In vitro drug testing of ovarian cancer using the human tumor colony-forming assay: comparison of in vitro response and clinical outcome

Prediction of Cancer Drug Resistance and Implications for Personalized Medicine

Drug resistance still impedes successful cancer chemotherapy. A major goal of early concepts in individualized therapy was to develop in vitro tests to predict tumors’ drug responsiveness. We have developed an in vitro short-term test based on nucleic acid precursor incorporation to determine clinical drug resistance. This test detects inherent and acquired resistance in vitro and transplantable syngeneic and xenografted tumors in vivo. In several clinical trials, clinical resistance was predictable with more than 90% accuracy, while drug sensitivity was detected with less accuracy (~60%). Remarkably, clinical cross-resistance to numerous drugs (multidrug resistance, broad spectrum resistance) was detectable by a single compound, doxorubicin, due to its multifactorial modes of action. The results of this predictive test were in good agreement with predictive assays of other authors. As no predictive test has been established as yet for clinical diagnostics, the identification of sensitive drugs may not reach sufficiently high reliability for clinical routine. A meta-analysis of the literature published during the past four decades considering test results of more than 15,000 tumor patients unambiguously demonstrated that, in the majority of studies, resistance was correctly predicted with an accuracy between 80 and 100%, while drug sensitivity could only be predicted with an accuracy of 50–80%. This synopsis of the published literature impressively illustrates that prediction of drug resistance could be validated. The determination of drug resistance was reliable independent of tumor type, test assay, and drug used in these in vitro tests. By contrast, chemosensitivity could not be predicted with high reliability. Therefore, we propose a rethinking of the “chemosensitivity” concept. Instead, predictive in vitro tests may reliably identify drug-resistant tumors. The clinical consequence imply to subject resistant tumors not to chemotherapy, but to other new treatment options, such as antibody therapy, adoptive immune therapy, hyperthermia, gene therapy, etc. The high accuracy to predict resistant tumors may be exploited to develop new strategies for individualized cancer therapy. This new concept bears the potential of a revival of predictive tests for personalized medicine.

In vitro assays for the evaluation of drug resistance in tumor cells

Oncologic diseases are among leading cause of mortality in developed countries. Despite significant progress, the use of standard cytotoxic chemotherapy has reached a therapeutical plateau. Currently, the process of selecting chemotherapy represents a trial and error method neglecting biological individuality of tumor and its bearer. The improvement of treatment results is expected from ex vivo drug sensitivity testing which may allow to choose the most effective drug for individual patient and to exclude agents to which the tumor cells exert resistance. New techniques and rapidly increasing knowledge about the molecular basis of malignant diseases provide important opportunities for the future of chemotherapy. This paper reviews current methods used to test the resistance of tumor cells to a panel of anticancer agents in vitro. In addition, we focused on the in vitro MTT assay which represents one of major technique for testing of tumor cell resistance to anticancer agents.

In vitro efficacy of chemotherapeutics as determined by 50% inhibitory concentrations in cell cultures of mammary gland tumors obtained from dogs

OBJECTIVE

To determine the 50% inhibitory concentration (IC-50) of carboplatin, cisplatin, and doxorubicin in cell cultures of mammary gland tumors obtained from dogs and to assess whether in vitro efficacy was within the range of clinically relevant concentrations,

SAMPLE POPULATION

30 mammary gland tumors excised from dogs.

PROCEDURE

Cell cultures were established from the 30 tumors. Cultures then were treated with carboplatin, cisplatin, or doxorubicin. Growth inhibition of cultures was assessed via DNA measurement 24, 48, and 72 hours after treatment. The IC-50 values were calculated by use of linear interpolation.

RESULTS

Cultures varied in their pattern of susceptibility. Doxorubicin induced significantly lower IC-50 values than the platinum derivatives. Cisplatin and carboplatin had comparable effects. The IC-50 values for carboplatin and doxorubicin were in the range of clinically relevant concentrations, but only part of the cisplatin cultures had IC-50 values within clinically relevant concentrations. We did not detect differences in the in vitro susceptibility among subtypes of tumors (ie, adenocarcinoma, solid carcinoma, malignant mixed tumor).

CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The IC-50 values determined in this study allowed assessment of in vitro drug efficacy of chemotherapeutics in cultures of mammary gland tumors obtained from dogs. Variations in susceptibility were evident and emphasize the importance of assessing susceptibility and resistance patterns for each tumor. Prospective studies to assess direct correlations between in vitro and in vivo efficacy must be performed to determine the clinical predictive value of this in vitro chemosensitivity assay for treatment of dogs with mammary gland tumors.

Serous papillary adenocarcinomas of the ovary display heterogeneity in their response to chemotherapy

The response of ovarian serous papillary adenocarcinomas to various cytotoxic drugs was examined using the (3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-5-(3-carboxymethoxyphenyl)-2-(4-sulfophenyl)-2H-tetrazolium, inner salt) (MTS) cytotoxicity assay. Thirty tumors were collected and organized into four groups according to histologic grade and FIGO stage: stage III, grade 2; stage III, grade 3; stage IV, grade 2; and stage IV, grade 3. The MTS chemosensitivity assay was performed on each tumor to examine the response to cisplatin, paclitaxel, hycamtin and the combination of cisplatin and paclitaxel. Ovarian adenocarcinomas of similar stage and grade displayed varying responses to the same drug. A lower concentration of the drug was often as effective as the peak plasma concentration. For some specimens combination therapy was more effective for inhibiting tumor growth, and for others single-agent therapy gave a better response. A chemosensitivity/resistance profile is recommended before deciding on appropriate chemotherapy.

Combination photoimmunotherapy and cisplatin: effects on human ovarian cancer ex vivo

BACKGROUND

Patients with ovarian cancer that is clinically resistant to cisplatin-based chemotherapy have little hope of a cure of their disease. Photoimmunotherapy, which involves the antibody-targeted delivery of a nontoxic photosensitizer that is activated to a cytotoxic state with visible light, may offer a new treatment option. Photoimmunotherapy may be applied intraperitoneally to target disseminated tumor. We tested the hypothesis that this treatment in combination with cisplatin potentiates cytotoxicity in ovarian cancer cell lines and primary cultures of human tumors.

METHODS

Five human cancer cell lines (ovarian and breast) and 19 primary cultures were studied. The primary cultures were from solid and ascites tumor samples obtained from 14 patients with ovarian cancer who were undergoing primary surgery. The photosensitizer chlorin e(6) was conjugated to the F(ab')(2) fragment of the murine monoclonal antibody OC-125, which is directed against the antigen CA 125. Cytotoxicity was measured by the microculture tetrazolium assay. Treatments consisted of cisplatin alone, photoimmunotherapy alone, and photoimmunotherapy followed by cisplatin. The fractional product method was used to assess synergy in treatment effects. Ex vivo cultured human cells exhibiting 80% or greater survival at cisplatin concentrations of 10 microM for 24 hours were defined as cisplatin resistant for this study.

RESULTS

When all cell types (cisplatin sensitive and cisplatin resistant) were considered together, combination treatment yielded cytotoxicity that was, on average, 6.9 times (95% confidence interval = 1.86-11.94) greater than that of cisplatin alone (two-sided P =.023). Cisplatin-resistant cells showed a synergistic effect of the two treatments (two-sided P =.044), while cisplatin-sensitive cells showed an additive effect.

CONCLUSION

These ex vivo data suggest that platinum resistance in human ovarian cancer cells may be reversible by pretreatment with OC-125-targeted photoimmunotherapy. Further studies are required to confirm the efficacy of this approach in vivo.

Tumor chemosensitivity and chemoresistance assays

BACKGROUND

Chemosensitivity and chemoresistance assays have been used to select potentially more effective chemotherapy regimens and to avoid the toxicity of potentially ineffective drugs.

METHODS

Literature review was conducted.

RESULTS

The relevant outcome measure for chemosensitivity assays is improved patient survival. However, the relevant outcome measure for chemoresistance assays is more controversial. Advocates propose that the avoidance of the toxicity of potentially ineffective drugs is the relevant outcome, whereas others believe that the latter is an intermediate outcome and that improved patient survival is the appropriate outcome for both chemoresistance and chemosensitivity assays. There have been no clinical trials showing that either of these assays is associated with improved patient survival.

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of improved patient survival, the clinical role of chemosensitivity and chemoresistance assays is unproven. The use of the assays will vary depending on the type and stage of the tumor involved, the proposed role of chemotherapy, and the role of the empiric judgement of the physician.