Abstract 1846: Catalytic topoisomerase II inhibitors suppress the androgen receptor signaling and prostate cancer progression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Although the new generation of anti-androgens (e.g. MDV) improves survival of metastatic prostate cancer patients, tumors eventually recur indicating that additional therapeutic means is required to fully block the functions of the androgen receptor (AR). Since DNA topoisomerase II (Topo II) was demonstrated to be essential for AR to initiate gene transcription, this study tested whether catalytic inhibitors of Topo II can suppress the AR signaling and block prostate tumor growth. Methods and Results: Androgen-dependent and MDV-resistant prostate cancer cells were treated with increasing doses of catalytic Topo II inhibitors, ICRF187 and ICRF193. Luciferase reporter assays showed that both inhibitors suppressed the transcriptional activities of wild-type AR, mutant AR (F876L and W741C), and AR-V7 splice variant. ICRF187 and ICRF193 decreased AR recruitment to its target promoters and reduced AR nuclear localization. Both ICRF187 and ICRF193 inhibited androgen-dependent and MDV-resistant cancer cell proliferation and delayed cell cycling at the G2/M stages. In castration-resistant LNCaP tumors, ICRF187 inhibited tumor growth, PSA secretion and expressions of several other AR regulated genes. These repressive effects became stronger when tumors were co-treated with MDV. Additionally, ICRF187 effectively inhibited tumor growth of MDV-resistant MR49F as well as castration-resistant 22RV1 xenografts. Conclusions: Catalytic Topo II inhibitors can block the AR signaling and inhibit tumor growth of castration-resistant xenografts, suggesting their potential applications in treating castration-resistant cancers in patients. Citation Format: Haolong Li, Ning Xie, Martin Gleave, Xuesen Dong. Catalytic topoisomerase II inhibitors suppress the androgen receptor signaling and prostate cancer progression. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 106th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2015 Apr 18-22; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(15 Suppl):Abstract nr 1846. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2015-1846
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".