Combining low-dose chemotherapies is a strategy for designing less toxic and more potent childhood cancer treatments. We examined the effects of combining the novel thiosemicarbazones, di-2-pyridylketone 4-cyclohexyl-4-methyl-3-thiosemicarbazone (DpC), or its analog, di-2-pyridylketone-4,4-dimethyl-3-thiosemicarbazone (Dp44mT), with the standard chemotherapies, celecoxib (CX), etoposide (ETO), or temozolomide (TMZ). These combinations were analyzed for synergism to inhibit proliferation of three pediatric tumor cell-types, namely osteosarcoma (Saos-2), medulloblastoma (Daoy) and neuroblastoma (SH-SY5Y). In terms of mechanistic dissection, this study discovered novel thiosemicarbazone targets not previously identified and which are important for considering possible drug combinations. In this case, DpC and Dp44mT caused: (1) up-regulation of a major protein target of CX, namely cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2); (2) down-regulation of the DNA repair protein, O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT), which is known to affect TMZ resistance; (3) down-regulation of mismatch repair (MMR) proteins, MSH2 and MSH6, in Daoy and SH-SY5Y cells; and (4) down-regulation in all three cell-types of the MMR repair protein, MLH1, and also topoisomerase 2α (Topo2α), the latter of which is an ETO target. While thiosemicarbazones up-regulate the metastasis suppressor, NDRG1, in adult cancers, it is demonstrated herein for the first time that they induce NDRG1 in all three pediatric tumor cell-types, validating its role as a potential target. In fact, siRNA studies indicated that NDRG1 was responsible for MGMT down-regulation that may prevent TMZ resistance. Examining the effects of combining thiosemicarbazones with CX, ETO, or TMZ, the most promising synergism was obtained using CX. Of interest, a positive relationship was observed between NDRG1 expression of the cell-type and the synergistic activity observed in the combination of thiosemicarbazones and CX. These studies identify novel thiosemicarbazone targets relevant to childhood cancer combination chemotherapy.

The p73 protein is a member of the p53 family, and this protein is known to be essential for the maintenance of genomic stability, DNA repair, and apoptosis regulation. Transcription from two promoters leads to two main N-terminal isoforms: the TAp73 isoform is reported to have tumor suppressor function, whereas the ΔNp73 isoform likely has oncogenic potential. The present study is focused on the investigation of a possible role of both these p73 N-terminal isoforms in the process of centrosome amplification. HGG-02 and GM7 glioblastoma cell lines and the Daoy medulloblastoma cell line were used in this study. The cells were analyzed using indirect immunofluorescence to determine TAp73 and ΔNp73 expression patterns and possible co-localization with the BubR1 protein, as well as the number of centrosomes. A transiently transfected GM7 cell line was used to verify the results concerning the N-terminal isoforms in relation to centrosome amplification. We found that increased immunoreactivity for the ΔNp73 isoform is associated with the occurrence of an abnormal number of centrosomes in particular cells. Using the transiently transfected GM7 cell line, we confirmed that centrosome amplification is present in cells with overexpression of the ΔNp73 isoform. In contrast, the immunoreactivity for the TAp73 isoform was weak or medium in most of the cells with an aberrant number of centrosomes. To determine the putative counterpart of the p73 N-terminal isoforms among spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) proteins, we also evaluated possible interactions between the N-terminal isoforms and BubR1 protein, but no co-localization of these proteins was observed.

NANOG is a transcription factor involved in the regulation of pluripotency and stemness. The functional paralog of NANOG, NANOGP8, differs from NANOG in only three amino acids and exhibits similar reprogramming activity. Given the transcriptional regulatory role played by NANOG, the nuclear localization of NANOG/NANOGP8 has primarily been considered to date. In this study, we investigated the intriguing extranuclear localization of NANOG and demonstrated that a substantial pool of NANOG/NANOGP8 is localized at the centrosome. Using double immunofluorescence, the colocalization of NANOG protein with pericentrin was identified by two independent anti-NANOG antibodies among 11 tumor and non-tumor cell lines. The validity of these observations was confirmed by transient expression of GFP-tagged NANOG, which also colocalized with pericentrin. Mass spectrometry of the anti-NANOG immunoprecipitated samples verified the antibody specificity and revealed the expression of both NANOG and NANOGP8, which was further confirmed by real-time PCR. Using cell fractionation, we show that a considerable amount of NANOG protein is present in the cytoplasm of RD and NTERA-2 cells. Importantly, cytoplasmic NANOG was unevenly distributed at the centrosome pair during the cell cycle and colocalized with the distal region of the mother centriole, and its presence was markedly associated with centriole maturation. Along with the finding that the centrosomal localization of NANOG/NANOGP8 was detected in various tumor and non-tumor cell types, these results provide the first evidence suggesting a common centrosome-specific role of NANOG.