|
|
Previous Article | Table of Contents | Next Article 
Blood, 15 February 2002, Vol. 99, No. 4, pp. 1356-1363
NEOPLASIA
Frequent mutations in the ligand-binding domain of PML-RAR
after multiple relapses of acute promyelocytic leukemia: analysis for
functional relationship to response to all-trans
retinoic acid and histone deacetylase inhibitors in vitro and
in vivo
Da-Cheng Zhou,
Soon H. Kim,
Wei Ding,
Cynthia Schultz,
Raymond P. Warrell Jr, and
Robert E. Gallagher
From the Departments of Oncology and Pathology,
Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein Cancer Center, Bronx, NY;
and the Developmental Chemotherapy and Leukemia Services, Department of
Medicine, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
 |
Abstract |
This study identified missense mutations in the ligand binding
domain of the oncoprotein PML-RAR in 5 of 8 patients with acute
promyelocytic leukemia (APL) with 2 or more relapses and 2 or more
previous courses of all-trans retinoic acid
(RA)-containing therapy. Four mutations were novel (Lys207Asn,
Gly289Arg, Arg294Trp, and Pro407Ser), whereas one had been previously
identified (Arg272Gln; normal RAR 1 codon assignment). Five patients
were treated with repeat RA plus phenylbutyrate (PB), a histone
deacetylase inhibitor, and one patient experienced a prolonged clinical
remission. Of the 5 RA + PB-treated patients, 4 had
PML-RAR mutations. The Gly289Arg mutation in the clinical responder
produced the most defective PML-RAR function in the presence of RA
with or without sodium butyrate (NaB) or trichostatin A. Relapse APL
cells from this patient failed to differentiate in response to RA but
partially differentiated in response to NaB alone, which was augmented
by RA. In contrast, NaB alone had no differentiation effect on APL cells from another mutant case (Pro407Ser) but enhanced differentiation induced by RA. These results indicate that PML-RAR mutations occurred with high frequency after multiple RA treatment relapses, indicate that the functional potential of PML-RAR was not correlated with clinical response to RA + PB treatment, and suggest that the
response to RA + PB therapy in one patient was related to the
ability of PB to circumvent the blocked RA-regulated gene response pathway.
(Blood. 2002;99:1356-1363)
© 2002 by The American Society of Hematology.
 |
Introduction |
Despite major advances in the treatment of acute
promyelocytic leukemia (APL) with all-trans retinoic acid
(RA) in combination with chemotherapy, relapse occurs in approximately
30% of patients who achieve clinical remission (CR). Most of
these patients are either already refractory to or soon become
refractory to retreatment with RA.1-3 Among these relapse
patients, there is a high incidence of reduced APL cell sensitivity to
RA-induced terminal differentiation in vitro.2,4,5 In a
study of de novo APL patients treated on intergroup protocol 0129 with
sequential RA and chemotherapy, we found PML-RAR mutations in 25%
to 30% of patients at first relapse5 (Gallagher, Slack,
Willman, et al, unpublished results, September 2001). Others
have also reported the finding of RAR -region missense mutations in
first or second relapse, RA-treated APL patients.6,7 One
objective of the current study was to assess whether multiple relapses
from RA therapy is associated with an increased incidence of
PML-RAR mutations.
The recruitment of excessive amounts of corepressor proteins to
retinoic acid response element (RARE)-regulated gene promoters by a
multimeric complex of PML-RAR plays a crucial role in the genesis
and maintenance of APL.8-10 The therapeutic response of APL cells to RA depends on the ability of pharmacologic RA
concentrations ( 100 nM) to dissociate the corepressor complex and
to recruit an alternative set of coactivator proteins, all of which
depends on binding of RA to the ligand-binding domain (LBD) of the
RAR region of PML-RAR . Essential components of the corepressor
complex are histone deacetylase (HDAC) enzymes that foster chromatin
condensation and reduced gene promoter activity (reviewed in McKenna et
al11). Trichostatin A (TSA) is one of a variety of
compounds that can inhibit HDAC enzymes, reversing their effect on
chromatin.12 TSA was reported to partially overcome
resistance to RA-induced differentiation in a subline of NB4 APL cells
containing a missense mutation in the LBD of PML-RAR that markedly
reduces RA binding and corepressor dissociation.13 In that
study, the HDAC inhibitor (HDI) was ineffective alone but positively
interacted with RA to induce partial differentiation. Similarly, HDI
antileukemic activity in murine leukemias generated in PML-RAR
transgenic mice was RA dependent.14 These results suggest
that HDI differentiation activity is mediated by modulation of
RA/RARE-regulated gene transcription. The results, however, do not
exclude the possibility that HDIs might independently modulate the
transcription of alternative genes that complement RA/RARE-modulated
genes leading to terminal APL cell differentiation. This possibility
seems consistent with observations that HDIs alone can modulate the
transcription of a limited range of genes that affect cell growth,
death, and differentiation in non-RA-dependent leukemias and
cancers.12,15
On the basis of such background information, one of us (R.P.W.) and
colleagues initiated a pilot clinical trial to test the potential
interactive therapeutic effect of the HDI sodium phenylbutyrate (PB)
and graded doses of RA in multiple-relapse APL patients clinically resistant to RA and chemotherapeutic agents. Remarkably, the first patient treated with this regimen, dubbed "targeted transcription therapy," achieved a fourth CR that was sustained for several months.16 Four clinically similar patients, however, did
not respond to the same treatment regimen.17 In the
current study, we sought to determine if the differential clinical
response of these 5 patients might be related to the functional
properties of their PML-RAR fusion genes.
 |
Patients, materials, and methods |
Patients and treatments
Bone marrow specimens from 8 multiple-relapse APL patients were
used for the present studies under a protocol approved by the
institutional review board under Helsinki protocol guidelines. Table
1 briefly summarizes the treatment
histories of these patients. Case numbers were assigned based on the
order of laboratory specimen receipt and analysis. All patients had
relapsed at least twice (range, 2-4) and had received 2 or more (range,
2-4) courses of therapy containing RA. Additionally, all patients had
received 3 or more (range, 3-8) different agents. Two patients had been treated with the anti-CD33 monoclonal antibody HUM-195, and 2 patients
had relapsed after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation. All patients
had been treated with arsenic trioxide (ATO).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 1.
Patients with multiple relapse of acute promyelocytic
leukemia: treatment history and response to RA + PB therapy
|
|
Five patients (cases 3, 4, and 6-8) were treated with RA + PB, and
more detailed clinical accounts of these patients have been presented
elsewhere.16,17 Treatment consisted of escalating doses of
RA (30-90 mg/m2 per day) and PB (150-400 mg/kg per day) for
25 days per course up to 5 treatment courses. The first patient treated
(case 6 of this report) responded to treatment with a CR of 7 months'
duration attended by molecular remission, as determined by negative
reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests for
PML-RAR messenger RNA (mRNA).16,17 Three patients
(cases 6-8) were treated with PB + RA before initial mutational
analysis, but in cases 6 and 7 RNA from second bone marrow specimens
were retrospectively available before PB + RA therapy. In cases 3 and 4, mutational analysis was initially performed before RA + PB
therapy. In case 8, the only earlier sample was obtained at initial
diagnosis. No further stored materials were available on these patients.
Mutation analysis
RT-PCR and DNA sequence analysis were performed as previously
described.5 This analysis included 2 PCR amplification
procedures in preparation for DNA sequence analysis: (1) direct PCR
amplification from complementary DNA with primer pairs covering 2 overlapping sequences of the RAR LBD, which permitted biallelic
analysis of both normal RAR and PML-RAR mRNAs and (2) initial
first-round PCR amplification with a PML-RAR -specific primer pair,
followed by nested or heminested secondary PCR amplification using the RAR LBD primer pairs, which permitted monoallelic assignment of
mutations found in this study to PML-RAR . All mutations were confirmed by bidirectional sequencing and repeat analysis from RNA.
RA-binding analysis
COS-1 cells in exponential growth were collected by
trypsinization and washed twice with phosphate-buffered saline
(Mg++/Ca++ free), and 108 cells
were resuspended in 5 mL phosphate-buffered saline. pSG5 expression
vector DNA (400 µg), containing either wild-type or mutant
PML-RAR , was mixed with the cell suspension for 10 minutes at room
temperature. Electroporation was done by using a Gene Pulser II
(BioRad, Hercules, CA) at 250 µF and 350 V. After 3 days' culture in
Dulbecco modification of Eagle medium (DMEM) with 10% fetal bovine
serum (FBS), the cells were harvested for nuclear protein extraction,
as described.18 To test RA binding, 0.2 mL nuclear extract
was incubated for 15 hours at 4°C with 10 nmol/L [3H]RA
(30 Ci/mmol [1.11 × 1012 Bq]; DuPont-NEN,
Boston, MA) in the absence or presence of 200-fold excess of unlabeled
RA. The unbound RA was removed by incubation with dextran-coated
charcoal for 15 minutes and then centrifuged for 15 minutes at
10 000g. The supernatant was analyzed at 4°C by fast
performance liquid chromatography (FPLC), using a Superose 6HR
10/30 size-exclusion column (Pharmacia Biotech, Piscataway, NJ),
essentially as described.18
Transfection/transactivation procedures
COS-1 cells in exponential growth were seeded at
2 × 105 cells per well in 6-well plates 1 day before
transfection, using DMEM with 10% FBS (without antibiotics). Cells
were rinsed with serum-free Opti-MEM I (Gibco BRL, Bethesda, MD) and
transfected by using the Lipofectamine Plus kit (Gibco BRL). The
transfection mixture (190 µL Opti-MEM I, 0.6 µg of the reporter
plasmid DR5-tk-Luc, 0.4 µg pS5 containing either wild- type or mutant
PML-RAR , 0.3 µg pCMV- -Galactosidase, 6 µL PLUS reagent, and
4 µL Lipofectamine reagent) was overlaid onto the cells and incubated
for 4 hours at 37°C. The transfection mixture was then replaced by 2 mL DMEM containing 10% FBS and different RA concentrations in the
absence or presence of sodium butyrate (NaB) or TSA. After 48 hours'
incubation, the transfected cells were lysed in 500 µL Report Lysis
Buffer (Promega, Madison, WI). After centrifugation, 20 µL cell
lysate supernatant was mixed with 100 µL Luciferase Assay Reagent
(Promega), and the luciferase activity was measured by a luminometer
and then normalized with -gal activity.
Cell culture and analysis procedures
Enriched APL cell fractions were prepared from heparinized bone
marrow specimens, placed in tissue culture in the presence or absence
of experimental agents, and analyzed for evidence of cell
proliferation, death, and differentiation after variable culture
periods, following slight modifications of previously reported
procedures.5,19 The AP-1060 cell culture strain was derived from case 1, as described elsewhere.20
For flow cytometric analysis, cellular Fc receptors were first blocked
with 200 µg/mL normal mouse immunoglobulin G (Caltag, Burlingame, CA)
for 10 minutes at room temperature. The cells were then incubated with
phycoerythrin-conjugated CD11b (clone D12) or an isotype-matched
control antibody (Becton Dickinson, San Jose, CA) for 15 minutes at
room temperature. After washing and resuspending the cells, 20 000
events were analyzed by using a FACScan flow cytometer and Cell Quest
software (Becton Dickinson).
Histone acetylation
APL cells were incubated with different concentrations of RA
with or without 1 mM NaB at 37°C for 2 to 6 hours. Total cellular proteins were extracted as described.21 Protein extracts
of 4 × 105 cells were separated by sodium dodecyl
sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis on a 10% Tris-glycine
Novex precast gel (Invitrogen, Carlesbad, CA) and electroblotted to
nitrocellulose membrane (Pierce, Rockford, IL). The blot was first
incubated with 1 µg/mL antiacetylated histone H3 polyclonal antibody
(Upstate, Lake Placid, NY) and then with 0.2 µg/mL peroxidase-labeled
goat antirabbit antibody (Pierce) for detection with chemiluminescent
substrate (Pierce). After stripping (ImmunoPure IgG Elution Buffer;
Pierce), the blot was reprobed with 1 µg/mL antiacetylated histone H4
polyclonal antibody (Upstate) or 1:10 000 anti- -actin (Sigma, St
Louis, MO).
 |
Results |
Identification of PML-RAR missense mutations
Sequence analysis of the RAR region of PML-RAR mRNA revealed
base substitutions in 5 of 8 multiple relapse APL patients (Figure
1 and Table
2). Each base substitution produced an
amino acid codon change characteristic of missense mutations: Pro407Ser (case 1), Arg294Trp (case 4), Gly289Arg (case 6), Lys207Asn (case 7),
and Arg272Gln (case 8). No base substitutions were observed in the
corresponding sequence of the normal RAR allele (not shown). All 5 mutations occurred in the LBD of the RAR -region of PML-RAR and
were distributed in 3 distinct zones (Figure
2A,B): 1 near the beginning of the LBD
(Lys207Asn), 3 in a central zone (Arg272Gln, Gly289Arg, and Arg294Trp),
and 1 in a preterminal zone (Pro407Ser).

View larger version (44K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 1.
Automated DNA sequence analysis of nested, PML-RAR
allele-specific PCR products from 5 APL cases with single nucleotide
changes.
(A) Case 1, C T (Pro Ser). (B) Case 4, C T (Arg Trp). (C) Case
6, G A (Gly Arg). (D) Case 7, A T, (Lys Asn). (E) Case 8, G A
(Arg Gln).
|
|

View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 2.
Position of naturally occurring missense mutations in 3 zones of the ligand-binding domain of the RAR region.
Panel A shows the RAR region of PML-RAR , and Panel B 3 zones of
clustered mutations in the homologous TR defined in extensive
studies of RTHS.27,28 Asterisks indicate the positions of
the 5 missense mutations found in this report. Roman numerals I to III
designate the 3 clustered mutation zones. The numbers below the zones
indicate the number of mutations identified in each of the 3 zones, as
follows: (A) unique (numerator) and total (denominator) naturally
occurring PML-RAR mutants and (B) the number of unique mutations in
TR in the RTHS in the cited reviews.28,29
|
|
The mutations were discovered in specimens obtained after 2 to 4 relapses and 3 or 4 previous courses of RA therapy (Table 1). In 2 patients the mutations were found in specimens obtained before the
initiation of RA + PB therapy (cases 4 and 6), and, in case 6, a
specimen obtained after relapse from RA + PB therapy contained the
same mutation. In 2 other RA + PB-treated patients (cases 7 and
8), the mutations were only documented after failure of RA + PB
therapy. In case 7, the mutation was not present in a specimen obtained
16 months before RA + PB therapy, and, in case 8, the mutation was
not detected in a specimen before any leukemic therapy.
RA-binding activity of mutant PML-RAR proteins
As assessed by FPLC of nuclear extracts from transfected COS-1
cells incubated with 10 nM [3H]RA, 2 mutants, Gly289Arg
and Arg294Trp, completely lacked RA-binding activity (Figure
3E,H). Two mutants, Lys207Asn and
Pro407Ser, bound the ligand primarily in a monomeric/dimeric
configuration (Figure 3C,F), in contrast to the wild type L-form
control, which expressed more characteristic high molecular mass,
multimeric complexes (Figure 3B).8,22 The Arg272Gln L-form
mutant bound ligand in a pattern that resembled the wild-type pattern,
although reduced in amount (Figure 3D). Because this binding was
apparently greater than previously reported for an Arg272Gln S-form
mutant,23 we prepared this mutant in an S-form context;
ligand binding also showed a modest reduction of multimeric complexes
compared with the wild type S-form control (Figure 3G and not
shown).

View larger version (39K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 3.
Size-exclusion FPLC analysis of nuclear RA-binding
activity in COS-1 cells.
Cells are transfected with pSG5 vector (A), wild-type PML-RAR L form
(B), mutant Lys207Asn (C), mutant Arg272Gln (D), mutant Gly289Arg (E),
mutant Pro407Ser (F), wild-type PML-RAR S form (G), and mutant
Arg294Trp (H). Nuclear extracts were incubated with 10 nmol/L
[3H]-RA in the absence ( ) or presence ( ) of
200-fold excess of unlabeled RA for 15 hours at 4°C. The samples were
fractionated over a Superose 6HR 10/30 column at 0.4-mL intervals.
Arrows indicate the fraction numbers of marker proteins (in kd) used to
calibrate the FPLC column.
|
|
Effect of RA with or without NaB or TSA on mutant PML-RAR
transcriptional transactivation activity
All 5 mutant PML-RAR s showed reduced transcriptional
transactivation activity at 10 nM RA compared with wild-type L- or
S-form PML-RAR s (Figure 4A). The
Arg294Trp and Gly289Arg mutants were totally devoid of activity at 10 nM RA, and, the latter, also at 100 nM RA. The activity of the
Arg294Trp S-form mutant was also decreased at 100 nM RA. The activity
of all mutants was markedly stimulated at 1 µM RA, although this
stimulation was much less for the Gly289Arg mutant. Also, notably, the
depression of baseline activity from that of the pSG5 vector control in
the absence of drug was greater for the mutant PML-RAR s compared
with the wild-type PML-RAR s with the exception of the Pro407Ser
mutant (Figure 4A).

View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 4.
Transcriptional activity of wild-type and mutant
PML-RAR fusion proteins in variable RA concentrations with or
without NaB or TSA.
The DR5-tk-luc reporter was cotransfected with L-form PML-RAR (left
panel) or S-form PML-RAR (right panel) in the absence of HDI (A), in
the presence of 5 mM NaB (B) or 150 nM TSA (C). pSG5 represents the
vector alone. Luciferase activity with different concentrations of RA
is shown after normalization with -gal activity with the
corresponding, calculated fold-induction value indicated
below.
|
|
The transcriptional transactivation activity induced by 10 nM RA was
markedly stimulated in the presence of 5 mM NaB for 4 of the mutant
PML-RAR s compared with the stimulation by 10 nM RA alone (Figure
4B): Lys207Asn, 46- versus 4-fold; Arg272Gln, 40- versus 7-fold;
Pro407Ser, 27- versus 2-fold; and Arg294Trp, 65- versus 1-fold.
Conversely, combination NaB had no effect on Gly289Arg mutant activity
until a concentration of 1 µM RA, which produced a strong interactive
effect (44- versus 9-fold). A more modest stimulatory effect of 5 mM
NaB in the presence of 10 nM RA was observed for the wild-type
PML-RAR s: L-form, 15- versus 22-fold, and S-form, 5- versus 11-fold.
The latter was partly related to the fact that 5 mM NaB produced some
augmentation of baseline transcriptional activity in both pSG5 and the
wild-type transfectants (but not the mutant transfectants) in the
absence of RA supplementation, which likely is related to low levels of endogenous RA and RARs in the COS-1 cell culture system.
TSA (150 µM), a more specific HDI, had the same effects as 5 mM NaB
with some differences in detail (Figure 4C). TSA had a lesser effect on
baseline pSG5 activity and did not significantly relieve the
transcriptional repressive effect of the wild-type PML-RAR s. This
effect contributed to the greater stimulatory effect of TSA than NaB on
wild-type PML-RAR s in combination with 10 nM RA: L-form, 29-versus
22-fold, and S-form, 45- versus 11-fold. However, the stimulatory
interaction between 150 µM TSA and various RA concentrations was
generally less than that with 5 mM NaB on the mutant PML-RAR s. These
minor differences may reflect quantitative variations from the activity
optimum for each agent or could reflect qualitative differences related
to alternative, non-HDI activities of NaB.15
Differentiation response of APL cells harboring PML-RAR
Gly289Arg and Pro407Ser mutations
APL cells obtained from clinically responsive case 6 after relapse
from RA + PB therapy were tested for in vitro sensitivity to
differentiation induction by the 2 therapeutic agents. Up to 1 µM RA,
there was little or no evidence of cellular differentiation compared
with untreated cells (Figure 5B,C).
However, 1 mM NaB alone produced increased nuclear segmentation in a
significant proportion of the cells (Figure 5D), and this number was
increased in the presence of 1 µM RA (Figure 5E). The impression that
these nuclear changes reflected increased differentiation in the
presence of NaB, augmented by RA, was confirmed by measurement of the
myeloid differentiation marker CD11b. After culture for 4 days, the
percentage of CD11b+ cells increased to 58% in the
presence of 1 mM NaB alone and 75% in 1 mM NaB combined with 1 µM
RA, compared with no increase from the baseline value of 18% in the
absence or presence of 1 µM RA alone (Figure
6A). Under none of these conditions was
the nitroblue tetrazolium dye reduction test positive, suggesting a
defect in superoxide production in these multiple relapse APL cells,
which had typical cytologic features of the M3 variant form of APL
(Figure 5A).24

View larger version (35K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 5.
Cytologic evaluation of APL cells from PML-RAR
Gly289Arg mutant case 6 in the absence or presence of RA or NaB alone
and in combination.
Photographs of cytospin slide preparations of sodium
metrizoate-selected low-density (P 1.077 g/mL) bone
marrow cells were taken at × 1000 magnification of modified Wright
stain (Dif-Quik, Sigma, St Louis, MO). (A) Prior to culture; (B-E)
cultured × 4 days with (B) no added drug, (C) 1 µM RA, (D) 1 mM
NaB, or (E) 1 µM RA + 1 mM NaB.
|
|

View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 6.
Differentiation response of APL cells.
APL cells from case 6 (A) and from AP-1060 cells derived from case 1 (B) were cultured for the indicated time in the absence of agents
( ), in 1 µM RA ( ), in 1 mM NaB ( ), or in 1 µM RA + 1 mM NaB ( ). The percentage of terminally differentiated APL cells was
measured in case 6 by the expression of CD11b surface antigen
detected by flow cytometry (A) or in AP-1060 cells by the
nitroblue tetrazolium dye reduction test (B).
|
|
APL cells were available for in vitro testing from one other patient
with a PML-RAR mutation (Pro407Ser; case 1) in the form of a culture
strain, called AP-1060.20 In contrast to the Gly289Arg mutant cells, NaB alone had no discernible effect on AP-1060 cell differentiation, as measured cytologically (not shown) or by the nitroblue tetrazolium test (Figure 6B). Similarly, no differentiation was observed with NaB or a subinducing RA concentration (10 nM RA; not
shown). A strong positive interactive effect was, however, observed
with 100 nM RA, an effective inducing RA concentration (Figure 6B).
Acetylation of H3 and H4 histones
Exposure to 1 mM NaB for 2 to 6 hours resulted in effective
hyperacetylation of H3 and H4 histones in APL cells from the Gly289Arg mutant case and in AP-1060 cells (Figures
7A,B), as well as in transfected COS-1
cells (not shown). RA alone (1 µM) produced trace histone
acetylation, which only minimally increased the level of histone
acetylation produced by 1 mM NaB alone in either cell type.

View larger version (56K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Figure 7.
Western blot analysis of H3 and H4 histone acetylation
in APL cells.
APL cells from case 6 (A) and AP-1060 cells (B) were treated with 1 mM
NaB, 1 µM RA, or 1 mM NaB + 1 µM RA for the indicated periods
of time in tissue culture.
|
|
 |
Discussion |
This study found that 5 (62.5%) of 8 APL patients who had
relapsed after 2 or more courses of RA-containing therapy had missense mutations in the RAR -region of PML-RAR . This finding compares with the finding of such mutations in 3 (25%) of 12 first- relapse RA-treated APL patients.5 Although the case numbers are
small, these results strongly suggest that repeated and longer exposure to RA-containing therapy is associated with increased risk of developing PML-RAR mutations. It seems improbable that any of these
mutations were present in the APL cells before initial therapy, as
demonstrated in case 8 in this study, because such mutations have not
been observed in more than 30 de novo APL cases, including 5 published
cases positive for mutations at relapse.5,7,25 In one
patient (case 7), the mutation may have been late emerging, possibly
during RA + PB therapy, because no mutation was detected in a
specimen obtained 16 months previously during a transient CR on ATO
therapy. Conversely, in another patient (case 6), the same mutation was
detected before initiating and after relapse from a 7-month remission
achieved on RA + PB therapy.16 The latter observation
suggests that, once established, the mutant clone may persist, but,
clearly, more data on serial specimens and in successive relapses are
needed to assess possible subclonal variation. Further studies are also
required to determine when the mutations arise and/or become detectable
in the APL cell population during the course of therapy and to
determine what role the coadministration of chemotherapy or other
agents may have in the acquisition of mutations. The emergence of
mutant subclones could also affect the rate of clinical recurrence from
minimal residual disease levels, a factor to consider in the use of
PML-RAR mRNA measurements by RT-PCR to assess relapse
risk.26,27
This report adds 4 novel missense mutations to 6 previously identified
unique PML-RAR missense mutations, all in the LBD of the RAR
region of the molecule (Table 3). A
fifth missense mutation (Arg272Gln) was identical to 2 previously
reported point mutations,6,7 suggesting that this site
could be a hot spot related to RA resistance in APL. The position of
the mutations in the RAR region LBD in 13 positive APL relapse
cases, counting the redundant cases (Table 3), appears to be segregated
into the same 3 zones of clustered mutations identified in the
homologous thyroid hormone receptor- (TR ) in the more extensively
studied resistance to thyroid hormone syndrome
(RTHS).28,29 As shown in Figure 2A,B, 9 of 13 PML-RAR
mutations occurred in central LBD zone I, corresponding to the site of
the most numerous mutations of TR in RTHS; 3 of 13 PML-RAR
mutations occurred in the near carboxy-terminal activator function-2
region, corresponding to TR mutational zone II; and 1 of 13, the
Lys207Asn mutant, occurred in a more proximal zone of the RAR -region
LBD, corresponding to a recently defined, third zone of clustered
mutations in the LBD of TR .29 The uniform finding of
missense mutations in the PML-RAR LBD contrasts with the finding of
some deletion mutations in the TR LBD,28 suggesting
different mutational mechanisms. Similarly, the finding of a common
nonsense mutation in PML-RAR or RAR in RA-sensitive human myeloid
leukemia cell lines selected for RA resistance in vitro (NB4 and HL-60,
respectively),30-32 suggests that mutation mechanisms may
differ in vitro and in vivo.
The common positional mutations in the LBD of the TR and PML-RAR
imply common functional defects as well. Studies of numerous TR
mutants from all 3 clustered mutation zones indicate that these
mutations result in defective activation of thyroid hormone response
genes by reducing TR-ligand binding, increasing TR-corepressor binding,
and, in some cases, decreasing TR-coactivator
binding.28,29,33 A recent study of 5 naturally occurring
PML-RAR mutants demonstrated similar RAR -region binding
defects.23 In the current study, 2 PML-RAR mutants
(Arg294Trp and Gly289Arg) showed a marked reduction in RA binding
(Figure 3), and all 5 mutants showed reduced RA transactivation of an
RARE-regulated reporter gene compared with wild-type PML-RAR
controls (Figure 4). Although more detailed molecular studies are
required to understand the heterogeneity of PML-RAR mutant molecular
mechanisms, the disproportionate involvement of the basic amino acids,
arginine and lysine, that were converted to hydrophobic (tryptophan) or
neutral (glutamine and asparagine) amino acids in 50% or more of
overall mutations is notable (5 of 10 unique mutations and 8 of 13 total mutations; Table 3). Such alterations, which also might apply to
the acquisition of arginine in the Gly289Arg mutation, have been
related to changes in interactions with negatively charged residues in
the carboxylate moiety of RA, in DNA, and in other proteins, possibly
including acetyl and phosphate groups.34-38
The current study clearly demonstrates that there was no relationship
between the functional status of PML-RAR and clinical outcome on
RA + PB therapy. This finding poses 2 essential questions: Why did
case 6 with the most dysfunctional PML-RAR mutation respond to
RA + PB treatment, and why did the other 4 patients with either wild-type PML-RAR or less dysfunctional PML-RAR mutations fail to
respond? Regarding case 6, there seems little doubt that the Gly289Arg
mutation produced severe RA resistance, because the APL cells failed to
show any signs of differentiation after treatment with 1 µM RA. At
this relatively high concentration, a synergistic interaction between
RA and NaB was observed in a transactivation transcription reporter
assay (Figure 4B). Although this interaction could be an important
element in the clinical response of case 6 to RA + PB therapy,
this in vitro response required at least a 10-fold higher RA
concentration to elicit compared with the other PML-RAR mutants.
These considerations suggest that our additional observation that NaB
alone was able to induce partial differentiation of the APL cells from
case 6 in short-term culture (Figures 5 and 6) might signify a
contributory factor to this patient's clinical response. That this
might have been a discriminatory factor is enhanced by the observation
that the APL cells from an alternative PML-RAR mutant case
(case 1) did not differentiate in response to NaB as a single agent
(Figure 6), which is in accord with a reported mutant NB4
subline.13 Thus, NaB may have contributed to the
exceptional clinical response of case 6 by modulating critical differentiation-response genes in a non-RA-dependent manner. If this
suggestion is valid, it would not have been apparent from the global
histone H3 and 4 acetylation studies performed to compare cases 6 and
1, which showed no apparent intercase variation in histone acetylation
pattern (Figure 7).
Regarding the failure of the other 4 RA + PB-treated
patients to respond, insufficient information is available to offer any specific hypotheses. In our previous study of de novo APL, more first-relapse patients were resistant to RA-induced differentiation than harbored PML-RAR mutations (8 of 10 versus 3 of 12, respectively).5 This finding indicates the involvement of
alternative defects in APL cellular RA resistance that might reasonably
be expected to be compounded in the cells of patients who have
experienced further treatments and relapses. Thus, it would not be
surprising if the differentiation response of the APL cells from the 4 nonresponder RA + PB-treated patients did not parallel the
PML-RAR transfection transactivation activity, as it did in both
case 6 with Gly289Arg and case 1 with Pro407Ser mutant cells. One
possible alternative mechanism of RA resistance in these patients, who
had previously been extensively treated with both RA and ATO, is
hypercatabolism of PML-RAR protein, as reported in NB4 sublines
intensively selected with these agents in vitro.39-41
Although the ATO-induced hypercatabolism depended on the continuous
presence of ATO,40,41 which did not pertain in the current
clinical cases, this and other potential mechanisms of clinical APL
cellular RA resistance require further study.42
Additionally, the 4 nonresponder patients might have had precellular
aberrations of RA pharmacology that prevented adequate leukemic cell RA
delivery.43 From these considerations, we conclude that
neither the presence nor the nature of PML-RAR mutations is
predictive for responsiveness to RA + PB therapy.
 |
Footnotes |
Submitted April 2, 2001; accepted October 10, 2001.
Supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (CA56771
[R.E.G.] and CA73136 [R.P.W.]) and from the Lymphoma Foundation (R.P.W.).
The publication costs of this
article were defrayed in part by
page charge payment. Therefore,
and solely to indicate this fact,
this article is hereby marked
"advertisement"
in accordance with 18 U.S.C.
section 1734.
Reprints: Robert E. Gallagher, Department of Medical
Oncology, Montefiore Medical Center, Rm 601, Hofheimer Bldg, 111 E
210th St, Bronx, NY 10467; e-mail: rgallagh{at}aecom.yu.edu.
 |
References |
1.
Chen Z-X, Xue Y-Q, Zhang R, et al.
A clinical and experimental study on all-trans retinoic acid-treated acute promyelocytic leukemia patients.
Blood.
1991;78:1413-1419[Abstract/Free Full Text].
2.
Delva L, Cornic M, Balitrand N, et al.
Resistance to all-trans-retinoic acid (ATRA) therapy in relapsing acute promyelocytic leukemia: study of in vitro sensitivity and cellular retinoic acid binding protein levels in leukemic cells.
Blood.
1993;82:2175-2181[Abstract/Free Full Text].
3.
Frankel SR, Eardley A, Heller G, et al.
All-trans-retinoic acid for acute promyelocytic leukemia: results of the New York study.
Ann Intern Med.
1994;120:278-286[Abstract/Free Full Text].
4.
Miller W Jr, Jakubowski A, Tong W, et al.
9-cis retinoic acid induces complete remission but does not reverse clinically acquired retinoid resistance in acute promyelocytic leukemia.
Blood.
1995;85:3021-3027[Abstract/Free Full Text].
5.
Ding W, Li YP, Nobile LM, et al.
Leukemic cellular retinoic acid resistance and missense mutations in the PML-RAR fusion gene after relapse of acute promyelocytic leukemia from treatment with all-trans retinoic acid and intensive chemotherapy.
Blood.
1998;92:1172-1183[Abstract/Free Full Text].
6.
Imaizumi M, Suzuki H, Yoshinari M, et al.
Mutations in the E-domain of RAR portion of the PML/RAR chimeric gene may confer clinical resistance to all-trans retinoic acid in acute promyelocytic leukemia.
Blood.
1998;92:374-382[Abstract/Free Full Text].
7.
Marasca R, Zucchini P, Galimberti S, et al.
Missense mutations in the PML/RAR ligand binding domain in ATRA-resistant AS2O3 sensitive relapse acute promyelocytic leukemia.
Haematologica.
1999;84:963-968[Abstract/Free Full Text].
8.
Minucci S, Maccarana M, Cioce M, et al.
Oligomerization of RAR and AML1 transcription factors as a novel mechanism of oncogenic activation.
Mol Cell.
2000;5:811-820[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
9.
Lin RJ, Evans RM.
Acquisition of oncogenic potential by RAR chimeras in acute promyelocytic leukemia through formation of homodimers.
Mol Cell.
2000;5:821-830[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
10.
Grignani F, Valtieri M, Gabbianelli M, et al.
PML/RAR fusion protein expression in normal human hematopoietic progenitors dictates myeloid commitment and the promyelocytic phenotype.
Blood.
2000;96:1531-1537[Abstract/Free Full Text].
11.
McKenna NJ, Lanz RB, O'Malley BW.
Nuclear receptor coregulators: cellular and molecular biology.
Endocrine Rev.
1999;20:321-344[Abstract/Free Full Text].
12.
Marks PA, Richon VM, Rifkind RA.
Histone deacetylase inhibitors: inducers of differentiation or apoptosis of transformed cells.
J Natl Cancer Inst.
2000;92:1210-1216[Abstract/Free Full Text].
13.
Lin RJ, Nagy L, Inoue S, et al.
Role of the histone deacetylase complex in acute promyelocytic leukemia.
Nature.
1998;391:811-814[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
14.
He LZ, Merghoub T, Pandolfi PP.
In vivo analysis of the molecular pathogenesis of acute promyelocytic leukemia in the mouse and its therapeutic implications.
Oncogene.
1999;18:5278-5292[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve].
15.
Redner RL, Wang J, Liu JM.
Chromatin remodeling and leukemia: new therapeutic paradigms.
Blood.
1999;94:417-428[Free Full Text].
16.
Warrell RP Jr, He LZ, Richon V, Calleja E, Pandolfi PP.
Therapeutic targeting of transcription in acute promyelocytic leukemia by use of an inhibitor of histone deacetylase.
J Natl Cancer Inst.
1998;90:1621-1625[Abstract/Free Full Text].
17.
Novick S, Camacho L, Gallagher R, et al.
Initial clinical evaluation of "transcription therapy" for cancer: all-trans retinoic acid and phenylbutyrate.
Blood.
1999;94(suppl 1):61a.
18.
Jetten AM, Grippo JF, Nervi C.
Isolation and binding characteristics of nuclear retinoic acid receptors. In:
Packer L, ed.
Methods in Enzymology. Vol 189. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 1990:248-255.
19.
Gallagher RE, Li Y-P, Rao S, et al.
Characterization of acute promyelocytic leukemia cases with PML-RAR break/fusion sites in PML exon 6: identification of a subgroup with decreased in vitro responsiveness to all-trans retinoic acid.
Blood.
1995;86:1540-1547[Abstract/Free Full Text].
20.
Kim SH, Ding W, Cannizzaro L, et al.
Cell line AP-1060 with novel phenotypic and genotypic features established from acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL) patient clinically-resistant to all-trans retinoic acid (RA) and arsenic trioxide (ATO) [abstract].
Blood.
1998;92(suppl 1):609a.
21.
Sambrook J, Maniatis T, Fritsch EF.
Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual. 2nd ed. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Press; 1990.
22.
Benedetti L, Levin AA, Scicchitano BM, et al.
Characterization of the retinoid binding properties of the major fusion products present acute promyelocytic leukemia cells.
Blood.
1997;90:1175-1185[Abstract/Free Full Text].
23.
Cote S, Zhou D, Bianchini A, et al.
Altered ligand binding and transcriptional regulation by mutations in the PML/RAR ligand-binding domain arising in retinoic acid-resistant patients with acute promyelocytic leukemia.
Blood.
2000;96:3200-3208[Abstract/Free Full Text].
24.
Bennett J, Catovsky D, Daniel M-T, et al.
Proposed revised criteria for the classification of acute myeloid leukemia.
Ann Intern |