Chemotherapeutic agents have certain limitations when it comes to treating cancer, the most important being severe side effects along with multidrug resistance developed against them. Tumor cells exhibits drug resistance due to activation of various cellular level processes viz. activation of drug efflux pumps, anti-apoptotic defense mechanisms etc. Currently, RNA interference (RNAi) based therapeutic approaches are under vibrant scrutinization to seek cancer cure. Especially small interfering RNA (siRNA) and micro RNA (miRNA), are able to knock down the carcinogenic genes by targeting the mRNA expression, which underlies the uniqueness of this therapeutic approach. Recent research focus in the regime of cancer therapy involves the engagement of targeted delivery of siRNA/miRNA in combinations with other therapeutic agents (such as gene, DNA or chemotherapeutic drug) for targeting permeability glycoprotein (P-gp), Multidrug resistant protein 1(MRP-1), B-cell lymphoma (BCL-2) and other targets that are mainly responsible for resistance in cancer therapy. RNAi-chemotherapeutic drug combinations have also been found to be effective against different molecular targets as well and can increase the sensitization of cancer cells to therapy several folds. However, due to stability issues associated with siRNA/miRNA suitable protective carrier is needed and nanotechnology based approaches have been widely explored to overcome these drawbacks. Furthermore, it has been univocally advocated that the co-delivery of siRNA/miRNA with other chemodrugs significantly enhances their capability to overcome cancer resistance compared to naked counterparts. The objective of this article is to review recent nanocarrier based approaches adopted for the delivery of siRNA/miRNA combinations with other anticancer agents (siRNA/miRNA/pDNA/chemodrugs) to treat cancer.

Lung cancer is the most common malignancy worldwide and is a focus for developing targeted therapies due to its refractory nature to current treatment. We identified a RNA helicase, DDX3, which is overexpressed in many cancer types including lung cancer and is associated with lower survival in lung cancer patients. We designed a first-in-class small molecule inhibitor, RK-33, which binds to DDX3 and abrogates its activity. Inhibition of DDX3 by RK-33 caused G1 cell cycle arrest, induced apoptosis, and promoted radiation sensitization in DDX3-overexpressing cells. Importantly, RK-33 in combination with radiation induced tumor regression in multiple mouse models of lung cancer. Mechanistically, loss of DDX3 function either by shRNA or by RK-33 impaired Wnt signaling through disruption of the DDX3–β-catenin axis and inhibited non-homologous end joining—the major DNA repair pathway in mammalian somatic cells. Overall, inhibition of DDX3 by RK-33 promotes tumor regression, thus providing a compelling argument to develop DDX3 inhibitors for lung cancer therapy.

Current standard-of-care (SOC) therapy for breast cancer includes targeted therapies such as endocrine therapy for estrogen receptor-alpha (ERα) positive; anti-HER2 monoclonal antibodies for human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)-enriched; and general chemotherapy for triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) subtypes. These therapies frequently fail due to acquired or inherent resistance. Altered metabolism has been recognized as one of the major mechanisms underlying therapeutic resistance. There are several cues that dictate metabolic reprogramming that also account for the tumors’ metabolic plasticity. For metabolic therapy to be efficacious there is a need to understand the metabolic underpinnings of the different subtypes of breast cancer as well as the role the SOC treatments play in targeting the metabolic phenotype. Understanding the mechanism will allow us to identify potential therapeutic vulnerabilities. There are some very interesting questions being tackled by researchers today as they pertain to altered metabolism in breast cancer. What are the metabolic differences between the different subtypes of breast cancer? Do cancer cells have a metabolic pathway preference based on the site and stage of metastasis? How do the cell-intrinsic and -extrinsic cues dictate the metabolic phenotype? How do the nucleus and mitochondria coordinately regulate metabolism? How does sensitivity or resistance to SOC affect metabolic reprogramming and vice-versa? This review addresses these issues along with the latest updates in the field of breast cancer metabolism.

Saccharomyces cerevisiae contains two Siz/PIAS SUMO E3 ligases, Siz1 and Siz2/Nfi1, and one other known ligase, Mms21. Although ubiquitin ligases are highly substrate-specific, the degree to which SUMO ligases target distinct sets of substrates is unknown. Here we show that although Siz1 and Siz2 each have unique substrates in vivo, sumoylation of many substrates can be stimulated by either protein. Furthermore, in the absence of both Siz proteins, many of the same substrates are still sumoylated at low levels. Some of this residual sumoylation depends on MMS21. Siz1 targets its unique substrates through at least two distinct domains. Sumoylation of PCNA (proliferating cell nuclear antigen) and the splicing factor Prp45 requires part of the N-terminal region of Siz1, the `PINIT' domain, whereas sumoylation of the bud neck-associated septin proteins Cdc3, Cdc11 and Shs1/Sep7 requires the C-terminal domain of Siz1, which is also sufficient for cell cycle-dependent localization of Siz1 to the bud neck. Remarkably, the non-sumoylated septins Cdc10 and Cdc12 also undergo Siz1-dependent sumoylation if they are fused to the short ΨKXE SUMO attachment-site sequence. Collectively, these results suggest that local concentration of the E3, rather than a single direct interaction with the substrate polypeptide, is the major factor in substrate selectivity by Siz proteins.

Twist1, a basic helix-loop-helix transcription factor, plays a key role during development and is a master regulator of the epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) that promotes cancer metastasis. Structure-function relationships of Twist1 to cancer-related phenotypes are underappreciated, so we studied the requirement of the conserved Twist box domain for metastatic phenotypes in prostate cancer (PCa). Evidence suggests that Twist1 is overexpressed in clinical specimens and correlated with aggressive/metastatic disease. Therefore, we examined a transactivation mutant, Twist1-F191G, in PCa cells using in vitro assays which mimic various stages of metastasis. Twist1 overexpression led to elevated cytoskeletal stiffness and cell traction forces at the migratory edge of cells based on biophysical single-cell measurements. Twist1 conferred additional cellular properties associated with cancer cell metastasis including increased migration, invasion, anoikis resistance, and anchorage-independent growth. The Twist box mutant was defective for these Twist1 phenotypes in vitro. Importantly, we observed a high frequency of Twist1-induced metastatic lung tumors and extra-thoracic metastases in vivo using the experimental lung metastasis assay. The Twist box was required for PCa cells to colonize metastatic lung lesions and extra-thoracic metastases. Comparative genomic profiling revealed transcriptional programs directed by the Twist box that were associated with cancer progression, such as Hoxa9. Mechanistically, Twist1 bound to the Hoxa9 promoter and positively regulated Hoxa9 expression in PCa cells. Finally, Hoxa9 was important for Twist1-induced cellular phenotypes associated with metastasis. These data suggest that the Twist box domain is required for Twist1 transcriptional programs and PCa metastasis.

Stem cell therapies are currently being investigated for the repair of brain injuries. Although exogenous stem cell labelling with superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs) prior to transplantation provides a means to noninvasively monitor stem cell transplantation by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), monitoring cell death is still a challenge. Here, we investigate the feasibility of using an MRI dual-contrast technique to detect cell delivery, cell migration and cell death after stem cell transplantation. Human mesenchymal stem cells were dual labelled with SPIONs and gadolinium-based chelates (GdDTPA). The viability, proliferation rate, and differentiation potential of the labelled cells were then evaluated. The feasibility of this MRI technique to distinguish between live and dead cells was next evaluated using MRI phantoms, and in vivo using both immune-competent and immune-deficient mice, following the induction of brain injury in the mice. All results were validated with bioluminescence imaging. In live cells, a negative (T2/T2*) MRI contrast predominates, and is used to track cell delivery and cell migration. Upon cell death, a diffused positive (T1) MRI contrast is generated in the vicinity of the dead cells, and serves as an imaging marker for cell death. Ultimately, this technique could be used to manage stem cell therapies.

This article reviews the pulmonary route of administration, aerosol delivery devices, characterization of pulmonary drug delivery systems, and discusses the rationale for inhaled delivery of siRNA. Diseases with known protein malfunctions may be mitigated through the use of siRNA therapeutics. The inhalation route of administration provides local delivery of siRNA therapeutics for the treatment of various pulmonary diseases, however barriers to pulmonary delivery and intracellular delivery of siRNA exists. siRNA loaded nanocarriers can be used to overcome the barriers associated with the pulmonary route, such as anatomical barriers, mucociliary clearance, and alveolar macrophage clearance. Apart from naked siRNA aerosol delivery, previously studied siRNA carrier systems comprise of lipidic, polymeric, peptide, or inorganic origin. Such siRNA delivery systems formulated as aerosols can be successfully delivered via an inhaler or nebulizer to the pulmonary region. Preclinical animal investigations of inhaled siRNA therapeutics rely on intratracheal and intranasal siRNA and siRNA nanocarrier delivery. Aerosolized siRNA delivery systems may be characterized using in vitro techniques, such as dissolution test, inertial cascade impaction, delivered dose uniformity assay, laser diffraction, and laser Doppler velocimetry. The ex vivo techniques used to characterize pulmonary administered formulations include the isolated perfused lung model. In vivo techniques like gamma scintigraphy, 3D SPECT, PET, MRI, fluorescence imaging and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamics analysis may be used for evaluation of aerosolized siRNA delivery systems. The use of inhalable siRNA delivery systems encounters barriers to their delivery, however overcoming the barriers while formulating a safe and effective delivery system will offer unique advances to the field of inhaled medicine.

Outcomes for poor-risk localized prostate cancers treated with radiation are still insufficient. Targeting the "non-oncogene" addiction or stress response machinery is an appealing strategy for cancer therapeutics. Heat-shock-protein-90 (Hsp90), an integral member of this machinery, is a molecular chaperone required for energy-driven stabilization and selective degradation of misfolded "client" proteins, that is commonly overexpressed in tumor cells. Hsp90 client proteins include critical components of pathways implicated in prostate cancer cell survival and radioresistance, such as androgen receptor signaling and the PI3K-Akt-mTOR pathway. We examined the effects of a novel non-geldanamycin Hsp90 inhibitor, AUY922, combined with radiation (RT) on two prostate cancer cell lines, Myc-CaP and PC3, using in vitro assays for clonogenic survival, apoptosis, cell cycle distribution, γ-H2AX foci kinetics and client protein expression in pathways important for prostate cancer survival and radioresistance. We then evaluated tumor growth delay and effects of the combined treatment (RT-AUY922) on the PI3K-Akt-mTOR and AR pathways in a hind-flank tumor graft model. We observed that AUY922 caused supra-additive radiosensitization in both cell lines at low nanomolar doses with enhancement ratios between 1.4-1.7 (p < 0.01). RT-AUY922 increased apoptotic cell death compared with either therapy alone, induced G 2-M arrest and produced marked changes in client protein expression. These results were confirmed in vivo, where RT-AUY922 combination therapy produced supra-additive tumor growth delay compared with either therapy by itself in Myc-CaP and PC3 tumor grafts (both p < 0.0001). Our data suggest that combined RT-AUY922 therapy exhibits promising activity against prostate cancer cells, which should be investigated in clinical studies.