Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The mechanism of increased sensitivity to etoposide (VP-16) in a human bladder cancer cell line (J82/MMC-2), which is >9-fold more resistant to mitomycin C (MMC) compared with parental cells (J82/WT), was investigated. Colony formation assays, following 1 hr drug exposure, revealed that about a 2.2-fold higher concentration of VP-16 was required to kill 50% of the J82/WT cell line compared with J82/MMC-2. The MTT assays, following continuous drug exposure, also showed that the J82/MMC-2 cell line was significantly more sensitive to VP-16 compared with J82/WT. Accumulation of VP-16 was significantly higher in the J82/MMC-2 cell line compared with J82/WT at every drug concentration tested. Likewise, intracellular VP-16 retention was significantly higher in the J82/MMC-2 cell line compared with J82/WT when drug uptake was measured as a function of varying incubation time and at a fixed VP-16 concentration. The efflux of VP-16 from the J82/MMC-2 cell line was equivalent to that from J82/WT. In agreement with the results of drug uptake studies, the levels of VP-16-induced protein-DNA complexes were markedly higher in the J82/MMC-2 cell line compared with J82/WT. The catalytic activity of topoisomerase II (topo II) in 0.35 M NaCl nuclear extract of J82/WT cells was equivalent to that of J82/MMC-2. The levels of topo II mRNA were also comparable in these cells. Our results suggest that the mechanism responsible for the collateral sensitivity of the J82/MMC-2 cell line to VP-16 may be attributable to a relatively higher drug accumulation in this cell line compared with parental cells.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xia et al. (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: