assay in three independent experiments with six replicates in each experiment. Relative cell viability was calculated by normalized intensity to nontreatment cell control under different drug concentrations after 72 h of incubation. IC50s were calculated by WinNonlin 5.0. RI induced by hypoxia was calculated as the ratio of IC50 under hypoxia and IC50 under normoxia.

The better anticancer activity of geldanamycin under hypoxia is very unique compared with other chemotherapeutic compounds. Normally, hypoxia will induce drug resistance to chemotherapy. For instance, anticancer activity of daunorubicin under hypoxia is decreased with a right-shifted cytotoxicity versus drug concentration curve. The IC50 of daunorubicin under hypoxia was increased by two- to fourfold compared with normoxia (5% CO2, 95% air; Table 1).

Because HIF-1α is a major regulator for cancer cell survival under hypoxia, and HIF-1α is an HSP90 client protein, we intend to test the hypothesis that high sensitivity of geldanamycin in hypoxia is due to the induction of HIF-1α degradation. Under hypoxia, HIF-1α is overexpressed to promote the cancer cell proliferation and survival (i.e., cancer cells are more heavily relied on by HIF-1α for their survival under hypoxia than under normoxia). Through inhibition of HSP90, geldanamycin would enhance the ubiquitination and proteasomal degradation of premature client proteins in cancer cells including HIF-1α and other downstream proteins stimulated by hypoxia. Our data showed that HIF-1α expression is significantly increased by 11-fold to promote cancer cell survival when the cells were in hypoxia for 2 to 24 hours (Fig. 1A). Geldanamycin (1-5 μmol/L) inhibits HSP90 and induces HIF-1α degradation by 60% after 16 hours of incubation in hypoxia to show high anticancer sensitivity (Fig. 1A). To further confirm if geldanamycin inhibits HSP90 to degrade other client protein degradation under hypoxia, we also tested total AKT levels in pancreatic cancer cells (Panc-1 and BxPc-3). Similar to HIF-1α, total AKT levels were also degraded more significantly by geldanamycin under hypoxia (by 40%-70%) than under normoxia (by 20%-30%; Fig. 1B).

Fig. 1.

Hypoxia increases geldanamycin-induced HSP90 client protein degradation in pancreatic cancer cells. One million cells were treated with the desired concentration of geldanamycin and exposed under hypoxic environment for 0 to 24 h. HIF-1α, AKT, HSP90, and actin expression level were analyzed by Western blots. The protein levels were normalized by beta-actin and compared with the control group. A, time course of 10-umol/L geldanamycin-induced HIF-1α degradation of Panc-1 cells under hypoxia. B, geldanamycin-induced AKT degradation of BxPC3 cells and Panc-1 cells under hypoxia. C, geldanamycin-induced protein degradation was recovered by proteasome inhibitors in BxPC3 cells. Left, mRNA levels of AKT or HIF-1α after 10 umol/L geldanamycin treatment. Right, One representative of Western blots.

Fig. 1.

Hypoxia increases geldanamycin-induced HSP90 client protein degradation in pancreatic cancer cells. One million cells were treated with the desired concentration of geldanamycin and exposed under hypoxic environment for 0 to 24 h. HIF-1α, AKT, HSP90, and actin expression level were analyzed by Western blots. The protein levels were normalized by beta-actin and compared with the control group. A, time course of 10-umol/L geldanamycin-induced HIF-1α degradation of Panc-1 cells under hypoxia. B, geldanamycin-induced AKT degradation of BxPC3 cells and Panc-1 cells under hypoxia. C, geldanamycin-induced protein degradation was recovered by proteasome inhibitors in BxPC3 cells. Left, mRNA levels of AKT or HIF-1α after 10 umol/L geldanamycin treatment. Right, One representative of Western blots.

Close modal

To confirm that the anticancer effect of geldanamycin is through client protein degradation rather than decreasing the transcription of mRNA, we have performed real-time PCR to measure the mRNA level of client protein (e.g., HIF-1α and AKT). The data showed that geldanamycin treatment did not decrease mRNA levels of both HIF-1α and AKT. To further validate that the geldanamycin-induced client protein degradation is through proteasomal pathway, we combined geldanamycin with proteasome inhibitor MG 132 or lactacystin in the treatment of cancer cells (22, 23).The data showed that proteasome inhibitors (MG 132 or lactacystin) reversed the geldanamycin-induced degradation of HSP90 client proteins from 50% to 80% to 120% (Fig. 1C). These data suggest that geldanamycin-induced HSP90 client protein degradation is through proteasomal pathway, and geldanamcyin offers advantages in the treatment of hypoxic solid pancreatic tumors.

Glycolysis inhibitor inhibits lactate production and intracellular ATP level in pancreatic cancer cells under hypoxia. Human pancreatic tumors exhibit increased glycolysis rates and use this metabolic pathway for generation of ATP as an energy source. The high rate of glycolysis in pancreatic cancer has been clinically used in PET scanning for tumor imaging and detection in patients (date not shown). In order to show whether glycolysis inhibitors can reduce the glycolysis and the intracellular ATP level in pancreatic cancer cells, the HKII inhibitor 3BrPA was incubated with human pancreatic cancer cells in vitro under hypoxic and normoxic conditions. Both lactate production and intracellular ATP level were measured after 24 hours of incubation of different concentrations of 3BrPA treatment. As Fig. 2A shows, lactate production was threefold higher in the hypoxic condition, which is due to the higher glycolysis rate under hypoxia compared with normoxia. Accordingly, in order to adapt to the hypoxic environment, the intracellular ATP level was increased 40% to maintain the cancer cell growth rate under hypoxia (Fig. 2B). Fifty to 70 μmol/L 3BrPA can inhibit the hypoxia-induced lactate production and intracellular ATP level in this in vitro hypoxic system (Fig. 2A and B). Meanwhile, the same concentration of 3BrPA did not change the metabolism and intracellular ATP level under normoxia. These data suggest that 3BrPA showed the preferential inhibition of the high rate of glycolysis under hypoxia compared with normoxia. The IC50s of 3BrPA in pancreatic cancer cells were 80 to 90 μmol/L as tested in MTS assay (Table 2) and showed similar cytotoxicity in both hypoxia and normoxia. An optimal concentration (50∼70 μm) was selected to inhibit the intracellular ATP level in only hypoxia and exhibit 20% cell cytotoxicity only in hypoxia.

Fig. 2.

Selective inhibition of glycolytic rate by 3BrPA in pancreatic cancer cells under hypoxia sensitizes pancreatic cancer cells to geldanamycin. A, dose dependence of 3BrPA for selective inhibition of lactate generation in hypoxia and normoxia. Three independent experiments were performed. In each experiment, 1 million cells were seeded in 10-mL fresh medium and, after 24 h of incubation under normoxia or hypoxia, medium were collected, and lactate concentration was analyzed by Accutrend lactate analyzer with duplicates. B, dose dependence of 3BrPA for selective inhibition of intracellular ATP level in hypoxia and normoxia. Three independent experiments were performed. In each experiment, 1 million cells were seeded in 10-mL fresh medium and, after 24 h of incubation under normoxia or hypoxia, cell pellets were collected, and 10-μL whole-cell lysate was subject to the ATP luciferin/luciferase assay kit. The final ATP content was calculated using an internal standard, and the data were further normalized by total protein as concentration per microgram total proteins. C, the cytotoxicity of single geldanamycin treatment or combined with 50 umol/L 3BrPA treatment under normoxia or hypoxic environment in BxPC3 cells. Relative cell viability was calculated by normalized intensity to nontreatment cell control under different drug concentrations after 72 h of incubation. The MTS assays of single or combination treatment were performed in three independent experiments with six replicates in each individual experiment. IC50s in each experiment were calculated. The means and SD were used to calculate the synergistic effect in Table 2. *P value of the difference of IC50s between combination treatment and single treatment under hypoxia. D, synergistic AKT degradation was induced by combination treatment of geldanamycin and 3BrPA under hypoxia in pancreatic cancer cells. One million cells were treated with the desired concentration of geldanamycin single treatment or combined with 3BrPA treatment and exposed under hypoxic environment for 24 h. AKT, HSP90, and actin expression level were analyzed by Western blots. The protein levels were normalized by beta-actin and compared with the control group.

Fig. 2.

Selective inhibition of glycolytic rate by 3BrPA in pancreatic cancer cells under hypoxia sensitizes pancreatic cancer cells to geldanamycin. A, dose dependence of 3BrPA for selective inhibition of lactate generation in hypoxia and normoxia. Three independent experiments were performed. In each experiment, 1 million cells were seeded in 10-mL fresh medium and, after 24 h of incubation under normoxia or hypoxia, medium were collected, and lactate concentration was analyzed by Accutrend lactate analyzer with duplicates. B, dose dependence of 3BrPA for selective inhibition of intracellular ATP level in hypoxia and normoxia. Three independent experiments were performed. In each experiment, 1 million cells were seeded in 10-mL fresh medium and, after 24 h of incubation under normoxia or hypoxia, cell pellets were collected, and 10-μL whole-cell lysate was subject to the ATP luciferin/luciferase assay kit. The final ATP content was calculated using an internal standard, and the data were further normalized by total protein as concentration per microgram total proteins. C, the cytotoxicity of single geldanamycin treatment or combined with 50 umol/L 3BrPA treatment under normoxia or hypoxic environment in BxPC3 cells. Relative cell viability was calculated by normalized intensity to nontreatment cell control under different drug concentrations after 72 h of incubation. The MTS assays of single or combination treatment were performed in three independent experiments with six replicates in each individual experiment. IC50s in each experiment were calculated. The means and SD were used to calculate the synergistic effect in Table 2. *P value of the difference of IC50s between combination treatment and single treatment under hypoxia. D, synergistic AKT degradation was induced by combination treatment of geldanamycin and 3BrPA under hypoxia in pancreatic cancer cells. One million cells were treated with the desired concentration of geldanamycin single treatment or combined with 3BrPA treatment and exposed under hypoxic environment for 24 h. AKT, HSP90, and actin expression level were analyzed by Western blots. The protein levels were normalized by beta-actin and compared with the control group.

Close modal
Table 2.

Synergy between 3BrPA and geldanamycin in pancreatic cancer cells under normoxia and hypoxia in three independent experiments

CellsConditionEffectIC50 or IC70 of 3BrPA alone (umol/L)IC50 or IC70 of geldanamycin alone (umol/L)IC50 or IC70 of geldanamycin when combined with 50 umol/L PA (umol/L)Combination index
BxPC-3 Normoxia 50% 86.3 ± 6.4 0.85 ± 0.12 0.24 ± 0.13 0.86 ± 0.16 
  70% 190 ± 11 2.12 ± 0.4 1.2 ± 0.3 0.82 ± 0.17 
 Hypoxia 50% 90.5 ± 6.7 0.34 ± 0.11 0.02 ± 0.02 0.68 ± 0.07 
  70% 131 ± 8.9 0.76 ± 0.12 0.37 ± 0.1 0.86 ± 0.15 
Panc-1 Normoxia 50% 79.2 ± 6.3 >10 0.021 ± 0.04 <0.64 
  70% 93.1 ± 5.8 >50 0.76 ± 0.23 <0.55 
 Hypoxia 50% 76.7 ± 6.8 4.43 ± 2.2 0.007 ± 0.001 0.65 ± 0.05 
  70% 109 ± 8.5 >15 0.34 ± 0.12 <0.48 
CellsConditionEffectIC50 or IC70 of 3BrPA alone (umol/L)IC50 or IC70 of geldanamycin alone (umol/L)IC50 or IC70 of geldanamycin when combined with 50 umol/L PA (umol/L)Combination index
BxPC-3 Normoxia 50% 86.3 ± 6.4 0.85 ± 0.12 0.24 ± 0.13 0.86 ± 0.16 
  70% 190 ± 11 2.12 ± 0.4 1.2 ± 0.3 0.82 ± 0.17 
 Hypoxia 50% 90.5 ± 6.7 0.34 ± 0.11 0.02 ± 0.02 0.68 ± 0.07 
  70% 131 ± 8.9 0.76 ± 0.12 0.37 ± 0.1 0.86 ± 0.15 
Panc-1 Normoxia 50% 79.2 ± 6.3 >10 0.021 ± 0.04 <0.64 
  70% 93.1 ± 5.8 >50 0.76 ± 0.23 <0.55 
 Hypoxia 50% 76.7 ± 6.8 4.43 ± 2.2 0.007 ± 0.001 0.65 ± 0.05 
  70% 109 ± 8.5 >15 0.34 ± 0.12 <0.48 

NOTE: The cytotoxicity of a single geldanamycin treatment or combined with 50 umol/L 3BrPA treatment under normoxia or hypoxic environment was measured by MTS assay. Relative cell viability was calculated by normalized intensity to nontreatment cell control under different drug concentrations after 72 h of incubation. IC50s or IC70s were calculated by WinNonlin 5.0 in each experiment.

HSP90 inhibitor and glycolysis inhibitor simultaneously target hypoxic pancreatic cancer cells for synergistic anticancer effect. In order to confirm the synergistic anticancer effect of the combination treatment of the HSP90 inhibitor and glycolysis inhibitor in pancreatic cancer cells, 3BrPA and geldanamycin were combined to treat Panc-1 and BxPC3 cells under either normoxia or hypoxia conditions. The concentration of 3BrPA was chosen at 50 μmol/L at which showed no cell killing effects in normoxia but selectively inhibited 50% of the lactate production and intracellular ATP level in a hypoxic environment. As shown in Fig. 2C, the combination of geldanamycin and 3BrPA showed a significant synergistic effect under hypoxia compared with normoxia. Under hypoxia, the IC50 of geldanamycin in the combination treatment of 3BrPA and geldanamycin was 17-fold lower than the IC50 of geldanamycin alone in BxPC3 cells and more than 400-fold lower in Panc-1 cells. In contrast, under normoxia, the IC50 of geldanamycin in the combination of geldanamycin and 3BrPA is threefold lower than that of geldanamycin alone (Table 2). In order to evaluate the synergism of combination, the combination index of different treatments to reach both 50% cell killing and 70% cell killing were calculated. Combination index values less than 1.0 indicate the synergy between 3BrPA and geldanamycin.

To further study the mechanism of synergism in the combination of geldanamycin and 3BrPA, we evaluated the degradation of HSP90 client proteins using Western blots under both hypoxia and normoxia conditions. As illustrated in Fig. 2D, combination of geldanamycin and 3BrPA (30-50 μmol/L) treatment significantly induced AKT degradation in both BxPC3 and Panc-1 cells by 2.5- to threefold higher compared with geldanamycin treatment alone. In contrast, 3BrPA alone did not show a significant effect (<25%) on the degradation of AKT. These data suggest that the synergism of geldanamycin and 3BrPA in the combination treatment is due to increased degradation of HSP90 client proteins.

Combination of geldanamycin and 3BrPA exhibits anticancer activity in a xenograft model of pancreatic cancer. To confirm the synergistic anticancer activity of combination treatment of geldanamycin and 3BrPA in vivo, we tested the combination efficacy in a xenograft model with human pancreatic cancer cells (Panc-1, BxPC3). According to in vitro cytotoxicity of geldanamycin in our MTS assays, Panc-1 and BxPC3 cell lines showed different sensitivity to geldanamycin. It has been reported in the literature that geldanamycin (5-100 mg/kg) and 3BrPA (1 mL × 2 mmol/L intratumor injection) showed anticancer activity against various cancers with a high dose (13, 2431). In order to reduce their toxicity and examine the synergistic effect of geldanamycin and 3BrPA, we selected a very small dose of both geldanamycin and 3-BrPA to have minimal effects when they are used alone. We used 2 mg/kg geldanamycin and 2 mg/kg 3BrPA in a BxPC3 xenograft model, twice per week for 3 weeks. In addition, we used 5 mg/kg geldanamycin and 5 mg/kg 3BrPA in Panc-1 xenograft models with the same dose regimen. In both models, we used gemcitabine as the control because it is currently used as first-line therapy for human pancreatic cancer, which was given three times per week for 3 weeks with a dose of 125 mg/kg. The tumor growth rates (tumor size after treatment vs before treatment) were compared among different treatment groups. When tumor sizes reached 800 mm3, the mice were removed from the treatment groups, and the time was recorded and plotted in a survival rate curve to further confirm the antitumor effect.

As shown in Fig. 3A and B, average tumor sizes in the control group were about fivefold bigger than the initial sizes in the BxPC3 tumors at 58 days after the implant of cancer cells and approximately threefold larger in Panc-1 tumors at 75 days after implant. Interestingly, neither single treatment with the gemcitabine, geldanamycin, or 3BrPA had minimal effects, if any, on tumor growth compared with the control groups. However, combination treatments with geldanamycin and 3BrPA in both models showed 75% inhibition of the tumor growth.

Fig. 3.

Synergistic antitumor effect of geldanamycin and 3BrPA in xenograft pancreatic cancer models. 107 BxPC3 or Panc-1 cells were injected subcutaneously into female Nu/Nu nude mice. When tumors reach 100 to 150 mm3, animals were randomized into different groups with five mice in each group for single treatment or combination treatment. The desired dose of single treatment or combination treatment was freshly prepared and injected intraperitoneally twice per week for 3 wk, except the gemcitabine control group, which was injected three times per week. The relative tumor sizes were plotted. Statistical analysis of the differences of average tumor sizes in the control or single treatment group and the combination group with geldanamycin and 3BrPA was performed using the two-sided Student t test. P values in BxPC3 xenograft tumors <0.001; P values in Panc-1 xenograft tumors <0.001. A, tumor growth curves of different treatments in BxPC3 xenograft model. B, tumor growth curves of different treatments in Panc-1 xenograft model. C, the relative tumor growth rate to reach 800 mm3 with different groups in the BxPC3 model. Statistical analysis of the differences median date in control, single treatment group, and combination treatment group was performed using the two-sided Student t test. P < 0.001.

Fig. 3.

Synergistic antitumor effect of geldanamycin and 3BrPA in xenograft pancreatic cancer models. 107 BxPC3 or Panc-1 cells were injected subcutaneously into female Nu/Nu nude mice. When tumors reach 100 to 150 mm3, animals were randomized into different groups with five mice in each group for single treatment or combination treatment. The desired dose of single treatment or combination treatment was freshly prepared and injected intraperitoneally twice per week for 3 wk, except the gemcitabine control group, which was injected three times per week. The relative tumor sizes were plotted. Statistical analysis of the differences of average tumor sizes in the control or single treatment group and the combination group with geldanamycin and 3BrPA was performed using the two-sided Student t test. P values in BxPC3 xenograft tumors <0.001; P values in Panc-1 xenograft tumors <0.001. A, tumor growth curves of different treatments in BxPC3 xenograft model. B, tumor growth curves of different treatments in Panc-1 xenograft model. C, the relative tumor growth rate to reach 800 mm3 with different groups in the BxPC3 model. Statistical analysis of the differences median date in control, single treatment group, and combination treatment group was performed using the two-sided Student t test. P < 0.001.

Close modal

The time for tumor sizes to reach 800 mm3 in different groups in the BxPC3 model was plotted in survival rate curves. As shown in Fig. 3C, the median survival rate in the combination treatment group was significantly increased to more than 70 days (40% increase vs control; P < 0.001; Fig. 3C), whereas the median survival rate in either control group or single treatment group was approximately 50 days.

In addition, we also used noninvasive MRI to monitor tumor growth in BxPC3 xenograft tumors after drug treatment (Fig. 4) at the end of the experiments. As seen in Fig. 4, the tumor sizes increased from 765 ± 211 mm3 to 1560 ± 310 mm3 in either single treatment group or control groups, while the combination treatment with geldanamycin and 3-BrPA significantly inhibited the tumor growth with tumor sizes of 301 ± 228 mm3 (P < 0.05). These results suggest that simultaneous inhibition of HSP90 and glycolysis achieves synergistic antitumor effect in a xenograft model in vivo.

Fig. 4.

Noninvasive MR imaging of xenograft tumors. At the end of the in vivo experiments, all the mice were imaged in a 3-tesla clinical MRI system for a whole-body noninvasive tumor assessment. Coronal slice through the largest contour of the tumors (left) and three-dimensional reconstruction (right) of a mouse in different treatment group. A, control group. The MRI tumor volume is 1279 mm3 for the tumor in red and 984 mm3 for the tumor in yellow. B, 3BrPA group. The MRI tumor volume is 594 mm3 for the tumor in red and 701 mm3 for the tumor in yellow. C, geldanamycin group. The MRI tumor volume is 1393 mm3 for the tumor in red and 1918 mm3 for the tumor in yellow. D, 3BrPA + geldanamycin group. The MRI tumor volume is 118 mm3 for the tumor in red and 126 mm3 for the tumor in yellow.

Fig. 4.

Noninvasive MR imaging of xenograft tumors. At the end of the in vivo experiments, all the mice were imaged in a 3-tesla clinical MRI system for a whole-body noninvasive tumor assessment. Coronal slice through the largest contour of the tumors (left) and three-dimensional reconstruction (right) of a mouse in different treatment group. A, control group. The MRI tumor volume is 1279 mm3 for the tumor in red and 984 mm3 for the tumor in yellow. B, 3BrPA group. The MRI tumor volume is 594 mm3 for the tumor in red and 701 mm3 for the tumor in yellow. C, geldanamycin group. The MRI tumor volume is 1393 mm3 for the tumor in red and 1918 mm3 for the tumor in yellow. D, 3BrPA + geldanamycin group. The MRI tumor volume is 118 mm3 for the tumor in red and 126 mm3 for the tumor in yellow.

Close modal

Pancreatic cancer is a malignancy with a worldwide incidence of more than 200,000 cases and almost as many deaths every year. Currently, no effective treatment has been developed for this disease. Recent clinical trials have compared gemcitabine as a single agent to combination chemotherapy with one or several other cytotoxic or targeted agents for pancreatic cancers (2, 3, 3237). However, no statistically significant difference in median survival has been achieved in these combination therapies. In this article, we reported a new strategy for pancreatic cancer therapy by simultaneously targeting the hypoxic cancer cells with HSP90 inhibitor and glycolysis inhibitors in both in vitro and preclinical in vivo animal models.

The antitumor potential of geldanamycin has long been recognized, however, clinical evaluation of geldanamycin has not been pursued due to its severe dose-related toxicity and poor water solubility. For this reason, efforts have been made to modify geldanamycin, generating a number of analogues in attempts to increase clinical efficacy and water solubility and decrease toxicity. Among the successful analogues is 17-allylaminogeldanamycin (17-AAG), which is currently in phase II clinical trials for breast cancer therapy at the National Cancer Institute (1012). However, 17-AAG still has low water solubility. To overcome this problem, another geldanamycin derivative, 17-DMAG, with high water solubility was also developed (38). Although 17-AAG showed improved efficacy and relatively low toxicity, it appears that the dose-limiting toxicity may be still limiting factors for its clinical application.

HSP90 inhibitors have not been tested in pancreatic cancer, and it is not known if they can be used as a stand-alone agent for pancreatic cancer therapy. In this study, we first showed that geldanamycin has a more potent effect against pancreatic cancer under hypoxia by inhibiting the molecular chaperone HSP90 and simultaneously downregulating multiple oncogenic protein targets. Cancer cells highly depend on the function of HSP90 to modulate the folding and assembly of oncogenic proteins including AKT, v-Src, Raf-1, Bcr-Abl, ErbB2, mutant P53, and HIF-1α (39, 40). Geldanamycin binds to the conserved ATP binding pocket at the N-terminus of HSP90 (41), inhibits ATP-dependent chaperone activity (42), enhances ubiquitination and proteasomal degradation of premature client proteins, and therefore exhibits potent anticancer activity (23, 43). Elevated AKT activation has been detected in cancer cells to promote cancer cell survival (44). Geldanamycin induces AKT degradation (45) and shows promising anticancer effects on AKT overexpressing cancer cells. Furthermore, under hypoxic conditions, HIF-1α is dramatically overexpressed 13-fold in pancreatic tumors compared with normal pancreas and correlates with metastasis of pancreatic cancer (46). HIF-1α–regulated pathways further exacerbate the resistance to chemotherapy (5, 6, 4648). In pancreatic cancer cells, geldanamycin shows seven- to eightfold higher cytotoxicity in a hypoxic environment (Table 1) through HIF-1α and AKT degradation (Fig. 1A and B) compared with normoxic conditions. All three pancreatic cell lines show the higher sensitivity to geldanamycin under hypoxia than in normoxia, which is different from other chemotherapeutic agents. These data suggest that HSP90 inhibition would have advantages against pancreatic cancer especially under hypoxia through multiple targets (Fig. 1).

To explore the sensitization strategy for HSP90 inhibitor against pancreatic cancer, we used a combination of HSP90 inhibitor and glycolysis inhibitor in comparison with a single agent alone. An elevated glycolysis rate and the expression of the glycolytic enzymes such as hexokinases in pancreatic tumors has been observed (49), which is consistently confirmed by PET imaging in pancreatic cancer patients (50, 51). These characteristics are also associated with increased metastasis and poor survival rates in cancer patients (18). Our data together with other reports suggest that pancreatic cancer relies on high-rate glycolysis for its survival. It has been reported that HKII inhibitor 3BrPA can reverse the drug resistance induced by high-rate glycolysis in mitochondrial defect cells C6F via the dephosphorylation of BAD and translocation of BAX to mitochondria (13). Other clinical trials have shown the feasibility and safety of combination effects of a glycolysis inhibitor (2-deoxyglucose) and docetaxel or radiation therapy in patients with solid tumors (2931). Our previous studies also showed that blocking the glucose transporter by phloretine synergistically increased daunorubicin-induced cytotoxicity and apoptosis in drug-resistant cancer cells (K562/Dox) under hypoxia (19). In the current study, the glycolysis inhibitor 3BrPA inhibited both the elevated glycolysis and intracellular ATP level induced by a hypoxic environment (Fig. 2A and B) without affecting the glucose metabolism and intracellular ATP level under normoxia. These data suggest that 3BrPA provides the preferential selectivity for the inhibition of the high rate of glycolysis in pancreatic cancer cells under hypoxia.

The dependency on high rates of glycolysis in cancer can be attributed to either injury of mitochondrial respiration associated with mitochondrial DNA mutations and oncogenic transformation and/or hypoxic stimuli in the tumor tissues (53). In contrast, normal cells with competent mitochondria can generate ATP efficiently through oxidative phosphorylation and can also use alternate energy sources such as amino acids and fatty acids when glycolysis is inhibited. This metabolic adaptation and the different energy metabolism render the cancers dependent on glycolysis to meet their energy requirements, which provide a biochemical basis to preferentially kill cancer cells or sensitize cancer cells to chemotherapeutic drugs under hypoxic conditions.

Therefore, we hypothesized that a combination treatment of pancreatic cancer cells with HSP90 inhibitors and glycolysis inhibitors will provide a synergistic antipancreatic effect, which will benefit to enhance the in vivo therapeutic efficacy and reduce dose-limiting geldanamycin toxicity in pancreatic tumors. In order to show the optimal actions of combined treatment of 3BrPA and geldanamycin, the concentration of 3BrPA in the in vitro studies was chosen through the selective inhibition of the glycolysis rate in cancer cells under hypoxia but not under normoxia (Fig. 2A and B). In vitro treatment of different pancreatic cancer cell lines with both 3BrPA and geldanamycin under hypoxia showed greater efficacy than selective inhibition of high glycolysis rate by 3BrPA alone or geldanamycin alone in pancreatic cancer cells. The antitumor activity of the combination of geldanamycin and 3-BrPA was enhanced by 17-fold in BxPC3 and more than 400-fold in Panc-1 cells compared with single treatment alone (Fig. 2C, Table 2).

Although it is challenging to determine the optimal dose of 3BrPA to selectively inhibit the glycolysis rate in in vivo xenograft tumors, it is predictable that there is more severe hypoxic environment in the solid xenograft tumors. Previous study has been reported to successfully use 3BrPA as an ATP depletion agent to eradicate advanced solid tumors in an in vivo animal model of hepatocellular cancers via a high dose of local injection (24). In our in vivo studies, we selected the drug administration by IP injection and reduced the doses to safety windows with both geldanamycin and 3BrPA. The dose selection was aimed to maximize the synergistic antitumor effect as well as to control the dose in safety windows in vivo for the combination treatment. Two pancreatic cancer cell lines with different in vitro sensitivity to geldanamycin were used in the xenograft models in this dose regimen. A synergistic inhibition on solid tumor growth in both pancreatic cancer xenograft models was observed in the combination treatment groups, while no effect was observed in the single treatment groups with reduced doses (Fig. 3). The synergistic antitumor effect of geldanamycin and 3-BrPA was further confirmed in vivo by the noninvasive MRI tumor images (Fig. 4). These data suggest that the combination treatment of HSP90 inhibitor and glycolysis inhibitor provides a novel therapeutic regimen to treat pancreatic cancers. In summary, combination of HSP90 inhibitors and glycolysis inhibitors provides preferential inhibition of high glycolysis rate and HSP90 client protein degradation under hypoxia. The synergistic effects of HSP90 inhibitors and glycolysis inhibitors will be beneficial to increase anticancer activity and to overcome drug resistance in pancreatic cancer therapy. Combination of HSP90 inhibitors and glycolysis inhibitors may also decrease the effective dose for both drugs and reduce dose-limiting toxicity. However, it is important to note that extensive pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic testing and simulation are warranted to optimize the dose regimen before the application of this strategy in patients with clinical pancreatic cancer.

Grant support: Ohio Cancer Research Associates and the PhRMA Foundation (D. Sun).

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

1
Bardeesy N, DePinho RA. Pancreatic cancer biology and genetics.
Nat Rev Cancer
2002
;
2
:
897
–909.
2
Kindler HL, Friberg G, Singh DA, et al. Phase II trial of bevacizumab plus gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.
J Clin Oncol
2005
;
23
:
8033
–40.
3
Xiong HQ, Rosenberg A, LoBuglio A, et al. Cetuximab, a monoclonal antibody targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor, in combination with gemcitabine for advanced pancreatic cancer: a multicenter phase II Trial.
J Clin Oncol
2004
;
22
:
2610
–6.
4
Di Costanzo F, Carlini P, Doni L, et al. Gemcitabine with or without continuous infusion 5-FU in advanced pancreatic cancer: a randomised phase II trial of the Italian oncology group for clinical research (GOIRC).
Br J Cancer
2005
;
93
:
185
–9.
5
Buchler P, Reber HA, Buchler M, et al. Hypoxia-inducible factor 1 regulates vascular endothelial growth factor expression in human pancreatic cancer.
Pancreas
2003
;
26
:
56
–64.
6
Mizuno T, Nagao M, Yamada Y, et al. Small interfering RNA expression vector targeting hypoxia-inducible factor 1 alpha inhibits tumor growth in hepatobiliary and pancreatic cancers.
Cancer Gene Ther
2006
;
13
:
131
–40.
7
Workman P. Altered states: selectively drugging the Hsp90 cancer chaperone.
Trends Mol Med
2004
;
10
:
47
–51.
8
Kamal A, Thao L, Sensintaffar J, et al. A high-affinity conformation of Hsp90 confers tumour selectivity on Hsp90 inhibitors.
Nature
2003
;
425
:
407
–10.
9
Ivy PS, Schoenfeldt M. Clinical trials referral resource. Current clinical trials of 17-AG and 17-DMAG.
Oncology (Huntingt)
2004
;
18
:
610
, 5, 9–20.
10
Munster PN, Basso A, Solit D, Norton L, Rosen N. Modulation of Hsp90 function by ansamycins sensitizes breast cancer cells to chemotherapy-induced apoptosis in an RB- and schedule-dependent manner. See Sausville EA. Combining cytotoxics and 17-allylamino, 17-demethoxygeldanamycin: sequence and tumor biology matters, Clin Cancer Res 7: 2155–58, 2001.
Clin Cancer Res
2001
;
7
:
2228
–36.
11
Goetz MP, Toft D, Reid J, et al. Phase I trial of 17-allylamino-17-demethoxygeldanamycin in patients with advanced cancer.
J Clin Oncol
2005
;
23
:
1078
–87.
12
Ronnen EA, Kondagunta GV, Ishill N, et al. A phase II trial of 17-(Allylamino)-17-demethoxygeldanamycin in patients with papillary and clear cell renal cell carcinoma.
Invest New Drugs
2006
;
24
:
543
–6.
13
Xu RH, Pelicano H, Zhou Y, et al. Inhibition of glycolysis in cancer cells: a novel strategy to overcome drug resistance associated with mitochondrial respiratory defect and hypoxia.
Cancer Res
2005
;
65
:
613
–21.
14
Xu RH, Pelicano H, Zhang H, et al. Synergistic effect of targeting mTOR by rapamycin and depleting ATP by inhibition of glycolysis in lymphoma and leukemia cells.
Leukemia
2005
;
19
:
2153
–8.
15
Pelicano H, Martin DS, Xu RH, Huang P. Glycolysis inhibition for anticancer treatment.
Oncogene
2006
;
25
:
4633
–46.
16
Warburg O. On the origin of cancer cells.
Science
1956
;
123
:
309
–14.
17
Gambhir SS. Molecular imaging of cancer with positron emission tomography.
Nat Rev Cancer
2002
;
2
:
683
–93.
18
Hockel M, Schlenger K, Hockel S, Vaupel P. Hypoxic cervical cancers with low apoptotic index are highly aggressive.
Cancer Res
1999
;
59
:
4525
–8.
19
Cao X, Fang L, Gibbs S, et al. Glucose uptake inhibitor sensitizes cancer cells to daunorubicin and overcomes drug resistance in hypoxia.
Cancer Chemother Pharmacol
2007
;
59
:
595
–05.
20
Jia G, Baudendistel KT, von Tengg-Kobligk H, et al. Assessing prostate volume by magnetic resonance imaging: a comparison of different measurement approaches for organ volume analysis.
Invest Radiol
2005
;
40
:
243
–8.
21
Zhao L, Wientjes MG, Au JL. Evaluation of combination chemotherapy: integration of nonlinear regression, curve shift, isobologram, and combination index analyses.
Clin Cancer Res
2004
;
10
:
7994
–8004.
22
Mabjeesh NJ, Post DE, Willard MT, et al. Geldanamycin induces degradation of hypoxia-inducible factor 1alpha protein via the proteosome pathway in prostate cancer cells.
Cancer Res
2002
;
62
:
2478
–82.
23
Mimnaugh EG, Chavany C, Neckers L. Polyubiquitination and proteasomal degradation of the p185c-erbB-2 receptor protein-tyrosine kinase induced by geldanamycin.
J Biol Chem
1996
;
271
:
22796
–801.
24
Ko YH, Smith BL, Wang Y, et al. Advanced cancers: eradication in all cases using 3-bromopyruvate therapy to deplete ATP.
Biochem Biophys Res Commun
2004
;
324
:
269
–75.
25
Lin CC, Tu CF, Yen MC, et al. Inhibitor of heat-shock protein 90 enhances the antitumor effect of DNA vaccine targeting clients of heat-shock protein.
Mol Ther
2007
;
15
:
404
–10.
26
Schnur RC, Corman ML, Gallaschun RJ, et al. Inhibition of the oncogene product p185erbB-2 in vitro and in vivo by geldanamycin and dihydrogeldanamycin derivatives.
J Med Chem
1995
;
38
:
3806
–12.
27
Smith NF, Hayes A, Nutley BP, Raynaud FI, Workman P. Evaluation of the cassette dosing approach for assessing the pharmacokinetics of geldanamycin analogues in mice.
Cancer Chemother Pharmacol
2004
;
54
:
475
–86.
28
Lang SA, Klein D, Moser C, et al. Inhibition of heat shock protein 90 impairs epidermal growth factor-mediated signaling in gastric cancer cells and reduces tumor growth and vascularization in vivo.
Mol Cancer Ther
2007
;
6
:
1123
–32.
29
Mohanti BK, Rath GK, Anantha N, et al. Improving cancer radiotherapy with 2-deoxy-D-glucose: phase I/II clinical trials on human cerebral gliomas.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
1996
;
35
:
103
–11.
30
Maher JC, Wangpaichitr M, Savaraj N, Kurtoglu M, Lampidis TJ. Hypoxia-inducible factor-1 confers resistance to the glycolytic inhibitor 2-deoxy-D-glucose.
Mol Cancer Ther
2007
;
6
:
732
–41.
31
Raez LE, Rosenblatt J, Schlesslman J, et al. Combing glycolytic inhibitors with chemotherapy: phase I trial of 2-deoxyglucose and docetaxel in patients with solid tumors.
J Clin Oncol
2005
;
23
Suppl 16:
s3190
.
32
Berlin JD, Catalano P, Thomas JP, et al. Phase III study of gemcitabine in combination with fluorouracil versus gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced pancreatic carcinoma: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial E2297.
J Clin Oncol
2002
;
20
:
3270
–5.
33
Colucci G, Giuliani F, Gebbia V, et al. Gemcitabine alone or with cisplatin for the treatment of patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic pancreatic carcinoma: a prospective, randomized phase III study of the Gruppo Oncologia dell'Italia Meridionale.
Cancer
2002
;
94
:
902
–10.
34
Alberts SR, Townley PM, Goldberg RM, et al. Gemcitabine and oxaliplatin for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group phase II study.
Ann Oncol
2003
;
14
:
580
–5.
35
Rocha Lima CM, Green MR, Rotche R, et al. Irinotecan plus gemcitabine results in no survival advantage compared with gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer despite increased tumor response rate.
J Clin Oncol
2004
;
22
:
3776
–83.
36
Bramhall SR, Schulz J, Nemunaitis J, et al. A double-blind placebo-controlled, randomised study comparing gemcitabine and marimastat with gemcitabine and placebo as first line therapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.
Br J Cancer
2002
;
87
:
161
–7.
37
Van Cutsem E, van de Velde H, Karasek P, et al. Phase III trial of gemcitabine plus tipifarnib compared with gemcitabine plus placebo in advanced pancreatic cancer.
J Clin Oncol
2004
;
22
:
1430
–8.
38
Glaze ER, Lambert AL, Smith AC, et al. Preclinical toxicity of a geldanamycin analog, 17-(dimethylaminoethylamino)-17-demethoxygeldanamycin (17-DMAG), in rats and dogs: potential clinical relevance.
Cancer Chemother Pharmacol
2005
;
56
:
637
–47.
39
Neckers L. Hsp90 inhibitors as novel cancer chemotherapeutic agents.
Trends Mol Med
2002
;
8
:
S55
–61.
40
Ogata M, Naito Z, Tanaka S, Moriyama Y, Asano G. Overexpression and localization of heat shock proteins mRNA in pancreatic carcinoma.
J Nippon Med Sch
2000
;
67
:
177
–85.
41
Prodromou C, Roe SM, O'Brien R, et al. Identification and structural characterization of the ATP/ADP-binding site in the Hsp90 molecular chaperone.
Cell
1997
;
90
:
65
–75.
42
Panaretou B, Siligardi G, Meyer P, et al. Activation of the ATPase activity of Hsp90 by the stress-regulated cochaperone aha1.
Mol Cell
2002
;
10
:
1307
–18.
43
Xu W, Yuan X, Xiang Z, et al. Surface charge and hydrophobicity determine ErbB2 binding to the Hsp90 chaperone complex.
Nat Struct Mol Biol
2005
;
12
:
120
–6.
44
Jia W, Yu C, Rahmani M, et al. Synergistic antileukemic interactions between 17-AAG and UCN-01 involve interruption of RAF/MEK- and AKT-related pathways.
Blood
2003
;
102
:
1824
–32.
45
Hostein I, Robertson D, DiStefano F, Workman P, Clarke PA. Inhibition of signal transduction by the Hsp90 inhibitor 17-allylamino-17-demethoxygeldanamycin results in cytostasis and apoptosis.
Cancer Res
2001
;
61
:
4003
–9.
46
Buchler P, Reber HA, Lavey RS, et al. Tumor hypoxia correlates with metastatic tumor growth of pancreatic cancer in an orthotopic murine model.
J Surg Res
2004
;
120
:
295
–303.
47
Zelzer E, Levy Y, Kahana C, et al. Insulin induces transcription of target genes through the hypoxia-inducible factor HIF-1alpha/ARNT.
EMBO J
1998
;
17
:
5085
–94.
48
Harris AL. Hypoxia—a key regulatory factor in tumour growth.
Nat Rev Cancer
2002
;
2
:
38
–47.
49
Sebastian S, Kenkare UW. Expression of two type II-like tumor hexokinase RNA transcripts in cancer cell lines.
Tumour Biol
1998
;
19
:
253
–60.
50
Ruf J, Lopez Hanninen E, Bohmig M, et al. Impact of FDG-PET/MRI image fusion on the detection of pancreatic cancer.
Pancreatology
2006
;
6
:
512
–9.
51
Pakzad F, Groves AM, Ell PJ. The role of positron emission tomography in the management of pancreatic cancer.
Semin Nucl Med
2006
;
36
:
248
–56.
52
Singh D, Banerji AK, Dwarakanath BS, et al. Optimizing cancer radiotherapy with 2-deoxy-d-glucose dose escalation studies in patients with glioblastoma multiforme.
Strahlenther Onkol
2005
;
181
:
507
–14.
53
Carew JS, Huang P. Mitochondrial defects in cancer.
Mol Cancer
2002
;
1
:
9
.