Gene-directed enzyme–prodrug therapy (GDEPT) aims to improve the therapeutic ratio (benefit versus toxic side-effects) of cancer chemotherapy. A gene encoding a 'suicide' enzyme is introduced into the tumour to convert a subsequently administered non-toxic prodrug into an active drug selectively in the tumour, but not in normal tissues. Significant effects can now be achieved in vitro and in targeted experimental models, and GDEPT therapies are entering the clinic. Our group has developed a GDEPT system that uses the bacterial enzyme carboxypeptidase G2 to convert nitrogen mustard prodrugs into potent DNA crosslinking agents, and a clinical trial of this system is pending.
Conventional chemotherapeutic treatments almost invariably produce unwanted, and for the patient often very unpleasant, toxicity owing to affecting characteristic features of cancer cell growth that are also found in some non-neoplastic, self renewing tissues, such as the gut, skin and the bone marrow. The most important toxicity that threatens the survival of the patient is bone marrow suppression, which can cause increased susceptibility to infection and reduced platelet counts, with increased risk of haemorrage1. In addition, drugs that target growing cells interfere with gut epithelial renewal and lead to recurrent nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea, and suppress hair follicle renewal leading to alopecia in cancer patients2. Combinations of chemotherapeutic drugs are used routinely to treat aggressive tumours and, along with radiation insults to uninvolved tissue, compound the unpleasant side effects experienced by most patients with advanced cancer. Moreover, the use of current chemotherapy may only be a stop-gap, as small populations of primary and metastatic cells that harbour resistance genes may survive and grow into inoperable and chemotherapeutically resistant tumours3. Cancer statistics show that the disease is still very prevalent, and although 5-year survival rates have increased across all tumour types4, overall the annual number of cancer diagnoses has increased5.
From the point of view of efficiency of treatment, as well as patient welfare, the precise targeting of tumours with cytotoxins is a long-cherished goal. Gene-directed enzyme–prodrug therapy (GDEPT)6 is a method of treating tumours that should be capable of significantly reducing the undesirable side effects of cancer treatment. This Perspective article will briefly review the goals and mechanisms of GDEPT and will focus on the combination of the bacterial enzyme carboxypeptidase G2 (Box 1) to convert nitrogen mustard prodrugs, as a means to illustrate how modifications of the vector and suicide enzyme can be used to improve GDEPT.
The principles of GDEPT
GDEPT is a concept aimed at improving the therapeutic ratio (benefit versus toxic side-effects) of cancer chemotherapy. A gene encoding an enzyme that is not naturally expressed in the host (experimental animal or patient) is first introduced into the cells of a tumour by a targeting mechanism ('vector') that leaves the surrounding non-cancerous cells untransformed. The transformed cells of the tumour should then express the enzyme7,8 (Fig. 1). It is important that the enzyme or a related protein is not normally active in human tissue so that the non-toxic prodrug that is administered to the patient cannot be activated in any tissue other than the tumour tissue. The prodrug should be sufficiently lipophilic to diffuse into tumour cells and should then be cleaved into the cytotoxic drug only by the introduced suicide enzyme. Alternatively, if cleavage of the prodrug takes place extracellularly, the active drug should be capable of diffusing through cell membranes. Moreover, the drug should be able to kill non-dividing as well as dividing cells because it is unlikely that all tumour cells will be in cycle when the drug is activated. It is also unlikely that all the cells within a tumour can be targeted by the vector and thus not all tumour cells will express the suicide enzyme. Therefore, those tumour cells would not be exposed to the active drug. In order to prevent the tumour cells that do not express the enzyme from escaping GDEPT, the active drug has to be designed to diffuse into the intercellular fluid, killing neighbouring cells in the tumour. This action is termed the bystander effect and is a requirement of this type of therapy as it amplifies the effect of the drug.
The vector should target tumours by virtue of a characteristic or function either related to their transformed state, such as the expression of specific cell surface proteins or enzymes, or specifically active promoters; or one of the sequelae of tumour formation itself, such as hypoxia. Table 1 lists the basic categories of different targeting strategies (for more in depth reviews see Refs 9–11). A wide variety of vectors has been developed, and those in current use include modified microorganisms (such as bacteria or viruses, which we consider here), natural proteins (such as antibodies8) or synthetic vectors (such as liposomes12).
The most prevalent organisms used in this category are species of Salmonella and Clostridium, but others, such as Bifidobacterium and Escherichia coli have also been used.
Salmonella. A well studied Salmonella typhimurium clone is VNP20009 (Ref. 13) (Vion Pharmaceuticals Inc., New Haven, Connecticut, USA). This bacterium is attenuated in its pathogenicity by deletion of the msbB gene, which is essential for the terminal myristoylation of lipid A in the external lipopolysaccharide. Myristoyl lipid A induces the production of tumour necrosis factor α in the host, leading to toxic shock syndrome. Inhibiting this modification therefore reduces the toxicity of the bacterium. VNP20009 is also auxotrophic for purines by deletion of the purI gene. As solid tumours are partially necrotic, intracellular contents accumulate in the interstitial spaces, providing a source of purines for bacterial growth that is not present in normal tissues. These mutations have produced a bacterium that is much safer to use than the parental strain, and one that grows preferentially within solid tumours. In mouse models, VNP20009 accumulates in various human solid tumour xenografts to concentrations that are many times higher than those found in the liver, the second-most-infected organ. Systemically administered VNP20009 has been seen to accumulate in xenograft tumours in mice using non-invasive imaging with green fluorescent protein14 and by positron emission tomography (PET) scanning15. Salmonella typhimurium has been engineered to express suicide enzymes, such as cytosine deaminase (CD)16 from E. coli or Saccharomyces cereviciae and Herpes simplex thymidine kinase (HSV-TK)13. Administration of the relevant prodrugs (5-fluorocytosine (5-FC) or ganciclovir, respectively) leads to specific localization of the cognate drugs and tumour growth suppression or regression greater than that seen with the vector alone16. This effect has been called tumour amplified protein expression and targeting (TAPET).
One caveat to the use of VNP20009 as a vector is that it can still manifest systemic toxicity in animals, although only when present at markedly higher bacterial numbers than are required for the wild-type bacterium.
Clostridium. Species of Clostridium have been known to proliferate preferentially in tumours since the 1950s. The initial, but lethal, experiments used C. tetani17, but later studies using non-pathogenic C. butyricum18 also showed tumour localization. Clostridia are obligate anaerobes that survive in aerobic conditions by developing a spore that remains quiescent until conditions allow it to germinate. When spores are injected into animals, they may be present in aerobic tissues without apparent effects but will germinate and produce replicating bacteria in the hypoxic regions that develop within even small tumours. Therefore, using spores rather than replicating bacteria provides a targeting mechanism. This effect has been successfully used to deliver therapeutic genes in GDEPT systems.
C. beijerinckii has also been used to deliver E. coli nitroreductase19 and CD20 to mouse xenograft tumours, but unfortunately the associated prodrugs (CB1954 and 5-FC respectively) did not become activated in the infected xenografts. Liu et al.21 suggested that the lack of activity could be due to the low levels of viable bacteria in tumours because of the strain used, and went on to show that systemically administrated spores of C. sporogenes, transformed with S. cerevisiae CD, led to the production of the enzyme exclusively within an abdominal wall squamous cell carcinoma of mice (SCCVII). Injection of 5-FC produced a tumour growth delay for about 7 days in the animals treated with spores compared with untreated controls or mice treated with 5-FC or spores alone. However, tumour growth recommenced after this period at the same rate as that in the controls, and no further response to the prodrug was seen. This suggests that the bacteria had a limited lifespan within the tumours and that multiple administration of spores might be necessary to maintain the anti-tumorigenic effect, as observed recently by Theys et al22.
Bifidobacterium. This genus of gram-positive anaerobes is commonly added to yogurt cultures and is regarded as beneficial to the digestive system.
Bifidobacterium longum was found by Yazawa et al.23,24 to accumulate in B16-F10 murine melanoma xenografts, such that after 96–168 hours following intravenous administration, viable bacilli could be detected only in tumour tissue. Nakamura et al.25 cloned E. coli CD into B. longum and showed that the transformed bacterium expressed the enzyme, suggesting that this organism could be used as a gene vector for solid hypoxic tumours. Sasaki et al. also used this system and were able to demonstrate tumour-site-specific prodrug activation and efficacy against autochthonous mammary tumours in rats26. The minimal pathogenicity of Bifidobacterium compared with Salmonella and Clostridium has been cited as advantageous to its possible use in suicide gene therapy. However, there is a report in the literature of a patient in an acupuncture clinic suffering from B. longum sepsis following treatment for a herniated vertebral disk27. The conclusion from this is that although an organism can be apparently non-pathogenic in some situations and routes of administration, there is no guarantee that it will be safe to use without attention being given to possible complications from its use.
E. coli. A strain of E. coli that is auxotrophic for the cell wall component diaminopimelic acid, making it non-replicating, has been engineered with the inv gene from Yersinia pseudotuberculosis and the hly gene from Listeria monocytogenes28. The inv gene product, invasin, increases selective uptake of E. coli into cells that express β1-integrin. After internalization the hly gene product binds to and perforates the phagosomal membrane, releasing the bacterium into the interior of the cell. In C57Bl/6J mice, this engineered strain of E. coli expressing purine nucleoside phosphorylase (PNP) was delivered to Panc-2 allograft tumours by intratumoral injection, followed by intraperitoneal injection of the prodrug, 6-methyl-purine-2′-deoxyriboside (6-MPDR). The tumours were reduced to approximately half the volume of those in control animals treated with bacteria and PBS, or PBS and prodrug, or PBS alone. However, this vector is limited to tumour masses that include β1-integrin-expressing cells, such as macrophages and dendritic cells, and must be injected intratumorally as it has no systemic targeting mechanism and would otherwise bind to all tissues that express β1-integrin.
The use of viruses as gene vectors is very popular at present, as many papers and reviews testify. See, for example Refs 29,30. Opinions differ as to the type and specificity of virus that best fulfils the requirements of a suitable vector. Viral vectors can be non-replicating, such as those that, for safety reasons, only deliver a suicide gene, or replicating, such as those that are oncolytic in addition to delivering a gene, the peak of the latter state being a conditionally replicating vector that targets tumours precisely.
Adenovirus. Adenovirus (AdV) is a non-enveloped, double-stranded DNA virus that exists in episomal form in infected cells, reducing the risk of insertional mutagenesis, where genetic material becomes inserted at random in the host's genome, a known tumor-igenic event16. Moreover, the genome of AdV is well characterized and can be readily manipulated to express targeting factors31. The capsid (the protein coat of the virus that contains its genetic material) is large, so sizeable amounts of foreign DNA can be introduced. Adenoviruses have been used extensively for GDEPT, and it is not possible to review all of this work in this Perspective. A brief summary is provided below, but more indepth information on these vectors and on their preclinical and clinical use can be found in Refs 32,33.
The most commonly used adenoviruses are those in serogroups 2 and 5, and the furthest advanced in the clinic is the restricted replication adenovirus Onyx 015, a chimaera of the two serogroups (Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Richmond, California, USA). Onyx 015 has had its early-expressed gene E1B deleted as its method of tumour targeting. When expressed in the host cell, E1B sequesters p53, allowing viral replication to commence. In the absence of E1B, viral replication should only take place in cells where p53 is non functional, a condition frequently found in tumours, although the efficiency of this targeting has been questioned34,35. AdV infection of cells requires expression by the host cell of the cell surface coxsackie-adenovirus receptor (CAR) and αv integrins, which interact with protein fibres protruding from the capsid, although the relative importance of these receptors is also uncertain36. A disadvantage of the use of AdV is the fact that the virus induces a potent immune response37 such that there is concern that it can become ineffective as a vector after the initial or second injection. Thus the effects of systemic AdV GDEPT in wild-type animals and in humans could be less successful than in athymic or severe combined immune deficient (SCID) mice, but circulating anti-AdV antibodies could be beneficial if the virus is injected intratumorally, preventing collateral toxicity38.
Several methods have been used to aid viral targeting, as shown in Table 1. Replacing the E1 promoter with the human telomerase reverse transcriptase (hTERT) promoter restricts viral replication to cells that express telomerase. This enzyme is often re-expressed in tumour cells, where it replaces the ends of chromosomes that are normally gradually lost during cell division and allows the cells to replicate indefinitely39,40,41. Modification of the structure of the capsid fibres to target receptors other than CAR broadens the range of cell types that AdV can infect42,43. Cationic liposome conjugation partially protects adenovirus from anti-AdV antibodies, possibly allowing multiple administration44. Engineering for overexpression of adenovirus death protein, ADP, a viral nuclear membrane glycoprotein needed in late-stage infection for efficient cell lysis, appears to increase the effect of this vector in GDEPT45,46. Freytag et al.47 have recently reported that an adenoviral vector carrying a CD/mutTKSR39rep–adp fusion suicide gene construct, when injected intrapancreatically in dogs, could be visualized within the target organ using a positron-emitting substrate of HSV1 TK and positron emission tomography. The signal remained exclusively in the pancreas, highlighting the safety of the vector. Another study in the same system suggests that GDEPT might augment the effectiveness of radiotherapy for pancreatic cancer without excessive toxicity47.
Adenoviral vectors have been used in GDEPT clinical trials, as shown in Table 2, despite worries about their safety following the death, from 'a systemic inflammatory response', of a patient being treated for an inherited enzyme deficiency in 1999 (Ref. 48).
These trials were in general well tolerated, with no treatment-related deaths reported, although the clinical benefits have so far been modest.
Adeno-associated virus. Adeno-associated virus (AAV) is a small virus that is not known to cause disease in humans and thus could be seen as a possible suicide gene vector. As the name suggests, this virus is often found in cells where adenovirus is also present. Unlike adenovirus, AAV becomes inserted in the human genome but at a specific site on chromosome 19, designated AAVS1, reducing the risk of insertional mutagenesis49. It has been found to target ovarian tumour cells in culture, delivering the prodrug-activating oxidoreductase DT-diaphorase50, and melanoma tumours in mice, expressing HSV-TK using the tissue-specific melanocyte inhibitory activity promoter to target the virus51. Vermeij et al.52 found AAV on its own to have very poor rates of transfection in ovarian cancer cells. Using an AAV engineered to express green fluorescent protein (GFP), so that the presence of virus in cells can be visualized, the virus alone transfected <1% of cells in culture, and the presence of an AdV only increased this to a meagre 15%. By contrast, AdV–GFP transfection in the same cell type resulted in the infection of about 50% of the cells. Transgene expression appears to depend on the promoter driving it, as Veldwijk et al.53 observed consistently better GFP fluorescence in a range of cell lines with an EF1α promoter-driven expression vector compared with one using the CMV promoter. Kanazawa et al.54 found that AAV transgene expression in head and neck cancer xenografts in nude mice was increased by γ-irradiation. The size of AAV might be a disadvantage in its use, as it only has the capacity for about 4.7 kb of DNA, limiting the size of therapeutic genes that it can deliver.
Retroviruses. Retroviruses are enveloped, single-stranded RNA viruses that rely on the activity of reverse transcriptase to produce double stranded DNA that then becomes lysogenic, replicating with the host55. For example, Vesicular stomatitis virus is a retrovirus that is less susceptible to the mutating effects of active 5-FU than DNA viruses, and so might more effectively be used with a CD and 5-FC combination56,57. Haemagglutinating virus of Japan (HVJ, or Sendai virus) is a retrovirus that is non-pathogenic to humans, primarily infecting rodents58. HVJ fuses with the cell membrane rather than undergoing endocytosis, minimizing cell damage. Lentiviruses such as HIV-1 fall within the retrovirus group, and although there are safety concerns regarding their use, they have several advantages. In particular, they do not elicit a host immune response, and target both dividing and quiescent cells. The use of these viruses as suicide gene vectors also has the obvious advantage of potentially long-lived expression of a prodrug-activating enzyme59 owing to retroviral insertion into the host DNA. However, there are risks. As the incorporation of the viral genome into that of the host occurs at random, retroviral infection could lead to insertional mutagenesis. Using generator cells that express viral proteins from constructs that are not encapsulated in the viral progeny allows viruses to infect a single cell and deliver the suicide gene60. This reduces the possibility of generating a replicative viral clone by recombination but does not eliminate the risk entirely. Despite these risks, retrovirally-mediated HSV-TK–ganciclovir GDEPT has entered clinical trials for malignant glioma, using vectors derived from the Moloney murine leukaemia virus61,62.
Herpes simplex virus. Herpes simplex virus (HSV) is an enveloped, double-stranded DNA virus known to infect tumours and tumour cells in vitro. HSV, and replication-competent vectors derived from it, have been investigated as vectors for the treatment of glioma63,64 and colon cancer, including liver metastases65,66.
HSV has been shown to deliver the gene for Saccharomyces cerevisiae CD to HT29 human colon cells in vitro and MC26 mouse colon carcinoma allografts, producing significant cell kill, tumour regression and an increase in survival time following 5-FC treatment67. Recently, a conditionally replicating HSV mutant has been shown to produce similar results with E. coli CD in murine Neuro-2a neuroblastoma allografts68. The vector HSV1716, which selectively replicates in dividing cells, has been tested safely in phase I trials in patients with glioma and metastatic melanoma69.
Other potential viral vectors. Other vectors that have been tested for the delivery of suicide genes in vitro and in vivo include Baculovirus and Vaccinia. Baculovirus has evolved to suit insect hosts, and its own promoters do not function in mammalian cells; thus it can express engineered constructs but not replicate. An advantage is that mammals are unlikely to have prior exposure and immunity to an insect infection70,71. Vaccinia has inherent tumour specificity72 and a track record of safe use for smallpox vaccination73,74. Although the mechanism of this natural tropism is unidentified, Vaccinia tumour selectivity can be increased by deletion of the viral thymidine kinase and other genes75,76, making viral replication more dependent on the nucleotide-rich environment in dividing cells. Vaccinia also seems to require leaky vasculature to access target cells, which is more common in tumours than normal tissues.
The vectors described above all have their advocates, but none is without some disadvantage in either its safety, targeting or efficacy. Approaches that combine different treatment modalities, such radiotherapy, with vector-delivered suicide gene systems might, in some cases, improve preclinical and perhaps clinical outcomes. Work is currently in progress in the development of safe, targeted vectors for GDEPT and gene therapy in general (Table 1).
Carboxypeptidase G2-based GDEPT
Many suicide gene therapy systems have been investigated, and those in current use are shown in Table 3. See Portsmouth et al.77 for a recent review. We have considerable experience in working with nitroreductase and CB1954 (Refs 78,79), but our group is currently working with Pseudomonas carboxypeptidase G2 (CPG2; expressed in various vectors) and nitrogen mustard prodrugs, and the rest of this Perspective documents the progress made in this area.
CPG2 catalyses the hydrolysis of nitrogen mustard prodrugs, releasing glutamic acid and the cognate drug. The system is illustrated in Fig. 1. The CPG2–nitrogen mustard prodrug system has several advantages over other GDEPT systems: CPG2 has no mammalian equivalent, unlike carboxylesterase, purine nucleoside phosphorylase or CYP450; no additional activating steps are required, unlike the CD–5FC combination80, where the 5FU produced must be metabolized to its cognate nucleotides, or nitroreductase–CB1954, where the 4-hydroxylamine derivative of the drug requires acetylation by reaction with acetylCoA to become the active DNA crosslinking81 species; and both dividing and quiescent cells are killed by the drug. Moreover, gap junctions are not required for a bystander effect, unlike HSV-TK– ganciclovir, where the activated drug (ganciclovir triphosphate) is charged and therefore cannot pass through cell membranes. CPG2-activated nitrogen mustard drugs are relatively lipophilic and can pass directly through cell membranes.
Our experience with antibody-directed enzyme-prodrug therapy (ADEPT) using the combination of a human anti-carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) antibody conjugated with CPG2 and nitrogen mustard prodrugs8,82,83,84 has established the suitability of this enzyme–prodrug combination, such that it has been taken forward into GDEPT studies. The first report of CPG2-based GDEPT was that of Marais et al.85, who tested the system in vitro using a range of human cancer cell types that had been transformed with the bacterial gene encoding CPG2. The enzyme produced was found to have a Km for methotrexate (the chemotherapeutic drug that is used as a model substrate to assay CPG2 activity) that was almost identical to that found in bacterial cultures. It was not secreted but remained in the cytoplasm of the cells and was designated CPG2*. CPG2*-expressing cells were found to have between 11-fold and 95-fold greater sensitivity to the nitrogen mustard prodrug 4-[(Mesyloxyethyl)(2-chloroethyl)amino] benzoyl-L-glutamic acid (CMDA) than control cells expressing bacterial β-galactosidase, an enzyme irrelevant to the therapy. Sensitivity was dependent on cell type, with A2780 ovarian adenocarcinoma and LS174T colon carcinoma being very much more sensitive than SK-OV-3 ovarian adenocarcinoma and WiDr colon carcinoma. Moreover, by treating cell cultures containing various proportions of normal and transfected cells, GDEPT showed a large bystander effect — when ∼2% of the cells expressed CPG2* 90% of them were killed.
A potential problem with the expression of CPG2* is the release of the enzyme from lysed cells and into the general circulation, possibly producing generalized toxicity. To address this, we have expressed CPG2 in a cell-surface-tethered form by creating a fusion protein with the transmembrane region of the epidermal growth factor receptor family member ERBB2. This initially led to surface expression but reduced activity, resulting from N-glycosylation that occurs in mammalian membrane targeting. By point-directed mutation of three asparagine residues to glutamines (producing stCPG2(Q)3), glycosylation was circumvented and the kinetics of the enzyme resembled those of CPG2*86.
This improves the efficacy of the system in vitro, as illustrated by a 10-fold reduction in the IC50 of CMDA in MDA MB 361 human mammary tumour cells. A good bystander effect was seen with the surface-tethered CPG2 both in vitro86 and in vivo87. The efficiency of a surface-tethered CPG2 GDEPT system has been borne out by work by others, such as Cowen et al.88, who used a glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)-anchored enzyme delivered by an adenovirus vector. In general terms, it is possible that in some GDEPT systems where the prodrug is too hydrophilic to cross the cell membrane the enzyme and substrate will not meet if the enzyme is only within the cytoplasm, so the technology of surface-tethering has wide applicability.
Nitrogen mustard prodrugs. The most widely used prodrugs in this class of compounds are CMDA and 4-[bis(2-iodoethyl)amino]phenoxycarbonyl-L-glutamic acid (ZD2767P, previously known as CJS149) (Fig. 2). The active drugs are potent alkylating agents that form inter-and intra-strand linkages in DNA. ZD2767P emerged as the best candidate compound from structure–activity relationship studies82, and the active drug produced from it (ZD2767D) was found to be at least 300-times more potent than the benzoic acid mustard drugs used in the first ADEPT studies89. Using transfected cells has allowed us to validate the CPG2 GDEPT system and to test new nitrogen mustard prodrugs both in optimizing their kinetic parameters for the enzyme and in their efficacy in ablating cells in vitro and xenograft tumours90,91,92,93,94.
Varying the types and number of groups around the heterocyclic ring affects the potency of the compound as a prodrug in killing human MDA MB 361 tumour cells in vitro and as xenografts in nude mice93. An analogue of ZD2767P with an amide linkage to the glutamate and para-difluoro groups on the ring was over 227 times more effective at killing surface-tethered CPG2 transfected cells than cells expressing β-galactosidase. By comparison, CMDA only exhibited a 19-fold difference in toxicity between the two cell types.
We have also developed self-immolative compounds that can widen the range of active drug structures that can be formulated as CPG2-activated prodrugs without introducing unfavourable steric or electronic effects. This was achieved by separating the CPG2 hydrolysis site from the 'effector' end of the molecule by a spacer that spontaneously undergoes 1,6-elimination to release the active drug. Depending on the structure of the linking group, the lipophilicity and hence the bioavailability of the prodrugs can be changed without affecting the activation kinetics90,92,95. The self-immolative mechanism is illustrated in Fig. 3.
Targeting tumours in model systems. For GDEPT to be used as a clinical therapy, it must be shown to be effective in vivo, with the suicide gene delivered to and expressed within the target tumour. To this end, we have carried out systemic GDEPT in athymic mice bearing human hepatocytic carcinoma tumours (Hep3B and HepG2)96. The gene for CPG2* was delivered by intravenous injection of a replication-competent adenovirus in which the essential early-expressed gene E1 was under the control of the TERT promoter (AdV.hTERT–CPG2*). This resulted in the AdV infection and expression of CPG2* in vastly greater titre in tumours than in the liver, the next most infected tissue. Although this virus is oncolytic in its own right, addition of a once-weekly administration of ZD2767P for 6 weeks led to a significant decrease in tumour growth rate and prolonged survival of the animals (Fig. 4).
We have also recently tested a similar therapy using SW620 human colorectal adenocarcinoma cells97. In vitro, comet assays for DNA crosslinking showed that AdV.hTERT–CPG2 with ZD2767P was as effective as cisplatin and free ZD2767D nitrogen mustard, whereas the other control groups were not significantly different from untreated cells. There was a 160-fold increase in sensitivity to ZD2767P in cells infected with the virus compared with uninfected cells. A good bystander effect was seen in mixed cultures of SW620 cells, which are infected with AdV, and WM266.4 cells, which are not: approximately 80% of the cells were killed in co-cultures with 25% SW620 cells.
In xenografts we observed good tumour regression and increased survival in the GDEPT group of animals compared with the control, virus- and prodrug-alone groups. We sampled a wide range of tissues (tumour, liver, lungs, kidney, spleen, gut, ovaries, femoral muscle, brain and bone marrow) to determine CAR and CPG2 expression. Although the tumour expressed less CAR than lung, gut, liver or ovaries, the level of CPG2 in the tumour was 20-fold greater than in the liver, with little or no expression in any other sampled tissue. Interestingly, in the animals treated with the full GDEPT, we found that the presence of prodrug led to a significantly increased viral copy and enzyme activity (around 20 and 3-fold respectively) in the tumours compared with those treated with virus alone. This suggests that our GDEPT system, while inducing cytotoxicity in the target tumour, presumably by nitrogen mustard-induced DNA crosslinking, does not affect the viral genome, but directly or indirectly increases adenovirus replication. This finding corroborates that of Bernt et al.98, who observed similar effects of a β-glucuronide prodrug, of 9-aminocamptothecin, a topoisomerase I inhibitor, and 5-FC on adenoviral replication in vivo and a range of cytostatic agents in vitro. However, some agents (5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and hydroxy-urea) seemed to have a biphasic effect on viral reproduction, being stimulatory at low doses and inhibitory at high doses. Conversely, Schaak et al.99 found that inhibition of topoisomerase I with camptothecin stopped adenoviral DNA replication in cells in vitro immediately. McCart et al.100 found that mice with subcutaneous MC38 tumours (murine colon adenocarcinoma) were protected from Vaccinia virus toxicity in the presence of a CD–5-FC GDEPT system, suggesting that in this case, the generated 5-FU inhibited viral replication as well as tumour growth. By contrast, Nakamura et al.67 found that the replication of a HSV-1 mutant, carrying yeast CD in addition to its native TK, was significantly more inhibited by ganciclovir than by 5-FC. In our system the prodrug appears to exert a positive cooperative effect on the vector, which could further increase the bystander effect. The increased survival of mice with virus alone compared with the controls seen in our data suggests that either the virus has a relatively low toxicity to non-tumour cells or that the hTERT targeting mechanism restricts its distribution largely to the tumour. In the light of these reports of apparent counter-productivity of combining GDEPT systems with oncolytic viral vectors, our paradigm seems, perhaps somewhat fortuitously, to exhibit synergistic behaviour. The reason for this differential action on cellular and viral DNA is unclear and we have not investigated it, but it underscores the potential of CPG2-based GDEPT as a cancer therapy.
Immunohistochemical staining of tumour slices revealed foci of virus surrounded by a halo of CPG2, giving an ex vivo correlate for the in vivo observations (Fig. 5). We are presently exploring the efficacy of this CPG2 GDEPT system on other model cell types, such as human head-and-neck cancer cells as a prelude for clinical studies.
Clinical submission. We are currently preparing for a Phase 1 clinical trial of the adenovirus-mediated CPG2-based GDEPT system in head-and-neck cancer patients at the Royal Marsden National Health Service Trust in Surrey, UK. This tumour type was chosen so that intratumoral injection of AdV.hTERT–CPG2, rather than systemic administration, can be performed. This will ensure tumour targeting and should reduce the risk of the release of a genetically modified organism into the environment. Tumour biopsies from treated patients will be analysed for enzyme activity to give an indication of the optimum timing for prodrug administration and their blood will be tested for anti-AdV and anti-CPG2 antibodies. Patients will be dosed with ZD2767P to assess the pharmacokinetics and toxic dose limit of the prodrug, and tumour growth will be measured for any GDEPT response.
GDEPT has the promise of delivering target-specific cancer therapy with reduced systemic toxicity and thus better prognoses for patients. A wide range of gene vectors are currently being assessed, some of which are already in clinical trials. The CPG2-based system that we have developed has shown efficient cell kill in vitro, potent bystander effect and effective targeting in xenograft tumours in experimental animals, leading to decreased tumour growth rates and prolonged survival. The preclinical data have allowed us to prepare this therapy for the clinic with the promise of a finely tuned treatment. The development of new vectors and prodrugs should allow GDEPT to become another 'magic bullet' for the twenty-first century.
Carter, S. K., Bakowski, M. T. & Hellman, K. Chemotherapy of Cancer, (John Wiley & Sons New York, 1986).
Calabresi, P. & Chabner, B. A. Chemotherapy of neoplastic diseases. in Goodman and Gilman's The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics (eds Hardman, J. G. & Linbird, L. E.) 1225–1287 (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1995).
Donnenberg, V. S. & Donnenberg, A. Multiple drug resistance in cancer revisited: the cancer stem cell hypothesis. J. Clin. Pharm. 45, 872–877 (2005).
Coleman, M. P. et al. Cancer survival trends in England and Wales 1971–1995: deprivation and NHS region (The Stationary Office, London, 1999).
Jemal, A. et al. 2006 cancer statistics. CA Cancer J. Clin. 56, 106–130 (2006).
Huber, B. E., Richards, C. A. & Krenitsky, T. A. Retroviral-mediated gene therapy for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: an innovative approach for cancer therapy. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 88, 8039–8043 (1991).
Moolten, F. L. Tumor chemosensitivity conferred by inserted herpes thymidine kinase genes: paradigm for a prospective cancer control strategy. Cancer Res. 46, 5276–5281 (1986).
Napier, M. et al. Antibody-directed enzyme prodrug therapy: efficacy and mechanism of action in colorectal carcinoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 6, 765–772 (2000).
Ring, C. J. A. Cytolytic viruses as potential anti-cancer agents. J. Gen. Virol. 83, 491–502 (2002).
Green, N. K. & Hale, S. J. Viral approaches to cancer gene therapy. Expert Opin. Ther. Pat. 12, 369–378 (2002).
Jain, K. K. Use of Bacteria as anticancer agents. Expert Opin. Biol. Ther. 1, 291–300 (2001).
Hajri, A. et al. Combined suicide gene therapy for pancreatic peritoneal carcinomatosis using BGTC liposomes. Cancer Gene Ther. 11, 16–27 (2004).
Pawelek, J. M., Low, K. B. & Bermudes, D. Tumor-targeted Salmonella as a novel anticancer vector. Cancer Res. 57, 4537–4544 (1997).
Zhao, M. et al. Tumor-targeting bacterial therapy with amino acid auxotrophs of GFP-expressing Salmonella typhimurium. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 755–760 (2005).
Soghomonyan, S. A. et al. Positron emission tomography (PET) inaging of tumor-localized Salmonella expressing HSV1-TK. Cancer Gene Ther. 1–8 (2004).
King, I. et al. Tumor-targeted Salmonella expressing cytosine deaminase as an anticancer agent. Human Gene Ther. 13, 1225–1233 (2002).
Malmgren, R. A. & Flanigan, C. C. Localization of the vegetative form of Clostridium tetani in mouse tumors following intravenous spore administration. Cancer Res. 15, 473–478 (1955).
Mose, J. R. & Mose, G. Oncolysis by Clostridia. I. Activity of Clostridium (M-55) and other nonpathogenic clostridia against the Ehrlich carcinoma. Cancer Res. 24, 212–216 (1964).
Lemmon, M. J. et al. Anaerobic bacteria as a gene delivery system that is controlled by the tumor microenvironment. Gene Ther. 4, 791–796 (1997).
Fox, M. E. et al. Anaerobic bacteria as a delivery system for cancer gene therapy: in vitro activation of 5-fluorocytosine by genetically engineered clostridia. Gene Ther. 3, 173–178 (1996).
Liu, S.-C., Minton, N. P., Giaccia, A. J. & Brown, J. M. Anticancer efficacy of systemically delivered anaerobic bacteria as gene therapy vectors targeting tumor hypoxia/necrosis. Gene Ther. 9, 291–296 (2002).
Theys, J. et al. Repeated cycles of Clostridium-directed enzyme prodrug therapy result in sustained antitumour effects in vivo. Br. J. Cancer 95, 1212–1219 (2006).
Yazawa, K., Fujimori, M., Amano, J., Kano, Y. & Taniguchi, S. Bifidobacterium longum as a delivery system for cancer gene therapy: selective localization and growth in hypoxic tumors. Cancer Gene Ther. 7, 269–274 (2000).
Yazawa, K. et al. Bifidobacterium longum as a delivery system for gene therapy of chemically induced rat mammary tumors. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 66, 165–170 (2001).
Nakamura, T. et al. Cloned cytosine deaminase gene expression of Bifidobacterium longum and application to enzyme/ pro-drug therapy of hypoxic solid tumors. Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 66, 2362–2366 (2002).
Sasaki, T. et al. Genetically engineered Bifidobacterium longum for tumor-targeting enzyme-prodrug therapy of autochthonous mammary tumors in rats. Cancer Sci. 97, 649–657 (2006).
Ha, G. Y., Yang, C. H., Kim, H. & Chong, Y. Case of sepsis caused by Bifidobacterium longum. J. Clin. Microbiol. 37, 1227–1228 (1999).
Critchley, R. J. et al. Potential, therapeutic applications of recombinant, invasive E. coli. Gene Ther. 11, 1224–1233 (2004).
Thomas, C. E. E. & Kay, M. A. Progress and problems with the use of viral vectors for gene therapy. Nature Rev. Genet. 4, 346–358 (2003).
Lin, E. & Nemunaitis, J. Oncolytic viral therapies. Cancer Gene Ther. 11, 643–664 (2004).
Heise, C. & Kirn, D. H. Replication-selective adenoviruses as oncolytic agents. J. Clin. Invest. 105, 847–851 (2000).
Jounaidi, Y., Doloff, J. C. & Waxman, D. J. Conditionally replicating adenoviruses for cancer treatment. Curr. Cancer Drug Targets 7, 285–301 (2007).
Alemany, R. Cancer selective adenoviruses. Mol. Asp. Med. 28, 42–58 (2007).
Heise, C. C., Williams, A., Olesch, J. & Kirn, D. Efficacy of a replication-competent adenovirus (ONYX-015) following intratumoral injection: intratumoral spread and distribution effects. Cancer Gene Ther. 6, 499–504 (1999).
Vollmer, C. M. et al. p53 selective and nonselective replication of an E1B-deleted adenovirus in hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer Res. 59, 4369–4374 (1999).
Hasenburg, A. et al. Adenovirus -mediated thymidine kinase gene therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer: expression of coxsackie-adenovirus receptor and integrins αvβ3 and αvβ5. J. Soc. Gynecol. Invest. 9, 174–180 (2002).
Green, N. K. & Seymour, L. W. Adenoviral vectors:systemic delivery and tumor targeting. Cancer Gene Ther. 9, 1036–1042 (2002).
Djeha, A. H. et al. Combined adenovirus-mediated nitroreductase gene delivery and CB1954 treatment: A well-tolerated therapy for established solid tumors. Molecular Ther. 3, 233–240 (2001).
Lanson N. A. Jr, Friedlander, P. A., Schwartzenberger, P., Kolls, J. K. & Wang, G. Replication of an adenoviral vector controlled by the human telomerase reverse transcriptase promoter causes tumor-selective tumor lysis. Cancer Res. 63, 7936–7941 (2003).
Irving, J. et al. Conditionally replicative adenovirus driven by the human telomerase promoter provides broad-spectrum antitumor activity without liver toxicity. Cancer Gene Ther. 11, 174–185 (2004).
Bisland, A. F. et al. Selective ablation of human cancer cells by telomerase-specific adenoviral suicide gene therapy vectors expressing bacterial nitroreductase. Oncogene 22, 370–380 (2003).
Liu, Y., Ye, T., Maynard, J., Akbulut, H. & Deisseroth, A. Engineering conditionally replication-competent adenoviral vectors carrying the cytosine deaminase gene increases the infectivity and therapeutic effect for breast cancer gene therapy Cancer Gene Ther. 13, 346–356 (2006).
Liu, Y. & Deisseroth, A. Tumor vascular targeting therapy with viral vectors. Blood 107, 3027–3033 (2006).
Fukuhara, H. et al. Improvement of transduction efficiency of recombinant adenovirus vector conjugated with cationic liposome for human oral squamous cell carcinoma cell lines. Oral Oncol. 39, 601–609 (2003).
Toth, K. et al. An oncolytic adenovirus vector combining enhanced cell-to-cell spreading mediated by the ADP cytolytic protein with selective replication in cancer cells with deregulated Wnt signalling. Cancer Res. 64, 3638–3644 (2004).
Barton, K. N. et al. Second-generation replication-competent oncolytic adenovirus armed with improved suicide genes and ADP gene demonstrates greater efficacy without increased toxicity. Mol. Ther. 13, 347–356 (2006).
Freytag, S. O. et al. Replication-competent adenovirus-mediated suicide gene therapy with radiation in a preclinical model of pancreatic cancer. Mol. Ther. 15, 1600–1606 (2007).
Marshall, E. Gene therapy death prompts review of adenovirus vector. Science 286, 2244–2245 (1999).
Knipe, D. M. & Howley, P. M. (eds). Fields' Virology (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philidelphia, 2007).
Warrington, K. H., Teschendorf, C., Cao, L., Muzyczka, N. & Siemann, D. W. Developing VDEPT for DT-diaphorase (NQO1) using an AAV vector plasmid. Int. J. Rad. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 42, 909–912 (1998).
Schoensiegel, F. et al. MIA (melanoma inhibitory activity) promoter mediated tissue-specific suicide gene therapy of malignant melanoma. Cancer Gene Ther. 11, 408–418 (2004).
Vermeij, J. et al. Transduction of ovarian cancer cells: a recombinant adeno-associated viral vector compared to an adenoviral vector. Br. J. Cancer 85, 1592–1599 (2001).
Veldwijk, M. R. et al. Suicide gene therapy of sarcoma cell lines using recombinant adeno-associated virus 2 vectors. Cancer Gene Ther. 11, 577–584 (2004).
Kanazawa, T. et al. Suicide gene therapy using AAV-HSVtk/ganciclovir in combination with irradiation results in regression of human head and neck cancer xenografts in nude mice Gene Ther. 10, 51–58 (2003).
Solly, S. K. et al. Replicative retroviral vectors for cancer gene therapy. Cancer Gene Ther. 10, 30–39 (2003).
Fernandez, M., Porosnicu, M., Markovic, D. & Barber, G. N. Genetically engineered vesicular stomatitis virus in gene therapy: application for treatment of malignant disease. J. Virol. 76, 895–904 (2002).
Porosnicu, M., Mian, A. & Barber, G. N. The oncolytic effect of vesicular stomatitis virus is enhanced by expression of the fusion cytosine deaminase/ uracil phosphoribosyltransferase suicide gene. Cancer Res. 63, 8366–8376 (2003).
Kanayama, H. et al. Usefulness of repeated direct intratumoral gene transfer using hemagglutinating virus of Japan-liposome method for cytosine deaminase suicide gene therapy. Cancer Res. 61, 14–18 (2001).
Aghi, M. & Martuza, R. L. Oncolytic viral therapies — the clinical experience. Oncogene 24, 7802–7816 (2005).
Shikova, E. Retroviral vectors for gene transfer: development, properties and application. Exp. Pathol. Parasitol 6/12, 40–47 (2003).
Floeth, F. W. et al. Local inflammation and devascularization — in vivo mechanisms of the 'bystander effect' in VPC-mediated HSV-tk/GCV gene therapy for human malignant glioma. Cancer Gene Ther 8, 843–851 (2001).
Rainov, N. G. A phase III clinical evaluation of herpes simplex type 1 thymidine kinase and ganciclovir gene therapy as an adjuvant to surgical resection and radiation in adults with previously untreated glioblastoma multiforme. Hum. Gene Ther. 11, 2389–2401 (2000).
Papanastassiou, V. et al. The potential for efficacy of the modified (ICP 34.5−) herpes simplex virus HSV1716 following intratumoural injection into human malignant glioma: a proof of principle study. Gene Ther. 9, 398–406 (2002).
Tyminski, E. et al. Brain tumor oncolysis with replication-conditional herpes simplex virus type 1 expressing the prodrug-activating genes, CYP2B1 and secreted human intestinal carboxylesterase, in combination with cyclophosphamide and irinotecan. Cancer Res. 65, 6850–6857 (2005).
Yoon, S. S., Carroll, N. M., Chiocca, E. A. & Tanabe, K. Cancer gene therapy using a replication competent herpes simplex virus type I vector. Annal. Surg. 228, 366–374 (1998).
Yoon, S. S. et al. An oncolytic herpes simplex type I selectively destroys diffuse liver metastases from colon carcinoma. FASEB J. 14, 301–311 (2000).
Nakamura, H. et al. Multimodality therapy with a replication-conditional Herpes simplex virus 1 mutant that expresses yeast cytosine deaminase for intratumoral conversion of 5-fluorocytosine to 5-fluorouracil. Cancer Res. 61, 5447–5452 (2001).
Guffey, M. B. et al. Engineered herpes simplex virus expressing bacterial cytosine deaminase for experimental therapy of brain tumors. Cancer Gene Ther. 14, 45–56 (2007).
Detta, A., Darland, J., Hanif, I., Brown, S. M. & Cruickshank, G. Proliferative activity and in vitro replication of HSV1716 in human metastatic brain tumours. J. Gene Med. 5, 681–689 (2003).
Hofmann, C. et al. Efficient gene transfer into human hepatocytes by baculovirus vectors. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 92, 10099–10103 (1995).
Stanbridge, L. J., Dussupt, V. & Maitland, N. J. Baculoviruses as vectors for gene therapy against human prostate cancer. J. Biomed. Bacteriol. 2003, 79–91 (2003).
Hung, C.-F. et al. Vaccinia virus preferentially infects and controls human and murine ovarian tumors in mice. Gene Ther. 14, 20–29 (2007).
Gnant, M. F. X., Puhlmann, M., Alexander. Jr, H. R. & Bartlett, D. L. Systemic administration of a recombinant vaccinia virus expressing the cytosine deaminase gene and subsequent treatment with 5-fluorocytosine leads to tumor-specific gene expression and prolongation of survival in mice. Cancer Res. 59, 3396–3403 (1999).
Peplinski, G. R. et al. In vivo murine tumor gene delivery and expression by systemic recombinant vaccinia virus encoding interleukin-1β. Cancer J. Sci. Am. 2, 21–27 (1996).
Zeh, H. J. & Bartlett, D. L. Development of a replication-selective, oncolytic poxvirus for the treatment of human cancers. Cancer Gene Ther. 9, 1001–1012 (2002).
Yang, S. et al. A new recombinant vaccinia with targeted deletion of three viral genes: its safety and efficacy as an oncolytic virus. Gene Therapy 14, 638–647 (2007).
Portsmouth, D., Hlavatya, J. & Renner, M. Suicide genes for cancer therapy Mol. Asp. Med. 28, 4–41 (2007).
Friedlos, F., Denny, W. A., Palmer, B. D. & Springer, C. J. Mustard prodrugs for activation by Escherichia coli nitroreductase in gene-directed prodrug therapy. J. Med. Chem. 40, 1270–1275 (1997).
Spooner, R. A. et al. Appropriate subcellular localisation of prodrug-activating enzymes has important consequences for suicide gene therapy. Int. J. Cancer 93, 123–130 (2001).
Knox, R. J. & Connors, T. A. Prodrugs in cancer chemotherapy. Pathol. Oncol. Res. 3, 309–324 (1997).
Race, P. et al. Kinetic and structural characterisation of Escherichia coli nitroreductase mutants showing improved efficacy for the prodrug substrate CB1954. J. Mol. Biol. 368, 481–492 (2007).
Niculescu-Duvaz, I. & Springer, C. J. Antibody-directed enzyme prodrug therapy (ADEPT): a targeting strategy in cancer chemotherapy. Current Med. Chem. 2, 687–706 (1995).
Niculescu-Duvaz, I., Friedlos, F., Niculescu-Duvaz, D., Davies, L. C. & Springer, C. J. Prodrugs for antibody- and gene- directed enzyme prodrug therapies (ADEPT and GDEPT). Anti-Cancer Drug Design 14, 517–538 (1999).
Senter, P. D. & Springer, C. J. Selective activation of anticancer prodrugs by monoclonal antibody-enzyme conjugates. Adv. Drug Del. Rev. 53, 247–264 (2001).
Marais, R., Spooner, R. A., Light, Y., Martin, J. & Springer, C. J. Gene-directed enzyme prodrug therapy with a mustard prodrug/carboxypeptidase G2 combination. Cancer Res. 56, 4735–4742 (1996).
Marais, R. et al. A cell surface tethered enzyme improves efficiency in gene-directed enzyme prodrug therapy. Nature Biotechnol. 15, 1373–1377 (1997).
Stribbling, S. M. et al. Regressions of established breast carcinoma xenografts by carboxypeptidase G2 suicide gene therapy and the prodrug CMDA are due to a bystander effect. Human Gene Ther. 11, 285–292 (2000).
Cowen, R. L. et al. Adenovirus vector-mediated delivery of the prodrug-converting enzyme carboxypeptidase G2 in a secreted or GPI-anchored form: High-level expression of this active conditional cytotoxic enzyme at the plasma membrane. Cancer Gene Ther. 9, 897–907 (2002).
Blakey, D. C. et al. ZD2767, an improved system for antibody-directed enzyme prodrug therapy that results in tumor regressions in colorectal tumor xenografts. Cancer Res. 56, 3287–3292 (1996).
Niculescu-Duvaz, I. et al. Self Immolative Anthracycline Prodrugs for Suicide Gene Therapy. J. Med. Chem. 42, 2485–2489 (1999).
Friedlos, F. et al. Three new prodrugs for suicide gene therapy using carboxypeptidase G2 elicit bystander efficacy in two xenograft models. Cancer Res. 62, 1724–1729 (2002).
Niculescu-Duvas, D. et al. Self-immolative nitrogen mustards prodrugs cleavable by carboxypeptidase G2 (CPG2) showing large cytotoxicity differentials in GDEPT. J. Med. Chem. 46, 1690–1705 (2003).
Niculescu-Duvas, I. et al. Significant differences in biological parameters between prodrugs cleavable by carboxypeptidase G2 that generate 3, 5-difluoro-phenol and -aniline nitrogen mustards in gene-directed enzyme prodrug therapy. J. Med. Chem. 47, 2651–2658 (2004).
Davies, L. C. et al. Novel fluorinated prodrugs for activation by carboxypeptidase G2 showing good in vivo antitumor activity in gene-directed enzyme prodrug therapy. J. Med. Chem. 48, 5331–5328 (2005).
Niculescu-Duvas, D. et al. Self -immolative nitrogen mustard prodrugs for suicide gene therapy. J. Med. Chem. 41, 5297–5309 (1998).
Schepelmann, S. et al. Systemic gene-directed enzyme prodrug therapy of hepatocellular carcinoma using a targeted adenovirus armed with carboxypeptidase G2. Cancer Res. 65, 5003–5008 (2005).
Schepelmann, S. et al. Suicide gene therapy of human colon carcinoma xenografts using an armed oncolytic adenovirus expressing carboxypeptidase G2. Cancer Res. 67, 4949–4955 (2007).
Bernt, K. M. et al. Enzyme activated prodrug therapy enhances tumor-specific replication of adenovirus vectors. Cancer Res. 62, 6089–6098 (2002).
Schaak, J., Schedl, P. & Shenk, T. Topoisomerase I and II cleavage of Adenovirus DNA in vivo: both topoisomerase activities appear to be required for adenovirus DNA replication. J. Virol. 64, 78–85 (1990).
McCart, J. et al. Complex interactions between the replicating oncolytic effect and the enzyme/prodrug effect of vaccinia mediated tumor regression. Gene Ther. 7, 1217–1223 (2000).
McCullough, J. L., Chabner, B. A. & Bertino, J. R. Purification and properties of carboxypeptidase G1. J. Biol. Chem. 246, 7207–7213 (1971).
Lindner, H. A. et al. Essential roles of zinc ligation and enzyme dimerisation for catalysis in the aminoacylase-1/M20 family. J. Biol. Chem. 278, 44496–44504 (2003).
Chabner, B. A., Johns, D. G. & Bertino, J. R. Enzymatic cleavage of methotrexate provides a method for prevention of drug toxicity. Nature 239, 395–397 (1972).
Gu, J., Andreeff, M., Roth, J. A. & Fang, B. hTERT promoter induces tumor-specific Bax gene expression and cell killing in syngenic mouse tumor model and prevents systemic toxicity. Gene Ther. 9, 30–37 (2002).
Barker, S. D. et al. Combined transcriptional and transductional targeting improves the specificity and efficacy of adenoviral gene delivery to ovarian carcinoma. Gene Ther. 10, 1198–1204 (2003).
Magnusson, M. K. et al. Adenovirus 5 vector genetically re-targeted by an Affibody molecule with specificity for tumor antigen HER2/neu. Cancer Gene Ther. 14, 468–479 (2007).
Hiraoka, K., Kimura, T., Logg, C. R. & Kasahara, N. Tumor-selective gene expression in a hepatic metastasis model after locoregional delivery of a replication-competent retrovirus vector. Clin. Cancer Res. 12, 7108–7116 (2006).
Chang, E. et al. Targeting vaccinia to solid tumors with local hyperthermia. Hum. Gene Ther. 16, 435–444 (2005).
Nettelbeck, D. M., Jérôme, V. & Müller, R. Gene therapy: Designer promoters for tumour targeting. Trends Genet. 16, 174–181 (2000).
Robson, T. & Hirst, D. G. Transcriptional targeting in cancer gene therapy. J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2003, 110–137 (2003).
Harrington, K. J., Linardkis, E. & Vile, R. G. Transcriptional control: an essential component of cancer gene therapy strategies? Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 44, 167–184 (2000).
Brand, K., Loser, P., Arnold, W., Bartels, T. & Strauss, M. Tumor cell-specific transgene expression prevents liver toxicity of the adeno-HSVtk/GCV approach. Gene Ther. 5, 1363–1371 (1998).
Maatta, A. M. et al. Transcriptional targeting of virus-mediated gene transfer by the human hexokinase II promoter. Int. J. Mol. Med. 18, 901–908 (2006).
Mathis, J. M. et al. Cancer-specific targeting of an adenovirus-delivered herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase suicide gene using translational control. J. Gene Med. 8, 1105–1120 (2006).
Yu, D. et al. Targeting and killing of prostate cancer cells using lentiviral constructs containing a sequence recognized by translation factor eIF4E and a prostate-specific promoter. Cancer Gene Ther. 13, 32–43 (2006).
Rein, D. T., Breidenbach, M., Hille, S. & Curiel, D. T. Current developments in adenovirus-based cancer gene therapy. Future Oncol. 2, 137–144 (2006).
Immonen, A. et al. AdvHSV-tk gene therapy with intravenous ganciclovir improves survival in human malignant glioma: a randomised, controlled study. Mol. Ther. 10, 967–972 (2004).
Alverez, R. D. et al. Adenoviral-mediated suicide gene therapy for ovarian cancer. Molecular Therapy 2, 524–530 (2000).
Kubo, H. et al. Phase I dose escalation clinical trial of adenovirus vector carrying osteocalcin promoter-driven Herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase in localized and metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Hum. Gene Ther. 14, 227–241 (2003).
Nasu, Y. et al. Suicide gene therapy with adenoviral delivery of HSV-tK gene for patients with local recurrence of prostate cancer after hormonal therapy. Mol. Ther. 15, 834–840 (2007).
van der Linden, R. et al. Virus specific immune responses after human neoadjuvant adenovirus-mediated suicide gene therapy for prostate cancer. Eur. Urol. 48, 153–161 (2005).
Freytag, S. O. et al. Phase I trial of replication-competent adenovirus-mediated suicide gene therapy combined with IMRT for prostate cancer. Mol. Ther. 15, 1016–1023 (2007).
Shalev, M. et al. Suicide gene therapy toxicity after multiple and repeat injections in patients with localized prostate cancer. J. Urol. 163, 1747–1750 (2000).
Sung, M. W. et al. Intratumoral adenovirus-mediated suicide gene transfer for hepatic metastases from colorectal adenocarcinoma: results of a phase I clinical trial. Mol. Ther. 4, 182–191 (2001).
Freytag, S. O. et al. Phase I study of replication competent adenovirus-mediated double suicide-gene therapy for the treatment of locally recurrent prostate cancer. Cancer Res. 62, 4968–4976 (2002).
Freytag, S. O. et al. Five-year follow-up of trial of replication-competent adenovirus-mediated suicide gene therapy for treatment of prostate cancer. Mol. Ther. 15, 636–642 (2007).
Freytag, S. O. et al. Phase I study of replication-competent adenovirus-mediated double-suicide gene therapy in combination with conventional-dose three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy for the treatment of newly diagnosed, intermediate-to-high-risk prostate cancer. Cancer Res. 63, 7497–7506 (2003).
Palmer, D. H. et al. Virus-directed enzyme prodrug therapy: intratumoral administration of a replication-deficient adenovirus encoding nitroreductase to patients with resectable liver cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 22, 1546–1552 (2004).
Braybrooke, J. P. et al. Phase I study of MetXia-P450 gene therapy and oral cyclophosphamide for patients with advanced breast cancer or melanoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 11, 1512–1520 (2005).
Barzon, L. et al. A pilot study of combined suicide/cytokine gene therapy in two patients with end-stage anaplastic thyroid carcinoma. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 90, 2831–2834 (2004).
Singh, S., Cummingham, C., Buchanan, A., Jolly, D. J. & Nemunaitis, J. Toxicity assessment of intratumoreal injection of herpes simplex type 1 thymidine kinase gene delivered by retrovirus in patients with refractory cancer. Mol. Ther. 4, 157–160 (2001).
Valéry, C. et al. Long-term survival after gene therapy for a recurrent glioblastoma. Neurology 58, 1109–1112 (2002).
Ryan, P. C. et al. Antitumor efficacy and tumor-selective replication with a single intravenous injection of OAS403, an oncolytic adenovirus dependent on two prevalent alterations in human cancer. Cancer Gene Ther. 11, 555–569 (2004).
Parker, W. B. et al. Metabolism and metabolic actions of 6-methylpurine and 2-fluoroadenine in human cells. Biochem. Pharmacol. 55, 1673–1681 (1998).
Slichenmyer, W. J., Rowinsky, E. K., Donehower, R. C. & Kaufmann, S. H. The current status of camptothecin analogues as antitumor agents. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 85, 271–291 (1993).
Springer, C. J. et al. Novel prodrugs which are activated to cytotoxic alkylating agents by carboxypeptidase G2. J. Med. Chem. 33, 677–681 (1990).
Pinedo, H. M. & Peters, G. F. Fluorouracil: biochemistry and pharmacology. J. Clin. Oncol. 6, 1653–1664 (1988).
Peñuelas, I. et al. Positron emission tomography imaging of adenoviral-mediated transgene expression in liver cancer patients. Gastroenterology 128, 1787–1795 (2005).
Thank you to Frank Friedlos for the immunofluorescence experiments. This work is funded by Cancer Research UK (grant numbers C309/A2187 and C309/A8274).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hedley, D., Ogilvie, L. & Springer, C. Carboxypeptidase G2-based gene-directed enzyme–prodrug therapy: a new weapon in the GDEPT armoury. Nat Rev Cancer 7, 870–879 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc2247
This article is cited by
White paper on microbial anti-cancer therapy and prevention
Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer (2018)
Detection of the Prodrug-Activating Enzyme Carboxypeptidase G2 Activity with Chemical Exchange Saturation Transfer Magnetic Resonance
Molecular Imaging and Biology (2014)
Molecular modeling approach to predict a binding mode for the complex methotrexate-carboxypeptidase G2
Journal of Molecular Modeling (2012)
Prodrug enzymes and their applications in image-guided therapy of cancer: tracking prodrug enzymes to minimize collateral damage
Drug Delivery and Translational Research (2012)
The fourth front against cancer
EMBO reports (2011)