← Back
Discovery of Ruthenium(II) Metallocompound and Olaparib Synergy for Cancer Combination Therapy.
Synergistic drug combinations can extend the use of poly(ADP-ribose)
polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) such as Olaparib to BRCA-proficient
tumors and overcome acquired or de novo drug resistance. To identify
new synergistic combinations for PARPi, we screened a “micro-library”
comprising a mix of commercially available drugs and DNA-binding ruthenium(II)
polypyridyl complexes (RPCs) for Olaparib synergy in BRCA-proficient
triple-negative breast cancer cells. This identified three hits: the
natural product Curcumin and two ruthenium(II)-rhenium(I) polypyridyl
metallomacrocycles. All combinations identified were effective in
BRCA-proficient breast cancer cells, including an Olaparib-resistant
cell line, and spheroid models. Mechanistic studies indicated that
synergy was achieved via DNA-damage enhancement and resultant apoptosis.
Combinations showed low cytotoxicity toward non-malignant breast epithelial
cells and low acute and developmental toxicity in zebrafish embryos.
This work identifies RPC metallomacrocycles as a novel class of agents
for cancer combination therapy and provides a proof of concept for
the inclusion of metallocompounds within drug synergy screens.
## Introduction
Introduction PARP inhibitors (PARPi) such as Olaparib
are now under clinical
investigation in both single-agent and combination treatment regimens, 1 and they achieve their effects by preventing
the repair of DNA single-strand breaks (SSBs) or stalled replication
forks, generating cytotoxic DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) that trigger
cell death by apoptosis. 2 Through synthetic
lethality, cancers with deficient BRCA pathways are hypersensitive
to PARP inhibition 3 and, as a consequence,
PARP inhibitors have been employed as treatments for BRCA-deficient
breast cancers to great effect. In these circumstances, they induce
a high therapeutic response with low side effects compared to traditional
cytotoxic chemotherapy. 4 However, use of
PARPi as single agents is restricted by the fact that BRCA-deficient
cancers account for a relatively small subset of cancers compared
to the BRCA wild-type 5 and the heterogenous
nature of cancers means that resistance after early use is common. 6 This is particularly true for triple-negative
breast cancer (TNBC), an aggressive form of the disease with a disproportionately
high rate of mortality. 7 Combination
therapy has also proven to be a highly successful cancer
strategy; synergistic drug combinations offer improved cancer specificity
and reduced side effects compared to single-agent treatment and can
also combat the challenge of drug resistance. 8 As PARP inhibitors rely upon synthetic lethality to exert their
cytotoxic effects, a combination of PARPi alongside conventional DNA-damaging
chemotherapy such as cisplatin or gemcitabine or ionizing radiation
has shown encouraging results in clinical trials. 1 , 9 − 11 Inspired by these efforts, synergistic drug combinations
for PARPi or agents that induce “chemical BRCAness”
have the potential to expand PARPi clinical usage to include BRCA-proficient
cancers. 12 The most common methodology
employed to develop new drug combinations for PARPi is judicious selection
of complimentary small molecules based on underlying molecular biology; 13 − 16 however, screening chemical libraries also holds the potential to
uncover new chemical or biological approaches to achieve drug synergy. 17 , 18 Despite this, chemical screens for PARPi synergy are rare, yet the
potential for this may be demonstrated by Liu et al. who utilized
this to great effect to identify BET, SRC, and BCL2 inhibitors as
new combinatorial therapeutics able to overcome PARPi resistance. 19 This approach has the advantage that chemical
diversity can be introduced deliberately, thereby promoting serendipitous
discovery and the isolation of new scaffolds for chemically induced
synthetic lethality. 20 , 21 One route to expanded chemical
diversity is presented by organometallic
or coordination chemistry as metallocompounds can provide molecular
geometries, shapes, and reactivities inaccessible to pure organics. 22 Numerous metallocompounds have been examined
for their anticancer properties, where modulated chemical stability
and metal- and/or ligand-based reactivities are cited as advantageous
properties. 23 The most successful have
been the platinum drugs, including octahedral Pt(IV) pro-drugs, 24 while, more recently, substitutionally inert
ruthenium(II) polypyridyl complexes (RPCs) have become the subject
of increasing interest as potential successors to these platinum systems. 25 − 27 The potential of RPCs within this area can be illustrated by work
describing RPCs that intercalate between base pairs of DNA, “metallo-intercalators”,
that are able to interfere with DNA replication or transcription with
distinct mechanisms of action compared to existing DNA targeting agents
such as cisplatin. 28 − 30 Specific examples include the organometallic complex
[Ru(bpy)(phpy)(dppz)] + (bpy = 2,2′bipyridine; phpy
= 2-phenylpyridine; dppz = dipyrido[3,2- a :2′,3′- c ]phenazine), which disrupts the transcription factor NF-κB
binding to DNA, resulting in low-micromolar half inhibitory IC 50 concentrations in numerous cancer cell lines 28 and [Ru(phen) 2 (tpphz)] 2+ (phen = 1,10-phenanthroline; tpphz = tetrapyridophenazine), which
induces replication fork collapse and inhibits esophageal cancer cell
proliferation through a combination of S-phase cell-cycle arrest and
mitotic arrest. 29 Notably, both complexes
exhibit cytotoxicity comparable to—or greater than—cisplatin
but with improved cancer selectivity. We have described one
such RPC, [Ru(dppz) 2 (PIP)] 2+ (PIP = 2-(phenyl)-imidazo[4,5- f ][1,10]phenanthroline),
“Ru-PIP”, which achieves preferential cancer cell proliferation
inhibition by replication fork stalling and corresponding G1/S phase
cell-cycle arrest. 31 Remarkably, sub-cytotoxic
concentrations of Ru-PIP render TNBC and lung cancer cells hypersensitive
to Olaparib, with a >300-fold increase in Olaparib potency achieved
as a result of complementary mechanisms of action, 32 , 33 one of the greatest nongenetic PARPi enhancement effects described
to date. In this study, we continue these efforts to identify and
characterize new synergistic combinations for PARPi in BRCA-proficient
TNBC cells. By employing a proof-of-concept “micro-library”
comprising a mix of DNA-binding RPCs and commercially available DNA-damaging
drugs, a secondary aim was to explore the use of metallocompounds
alongside organics for additional chemical diversity in a drug synergy
screen. We characterized the mechanism of synergy for newly discovered
synergistic combinations in detail and verified the activity in an
Olaparib-resistant cell line and tumor spheroids before finally assessing
their in vivo toxicity in a zebrafish embryo model.
## Results
Results Design of a Mixed Metallocompound/Organic DNA-Targeting “Micro-library” A “micro-library” of 19 compounds was assembled,
which was composed of nine commercially available anti-cancer drugs
or drug candidates and 10 DNA-binding RPCs. Compounds selected were
DNA-damaging chemotherapeutics cisplatin, gemcitabine hydrochloride,
and Fluorouracil (5FU), oestrogen antagonist Tamoxifen citrate, PARPi
NU1025, ATR (ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related protein) inhibitors
Berzosertib and Ceralasertib, and natural products Quercetin and Curcumin
( Table S1 in the Supporting Information). RPCs utilized three distinct scaffolds: [Ru(N^N) 2 (PIP)] 2+ ( 1 – 4 ), [Ru(N^N) 2 (dmdppz)] 2+ (dmdppz = 10,12-dimethyl-dipyrido[3,2- a :2′,3′- c ]phenazine) ( 5 – 7 ), or Ru(II)-Re(I) qtpy metallomacrocycles
(qtpy = 2,2′:4,4″:4′,4″′ quaterpyridyl)
( 8 – 10 ) ( Figure 1 a). RPCs were synthesized by established
pathways 34 − 38 and characterized by 1 H NMR, mass spectrometry, and elemental
analysis. Results for previously reported compounds ( 1 – 4 and 8 – 10 )
were in agreement with published data. 34 , 35 Novel compounds 5 – 7 were characterized by 1 H and 13 C NMR, high-resolution mass spectrometry, elemental
analysis, HPLC, and FT-IR ( Figures S1–S8 ). All RPCs bind DNA by reversible binding with medium to high affinity,
and luminescence titrations indicated that the three novel [Ru(N^N) 2 (dmdppz)] 2+ complexes demonstrated the highest
DNA binding affinities (binding affinities ( K b ) = 8.7 × 10 6 , 9.2 × 10 6 ,
and 5.7 × 10 6 M –1 for 5 , 6 , and 7 respectively, Figure S9 and Table S2 ). In terms of DNA binding mode, compounds 1 – 7 and 10 contain established
intercalating ligands PIP, H-PIP (2-(4-hydroxyphenyl)imidazo[4,5- f ][1,10]phenanthroline), dppz, or dmdppz, 39 , 40 while 8 and 9 bind DNA via non-intercalative
mechanisms. 41 , 42 As a result, all compounds either
bind DNA in cell-free conditions with medium to high affinity, induce
DNA damage by targeting DNA in cells or inhibiting DNA repair, or
have been reported to induce cellular DNA damage in mechanistic studies
( Tables S1 and S2 ). Figure 1 (a) Structures of RPCs
employed within this study. Compounds were
used as a mixture of enantiomers. (b) Combination indices (CIs) for
micro-library compound/Olaparib combinations in MDA-MB-231 cells.
Cell viability without or with Olaparib (10 μM) determined after
72 h treatment by the MTT assay (mean of at least two independent
experiments). CI values were calculated using CompuSyn software, and
a heat map was generated as described in the Experimental Section.
Clonogenic survival assays of (c) MDA-MB-231 or (d) MCF7 cells treated
with single-agent Olaparib (0.1, 1, or 10 μM) or in combination
with low-dose (1 μM) Curcumin (CUR), 8 , or 10 (72 h treatment time). Data expressed as mean ± SEM
of three independent experiments. * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, and *** P < 0.001 compared
to the Olaparib single agent-treated group by ANOVA. Olaparib Co-treatment Identifies New Synergistic Combinations To identify synergistic combinations with Olaparib, BRCA-proficient
MDA-MB-231 TNBC cells were treated with a concentration gradient of
each micro-library compound in the absence or presence of low-dose,
non-cytotoxic (10 μM) Olaparib ( Figure S10 ). Resultant cell viabilities at 72 h were determined by an MTT assay,
and these data were used to derive half inhibitory IC 50 concentrations ( Figure S11 and Table 1 ). Table 1 Half Maximal Inhibitory Concentration
(IC 50 ) Values of Each Compound Alone or in Combination
with Olaparib (10 μM) a –OLAP +OLAP compound IC 50 (μM) IC 50 (μM) fold shift cisplatin 35.3 ± 5.5 26.1 ± 11.1 1.4 gemcitabine hydrochloride 1.6 ± 0.8 0.6 ± 0.1 2.7 Fluorouracil 12.1 ± 3.0 4.2 ± 0.3 2.9 Tamoxifen citrate 20.6
± 1.3 19.9 ± 4.7 1.0 Berzosertib 0.46 ± 0.01 0.27 ± 0.06 1.7 Ceralasertib 4.4 ± 0.4 5.0 ± 1.5 0.9 NU1025 >100 >100 ND Quercetin >100 7.1 ± 5.7 >14.1 Curcumin 25.1 ± 2.4 0.09 ±
0.01 278.9 1 >100 75.5 ± 12.2 >1.3 2 >100 >100 ND 3 29.2 ± 3.7 8.0 ± 3.3 3.7 4 11.6 ±
3.2 1.7 ± 0.9 6.8 5 75.1 ± 12.2 >100 <0.8 6 87.4 ± 2.3 17.4 ± 5.3 5.0 7 34.3
± 0.5 15.2 ± 2.5 2.3 8 80.9 ± 8.2 0.6 ± 0.3 134.8 9 >100 57.4 ± 10.2 >1.7 10 26.3 ± 5.1 1.0 ± 0.2 26.3 a MDA-MB-231 72 h. IC 50 values determined by the MTT assay. Data expressed as mean ±
SD of at least two independent experiments. Fold shift = IC 50 (−OLAP)/IC 50 (+OLAP). ND = not determined. Examining the effects of each compound as a single
agent, the most
cytotoxic molecule tested was the ATR inhibitor Berzosertib (IC 50 = 460 ± 10 nM) and 4 was the most cytotoxic
RPC (IC 50 = 11.6 ± 3.2 μM), despite having the
lowest DNA binding affinity ( K b = 6.9
× 10 4 M –1 , Table S2 ). To assess Olaparib synergy, Chou and Talalay combination
indices (CIs) 43 were calculated for each
concentration tested and CI scores of less than 0.9 were considered
synergistic ( Figure 1 b). This analysis identified two clear hits for synergy with Olaparib:
Curcumin and 8 were both synergistic over most of the
tested concentrations, while 10 was scored as a moderate
hit, with 40% of the concentrations tested exhibiting synergy with
Olaparib. The associated IC 50 values illustrate the magnitude
of synergy demonstrated by these three compounds. In each case, a
large increase in potency is generated on inclusion of Olaparib (a
279-, 135-, and 26-fold decrease in IC 50 values for Curcumin, 8 , and 10 respectively, Table 1 ). To validate the synergistic pairs
isolated by this screen, clonogenic
survival assays on the three hits were performed in the presence and
absence of Olaparib. These demonstrated that MDA-MB-231 cells treated
with a low (1 μM) dose of Curcumin, 8 , or 10 display substantially enhanced cell sensitivity to Olaparib
(a >1000, >143, and >200 increase in Olaparib potency with
the addition
of Curcumin, 8 , and 10 , respectively; Figure 1 c and Table S3 ). As 8 and 10 possess a low impact on colony formation at this concentration (survival
fractions (S.F.) > 70%), this confirms synergy. Also, for their
effect
on MDA-MB-231 cells, combinations were also found to be synergistic
in BRCA-proficient MCF7 human breast cancer cells in both MTT and
clonogenic survival assays ( Figure 1 d, Figures S12 and S13 , Table 2 , and Table S3 ). Table 2 IC 50 Values of Curcumin, 8 , or 10 Alone or in Combination with 10 μM
Olaparib Following 72 h Treatment in MCF10A, MDA-MB-231, or MCF7 Cells
and Their Respective Selectivity Indices (SI) a IC 50 (μM) SI compound(s) MCF10A MDA-MB-231 MCF7 MDA-MB-231 MCF7 untreated +OLAP >100 80.9 ± 15.0 69.6 ± 6.3 >1.2 >1.4 Curcumin –OLAP 37.4 ± 6.0 25.1 ± 2.4 22.5 ± 4.1 1.5 1.7 +OLAP 34.7 ± 8.9 0.09
± 0.01 0.02 ± 0.01 385.6 1735 8 –OLAP 60.0 ± 6.4 80.9
± 8.2 38.0 ± 15.3 0.7 1.6 +OLAP 31.4 ±
5.6 0.6 ± 0.3 0.01 ± 0.01 52.3 3140 10 –OLAP >100 26.3 ± 5.1 >100 >3.8 ND +OLAP >100 1.0 ± 0.2 0.02 ± 0.01 >100 >5000 a IC 50 values determined
by the MTT assay. Data expressed as mean ± SD of at least two
independent experiments ( n = 3). SI = IC 50 MCF10A/IC 50 cancer cell line. Results for MDA-MB-231
cells from Table 1 included
for comparison. ND = not determined To examine cancer selectivity, single agents and combinations
were
tested in MCF10A normal human breast cells. These results show mild
or no cancer selectivity for Curcumin, 8 , or 10 as single agents; however, when each compound is combined with low-dose
Olaparib substantial (>50-fold) cancer v. non-cancer cell selectivity
is then apparent ( Table 2 and Figure S12 in the SI). Olaparib Drug Synergy Identifies New DNA-Damaging Agents As PARP enzymes are responsible for mediating DNA damage repair pathways, 44 the observed synergy of 8 and 10 with the PARPi Olaparib would imply that each molecule
induces DNA damage as part of its mechanism of action. Exploring this
possibility, Figure 2 a,b shows that MDA-MB-231 cells treated with a concentration gradient
of 8 or 10 for 3 h increased the levels
of several DDR signaling proteins in a statistically significant manner,
including activated (phosphorylated) p-ATR (at Thr1989), p-ATM (at
Ser1981, where ATM = ataxia-telangiectasia mutated), and γH2AX
(H2AX phosphorylated at Ser139) ( Figure 2 ). Early activation of these DDR signaling
pathways by 8 and 10 is consistent with
each molecule inducing both single-strand break (SSB) and double-strand
break (DSB) DNA damage, and these results also indicate that our Olaparib
synergy screen has successfully identified new cellular DNA damaging
agents. Figure 2 (a) Western blot analysis of DNA damage response activation in
MDA-MB-231 cells treated with 8 or 10 for
3 h. Cisplatin (CIS) treatment (50 μM, 3 h) was included for
comparative purposes. (b) Quantification of results in (a) by densitometry.
NT = untreated. Data expressed as mean ± SD of triplicate experiments.
* P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, and
*** P < 0.001 by ANOVA. Mechanistic Basis for Olaparib Synergy Examining the
mechanism of synergy of 8 and 10 with Olaparib,
greater γH2AX levels are apparent in cells treated with the
combinations compared to their single-agent equivalents, evidenced
by both immunostaining and immunofluorescence (2.3-fold for CUR +
OLAP vs CUR; 2.7-fold for 8 + OLAP vs 8 ;
3.3-fold for 10 + OLAP vs 10 ; P < 0.05; Figure 3 a and Figure S14 ). This finding was confirmed
by the alkaline comet assay, where significantly greater DNA tail
lengths were measured in all three co-treatment conditions compared
to as a single agent (5.7-fold for CUR + OLAP vs CUR; 5.7-fold for 8 + OLAP vs 8 ; 6.6-fold for 10 +
OLAP vs 10 ; P < 0.05; except P > 0.05 for 8 + OLAP vs OLAP; Figure 3 b). Examining the
impact on
cell-cycle distribution, an increase in cells with the sub-G1 content
( Figure 3 c) accompanied
by elevated levels of Annexin V-positive cells (2.8-fold for CUR +
OLAP vs CUR; 2.7-fold for 8 + OLAP vs 8 ;
3.6-fold for 10 + OLAP vs 10 ; P < 0.05; Figure 3 d) was apparent in all co-treatment conditions, indicative of high
levels of apoptosis, while an increase in intracellular reactive oxygen
species (ROS) levels in cells co-treated with Olaparib and 10 was apparent (6.8-fold for CUR + OLAP vs CUR; 2.5-fold for 8 + OLAP vs 8 ; 2.8-fold for 10 +
OLAP vs 10 ; P < 0.001; except P > 0.05 for 8 + OLAP vs single agents; Figure S15a ). As in MDA-MB-231 cells, enhanced
DNA damage, Annexin-V positive cells, and ROS levels were all observed
in MCF7 cells treated with the three synergistic pairs ( Figures S15b and S16 ). These results are consistent
with a mechanism of synergy whereby DNA damage induced by 8 or 10 is unrepaired due to PARP inhibition by Olaparib,
resulting in the accumulation of substantial DSB damage that triggers
cell death by apoptosis. Figure 3 (a) γH2AX levels upon treatment with the
stated single agent
(1 μM) alone or in combination with Olaparib (10 μM) for
24 h in MDA-MB-231 cells, determined by immunofluorescence and flow
cytometry analysis. The percentage of γH2AX-positive cells in
each population was determined by gating of histograms derived from
single-stained cells. Left, representative histograms, right, quantified
data. (b) Quantification of DNA damage by the alkaline comet assay
for cells treated as in (a). DNA damage assessed by DNA tail % where
at least 100 nucleoids were analyzed per sample. (c) Cell-cycle distribution
of MDA-MB-231 cells treated with the stated single agent (1 μM)
alone or in combination with Olaparib (10 μM) for 72 h, as determined
by PI staining and flow cytometry. Left, representative histograms,
right, quantification of the cell-cycle phase. (d) Annexin V-FITC
assay of MDA-MB-231 cells treated as in (c). Left, representative
scatterplots showing the percentage of cells in each quadrant. Right,
quantification of apoptotic cells (Q3-2 and Q3-4 quadrants) for each
treatment condition. Data expressed as mean ± SD of three independent
experiments. * P < 0.05, ** P <
0.01, and *** P < 0.001 by ANOVA. Synergistic Combinations Retain Activity in an Olaparib-Resistant
Cell Line To examine whether our combinations were effective
in Olaparib-resistant TNBC, we developed an Olaparib-resistant MDA-MB-231
strain, designated MDA-MB-231R, from the parental MDA-MB-231 cell
line by long-term (∼8 months) Olaparib exposure in a similar
manner as described by Kim et al. 45 Olaparib
resistance of MDA-MB-231R cells was confirmed by the clonogenic survival
assay, where a 28-fold level of resistance to Olaparib treatment for
MDA-MB-231R cells compared to parental MDA-MB-231 cells was observed
( Figure S17 ). The acquisition of Olaparib
resistance is accompanied by increased basal levels of p-ATR (activated
ATR), upregulation of drug efflux pumps such as p-glycoprotein (P-gp),
and loss of poly(ADP-ribose) glycohydrolase (PARG) ( Figure 4 a). This finding is consistent
with an up-regulated ATR pathway activation resistance mechanism reported
by Kim et al. in ovarian cancer cell lines with acquired PARPi-resistance. 45 Examining the effectiveness of the newly identified
drug combinations in MDA-MB-231R cells, clonogenic survival assays
show that the combination of low-dose Curcumin, 8 , or 10 (1 μM) alongside a concentration gradient of Olaparib
(0.1–100 μM) retains the ability to inhibit colony formation
in a similar manner to the parental MDA-MB-231 cells ( Figure 4 b). Figure 4 (a) Western blot analysis
of selected DNA damage response activation
in native MDA-MB-231 cells and derived Olaparib-resistant MDA-MB-231R
cells following treatment with 5 μM Olaparib for 0, 3, and 24
h. Data expressed as mean ± SD of triplicate experiments. (b)
Clonogenic survival assays of MDA-MB-231R cells treated with single-agent
Olaparib (0.01, 1, 10, and 100 μM) or in combination with low-dose
(1 μM) Curcumin, 8 , or 10 (72 h treatment
time). Data expressed as mean ± SD of three independent experiments.
NT = untreated. ns = not significant, * P < 0.05,
** P < 0.01, and *** P < 0.001
by ANOVA. Growth Inhibition of Tumor Spheroid Models 3D cancer
cell spheroids provide an improved model of the internal tumor microenvironment
and structure compared to conventional 2-D tissue culture. 46 We therefore examined the ability of the identified
synergistic pairs to inhibit growth of tumor spheroids, comparing
results to single-agent treatment conditions. MDA-MB-231 and MCF7
3D tumor spheroids were prepared and incubated with Curcumin, 8 , or 10 in the presence or absence of Olaparib.
Spheroids were imaged at 0, 3, 6, 9, and 12 days of incubation, and
their sizes were determined. While untreated spheroids showed an increase
in size, spheroids treated with combinations of Olaparib and Curcumin, 8 , or 10 showed complete disintegration at day
6 for MDA-MB-231 spheroids ( Figure 5 a,b) and at day 9 for MCF7 spheroids ( Figure 5 c,d). In addition to growth
studies, live/dead staining was performed on spheroids at 72 h incubation.
Visualizing spheroids by fluorescence microscopy, cell death (propidium
iodide, PI, positive staining) in the center of spheroids treated
with single-agent Curcumin, 8 , or 10 was
apparent ( Figure 5 e),
corresponding to a necrotic core. In co-treatment conditions of 10 and Olaparib, almost total cell death was observed, evidenced
by the absence of live-cell Calcein staining and abundant PI signal
( Figure 5 e). As fragmentation
appears to be the result of extensive cell death 47 and did not occur in untreated controls or single-agent
treatment conditions, this provides evidence that our synergistic
drug combinations are effective in spheroid models. Figure 5 Images of spheroids of
(a) MDA-MB-231 or (c) MCF7 breast cancer
cells and selected treatment groups. Scale bars = 500 μm. (b,
d) Quantification of volume of spheroids treated with the stated single
agent (1 μM) alone or in combination with Olaparib (10 μM).
Data expressed as mean ± SD of 18 spheroids from three independent
experiments. (e) Live/dead staining of MCF7 spheroids following treatments
with the stated single agent (1 μM) alone or in combination
with Olaparib (10 μM) for 72 h. Live cells indicated by Calcein
AM (green), dead cells by propidium iodide (PI, red). DNA staining
by Hoechst 33342 (blue) provides an indication of the total cell number.
Bright-field image also included. Scale bars = 200 μm. Characterization of Acute and Developmental Toxicity in Zebrafish
Embryos As all synergistic combinations occur with the enhancement
of potentially genotoxic DSB damage, an understanding of the toxicity
of these compounds and combinations is paramount to their future applications.
Accordingly, Curcumin, 8 , or 10 alone and
in combination with Olaparib were profiled in wild-type zebrafish
( Danio rerio ) embryos, a model employed
to assess toxicity. 48 This was performed
for both single-agent conditions, and the synergistic pairs were identified.
Embryos were exposed to concentration gradients of compounds in the
absence or presence of Olaparib (10 mg/L) at 1 h post fertilization
(hpf). The survival and hatching rates were recorded at 24, 48, 72,
and 96 hpf. Low toxicity for all three compounds was observed, with
half maximal lethal concentration (LC 50 ) values for all
compounds greater than the maximum concentration employed (LC 50 s > 100 mg/L, Table S4 in the
SI). Combination treatments tested also showed low toxicity, although
the highest concentration of 8 tested (100 mg/L) alongside
Olaparib (10 mg/L) resulted in 75% survival at 72 hpf onward ( Figure 6 a). Encouragingly,
neither 10 nor Curcumin impacted the hatching rate significantly
compared to the untreated control; however, 8 showed
almost complete inhibition of hatching at concentrations 25 mg/L or
greater, indicating embryonic toxicity ( Figure 6 b). Interestingly, the combination of 8 and Olaparib had improved hatching rates compared to 8 as a single agent, an unexpected result considering the
respective levels of DSB damage generated by these treatment conditions
in our cellular studies. Figure 6 (a) Survival rates and (b) hatching rates of
zebrafish embryos
upon treatment with the stated single agent alone or in combination
with 10 mg/L Olaparib. Data expressed as percentage of survival or
hatching of 24 embryos from two independent experiments. hpf = hours
post fertilization. The morphological changes in the development of
embryos after exposure
to compounds provides an indication of developmental toxicity and
potential teratogenicity. 49 Accordingly,
morphological changes in the development of zebrafish embryos after
exposure to Olaparib, Curcumin, 8 , or 10 were examined at 24, 48, 72, and 96 hpf ( Figure 7 a). These experiments show that treatment
with >25 mg/L Olaparib resulted in an increase in morphological
abnormalities
above untreated controls in pericardial edema (PE), yolk sac edema
(YSE), and spinal deformity (SD) (45.8% ± 17.7 PE; 45.8% ±
29.5 YSE; 75.0% ± 23.6 SD in 25 mg/L OLAP-treated zebrafish embryos; P < 0.05 for OLAP vs untreated; Figure 7 b). In contrast to these results, treatment
with Curcumin, 8 , or 10 did not generate
significant morphological abnormalities, indicating that these compounds
are not teratogenic in zebrafish at concentrations up to 100 mg/L.
No substantial enhancement of morphological abnormalities was observed
for Curcumin, 8 , or 10 combined with a sub-toxic
concentration of Olaparib (10 mg/L), although minor increases for
the Curcumin and Olaparib combination were evident (4.2% ± 5.9
PE; 12.5% ± 5.9 YSE; 8.3% ± 11.8 SD in 100 mg/L CUR + OLAP-treated
zebrafish embryos; P > 0.05 for treated vs untreated; Figure 7 b). As Curcumin and 10 show the lowest acute and developmental toxicity in the
zebrafish embryo model, including in combination with Olaparib, we
conclude that these two molecules are the strongest candidates for
future advancement. Figure 7 (a) Morphological assessment of zebrafish embryonic development.
Normal zebrafish embryonic development at the (A) hatching stage (48
hpf) and (B) larval stage (72 hpf); (C, D) dead or coagulated embryos;
(E, F) non hatching; (G–L) morphological abnormalities; precardial
edema (PE), yolk sac edema (YSE), and spinal deformity (SD). Scale
bars = 500 μm. (b) Morphological abnormalities of zebrafish
embryos upon treatments with the stated compounds at 96 hpf. Data
expressed as percentage of survival or hatching of 24 embryos from
two independent experiments. ** P < 0.01 and *** P < 0.001 compared to the control group by ANOVA.
## Design of a Mixed Metallocompound/Organic DNA-Targeting “Micro-library”
Design of a Mixed Metallocompound/Organic DNA-Targeting “Micro-library” A “micro-library” of 19 compounds was assembled,
which was composed of nine commercially available anti-cancer drugs
or drug candidates and 10 DNA-binding RPCs. Compounds selected were
DNA-damaging chemotherapeutics cisplatin, gemcitabine hydrochloride,
and Fluorouracil (5FU), oestrogen antagonist Tamoxifen citrate, PARPi
NU1025, ATR (ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related protein) inhibitors
Berzosertib and Ceralasertib, and natural products Quercetin and Curcumin
( Table S1 in the Supporting Information). RPCs utilized three distinct scaffolds: [Ru(N^N) 2 (PIP)] 2+ ( 1 – 4 ), [Ru(N^N) 2 (dmdppz)] 2+ (dmdppz = 10,12-dimethyl-dipyrido[3,2- a :2′,3′- c ]phenazine) ( 5 – 7 ), or Ru(II)-Re(I) qtpy metallomacrocycles
(qtpy = 2,2′:4,4″:4′,4″′ quaterpyridyl)
( 8 – 10 ) ( Figure 1 a). RPCs were synthesized by established
pathways 34 − 38 and characterized by 1 H NMR, mass spectrometry, and elemental
analysis. Results for previously reported compounds ( 1 – 4 and 8 – 10 )
were in agreement with published data. 34 , 35 Novel compounds 5 – 7 were characterized by 1 H and 13 C NMR, high-resolution mass spectrometry, elemental
analysis, HPLC, and FT-IR ( Figures S1–S8 ). All RPCs bind DNA by reversible binding with medium to high affinity,
and luminescence titrations indicated that the three novel [Ru(N^N) 2 (dmdppz)] 2+ complexes demonstrated the highest
DNA binding affinities (binding affinities ( K b ) = 8.7 × 10 6 , 9.2 × 10 6 ,
and 5.7 × 10 6 M –1 for 5 , 6 , and 7 respectively, Figure S9 and Table S2 ). In terms of DNA binding mode, compounds 1 – 7 and 10 contain established
intercalating ligands PIP, H-PIP (2-(4-hydroxyphenyl)imidazo[4,5- f ][1,10]phenanthroline), dppz, or dmdppz, 39 , 40 while 8 and 9 bind DNA via non-intercalative
mechanisms. 41 , 42 As a result, all compounds either
bind DNA in cell-free conditions with medium to high affinity, induce
DNA damage by targeting DNA in cells or inhibiting DNA repair, or
have been reported to induce cellular DNA damage in mechanistic studies
( Tables S1 and S2 ). Figure 1 (a) Structures of RPCs
employed within this study. Compounds were
used as a mixture of enantiomers. (b) Combination indices (CIs) for
micro-library compound/Olaparib combinations in MDA-MB-231 cells.
Cell viability without or with Olaparib (10 μM) determined after
72 h treatment by the MTT assay (mean of at least two independent
experiments). CI values were calculated using CompuSyn software, and
a heat map was generated as described in the Experimental Section.
Clonogenic survival assays of (c) MDA-MB-231 or (d) MCF7 cells treated
with single-agent Olaparib (0.1, 1, or 10 μM) or in combination
with low-dose (1 μM) Curcumin (CUR), 8 , or 10 (72 h treatment time). Data expressed as mean ± SEM
of three independent experiments. * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, and *** P < 0.001 compared
to the Olaparib single agent-treated group by ANOVA.
## Olaparib Co-treatment Identifies New Synergistic Combinations
Olaparib Co-treatment Identifies New Synergistic Combinations To identify synergistic combinations with Olaparib, BRCA-proficient
MDA-MB-231 TNBC cells were treated with a concentration gradient of
each micro-library compound in the absence or presence of low-dose,
non-cytotoxic (10 μM) Olaparib ( Figure S10 ). Resultant cell viabilities at 72 h were determined by an MTT assay,
and these data were used to derive half inhibitory IC 50 concentrations ( Figure S11 and Table 1 ). Table 1 Half Maximal Inhibitory Concentration
(IC 50 ) Values of Each Compound Alone or in Combination
with Olaparib (10 μM) a –OLAP +OLAP compound IC 50 (μM) IC 50 (μM) fold shift cisplatin 35.3 ± 5.5 26.1 ± 11.1 1.4 gemcitabine hydrochloride 1.6 ± 0.8 0.6 ± 0.1 2.7 Fluorouracil 12.1 ± 3.0 4.2 ± 0.3 2.9 Tamoxifen citrate 20.6
± 1.3 19.9 ± 4.7 1.0 Berzosertib 0.46 ± 0.01 0.27 ± 0.06 1.7 Ceralasertib 4.4 ± 0.4 5.0 ± 1.5 0.9 NU1025 >100 >100 ND Quercetin >100 7.1 ± 5.7 >14.1 Curcumin 25.1 ± 2.4 0.09 ±
0.01 278.9 1 >100 75.5 ± 12.2 >1.3 2 >100 >100 ND 3 29.2 ± 3.7 8.0 ± 3.3 3.7 4 11.6 ±
3.2 1.7 ± 0.9 6.8 5 75.1 ± 12.2 >100 <0.8 6 87.4 ± 2.3 17.4 ± 5.3 5.0 7 34.3
± 0.5 15.2 ± 2.5 2.3 8 80.9 ± 8.2 0.6 ± 0.3 134.8 9 >100 57.4 ± 10.2 >1.7 10 26.3 ± 5.1 1.0 ± 0.2 26.3 a MDA-MB-231 72 h. IC 50 values determined by the MTT assay. Data expressed as mean ±
SD of at least two independent experiments. Fold shift = IC 50 (−OLAP)/IC 50 (+OLAP). ND = not determined. Examining the effects of each compound as a single
agent, the most
cytotoxic molecule tested was the ATR inhibitor Berzosertib (IC 50 = 460 ± 10 nM) and 4 was the most cytotoxic
RPC (IC 50 = 11.6 ± 3.2 μM), despite having the
lowest DNA binding affinity ( K b = 6.9
× 10 4 M –1 , Table S2 ). To assess Olaparib synergy, Chou and Talalay combination
indices (CIs) 43 were calculated for each
concentration tested and CI scores of less than 0.9 were considered
synergistic ( Figure 1 b). This analysis identified two clear hits for synergy with Olaparib:
Curcumin and 8 were both synergistic over most of the
tested concentrations, while 10 was scored as a moderate
hit, with 40% of the concentrations tested exhibiting synergy with
Olaparib. The associated IC 50 values illustrate the magnitude
of synergy demonstrated by these three compounds. In each case, a
large increase in potency is generated on inclusion of Olaparib (a
279-, 135-, and 26-fold decrease in IC 50 values for Curcumin, 8 , and 10 respectively, Table 1 ). To validate the synergistic pairs
isolated by this screen, clonogenic
survival assays on the three hits were performed in the presence and
absence of Olaparib. These demonstrated that MDA-MB-231 cells treated
with a low (1 μM) dose of Curcumin, 8 , or 10 display substantially enhanced cell sensitivity to Olaparib
(a >1000, >143, and >200 increase in Olaparib potency with
the addition
of Curcumin, 8 , and 10 , respectively; Figure 1 c and Table S3 ). As 8 and 10 possess a low impact on colony formation at this concentration (survival
fractions (S.F.) > 70%), this confirms synergy. Also, for their
effect
on MDA-MB-231 cells, combinations were also found to be synergistic
in BRCA-proficient MCF7 human breast cancer cells in both MTT and
clonogenic survival assays ( Figure 1 d, Figures S12 and S13 , Table 2 , and Table S3 ). Table 2 IC 50 Values of Curcumin, 8 , or 10 Alone or in Combination with 10 μM
Olaparib Following 72 h Treatment in MCF10A, MDA-MB-231, or MCF7 Cells
and Their Respective Selectivity Indices (SI) a IC 50 (μM) SI compound(s) MCF10A MDA-MB-231 MCF7 MDA-MB-231 MCF7 untreated +OLAP >100 80.9 ± 15.0 69.6 ± 6.3 >1.2 >1.4 Curcumin –OLAP 37.4 ± 6.0 25.1 ± 2.4 22.5 ± 4.1 1.5 1.7 +OLAP 34.7 ± 8.9 0.09
± 0.01 0.02 ± 0.01 385.6 1735 8 –OLAP 60.0 ± 6.4 80.9
± 8.2 38.0 ± 15.3 0.7 1.6 +OLAP 31.4 ±
5.6 0.6 ± 0.3 0.01 ± 0.01 52.3 3140 10 –OLAP >100 26.3 ± 5.1 >100 >3.8 ND +OLAP >100 1.0 ± 0.2 0.02 ± 0.01 >100 >5000 a IC 50 values determined
by the MTT assay. Data expressed as mean ± SD of at least two
independent experiments ( n = 3). SI = IC 50 MCF10A/IC 50 cancer cell line. Results for MDA-MB-231
cells from Table 1 included
for comparison. ND = not determined To examine cancer selectivity, single agents and combinations
were
tested in MCF10A normal human breast cells. These results show mild
or no cancer selectivity for Curcumin, 8 , or 10 as single agents; however, when each compound is combined with low-dose
Olaparib substantial (>50-fold) cancer v. non-cancer cell selectivity
is then apparent ( Table 2 and Figure S12 in the SI).
## Olaparib Drug Synergy Identifies New DNA-Damaging Agents
Olaparib Drug Synergy Identifies New DNA-Damaging Agents As PARP enzymes are responsible for mediating DNA damage repair pathways, 44 the observed synergy of 8 and 10 with the PARPi Olaparib would imply that each molecule
induces DNA damage as part of its mechanism of action. Exploring this
possibility, Figure 2 a,b shows that MDA-MB-231 cells treated with a concentration gradient
of 8 or 10 for 3 h increased the levels
of several DDR signaling proteins in a statistically significant manner,
including activated (phosphorylated) p-ATR (at Thr1989), p-ATM (at
Ser1981, where ATM = ataxia-telangiectasia mutated), and γH2AX
(H2AX phosphorylated at Ser139) ( Figure 2 ). Early activation of these DDR signaling
pathways by 8 and 10 is consistent with
each molecule inducing both single-strand break (SSB) and double-strand
break (DSB) DNA damage, and these results also indicate that our Olaparib
synergy screen has successfully identified new cellular DNA damaging
agents. Figure 2 (a) Western blot analysis of DNA damage response activation in
MDA-MB-231 cells treated with 8 or 10 for
3 h. Cisplatin (CIS) treatment (50 μM, 3 h) was included for
comparative purposes. (b) Quantification of results in (a) by densitometry.
NT = untreated. Data expressed as mean ± SD of triplicate experiments.
* P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, and
*** P < 0.001 by ANOVA.
## Mechanistic Basis for Olaparib Synergy
Mechanistic Basis for Olaparib Synergy Examining the
mechanism of synergy of 8 and 10 with Olaparib,
greater γH2AX levels are apparent in cells treated with the
combinations compared to their single-agent equivalents, evidenced
by both immunostaining and immunofluorescence (2.3-fold for CUR +
OLAP vs CUR; 2.7-fold for 8 + OLAP vs 8 ;
3.3-fold for 10 + OLAP vs 10 ; P < 0.05; Figure 3 a and Figure S14 ). This finding was confirmed
by the alkaline comet assay, where significantly greater DNA tail
lengths were measured in all three co-treatment conditions compared
to as a single agent (5.7-fold for CUR + OLAP vs CUR; 5.7-fold for 8 + OLAP vs 8 ; 6.6-fold for 10 +
OLAP vs 10 ; P < 0.05; except P > 0.05 for 8 + OLAP vs OLAP; Figure 3 b). Examining the
impact on
cell-cycle distribution, an increase in cells with the sub-G1 content
( Figure 3 c) accompanied
by elevated levels of Annexin V-positive cells (2.8-fold for CUR +
OLAP vs CUR; 2.7-fold for 8 + OLAP vs 8 ;
3.6-fold for 10 + OLAP vs 10 ; P < 0.05; Figure 3 d) was apparent in all co-treatment conditions, indicative of high
levels of apoptosis, while an increase in intracellular reactive oxygen
species (ROS) levels in cells co-treated with Olaparib and 10 was apparent (6.8-fold for CUR + OLAP vs CUR; 2.5-fold for 8 + OLAP vs 8 ; 2.8-fold for 10 +
OLAP vs 10 ; P < 0.001; except P > 0.05 for 8 + OLAP vs single agents; Figure S15a ). As in MDA-MB-231 cells, enhanced
DNA damage, Annexin-V positive cells, and ROS levels were all observed
in MCF7 cells treated with the three synergistic pairs ( Figures S15b and S16 ). These results are consistent
with a mechanism of synergy whereby DNA damage induced by 8 or 10 is unrepaired due to PARP inhibition by Olaparib,
resulting in the accumulation of substantial DSB damage that triggers
cell death by apoptosis. Figure 3 (a) γH2AX levels upon treatment with the
stated single agent
(1 μM) alone or in combination with Olaparib (10 μM) for
24 h in MDA-MB-231 cells, determined by immunofluorescence and flow
cytometry analysis. The percentage of γH2AX-positive cells in
each population was determined by gating of histograms derived from
single-stained cells. Left, representative histograms, right, quantified
data. (b) Quantification of DNA damage by the alkaline comet assay
for cells treated as in (a). DNA damage assessed by DNA tail % where
at least 100 nucleoids were analyzed per sample. (c) Cell-cycle distribution
of MDA-MB-231 cells treated with the stated single agent (1 μM)
alone or in combination with Olaparib (10 μM) for 72 h, as determined
by PI staining and flow cytometry. Left, representative histograms,
right, quantification of the cell-cycle phase. (d) Annexin V-FITC
assay of MDA-MB-231 cells treated as in (c). Left, representative
scatterplots showing the percentage of cells in each quadrant. Right,
quantification of apoptotic cells (Q3-2 and Q3-4 quadrants) for each
treatment condition. Data expressed as mean ± SD of three independent
experiments. * P < 0.05, ** P <
0.01, and *** P < 0.001 by ANOVA.
## Synergistic Combinations Retain Activity in an Olaparib-Resistant
Cell Line
Synergistic Combinations Retain Activity in an Olaparib-Resistant
Cell Line To examine whether our combinations were effective
in Olaparib-resistant TNBC, we developed an Olaparib-resistant MDA-MB-231
strain, designated MDA-MB-231R, from the parental MDA-MB-231 cell
line by long-term (∼8 months) Olaparib exposure in a similar
manner as described by Kim et al. 45 Olaparib
resistance of MDA-MB-231R cells was confirmed by the clonogenic survival
assay, where a 28-fold level of resistance to Olaparib treatment for
MDA-MB-231R cells compared to parental MDA-MB-231 cells was observed
( Figure S17 ). The acquisition of Olaparib
resistance is accompanied by increased basal levels of p-ATR (activated
ATR), upregulation of drug efflux pumps such as p-glycoprotein (P-gp),
and loss of poly(ADP-ribose) glycohydrolase (PARG) ( Figure 4 a). This finding is consistent
with an up-regulated ATR pathway activation resistance mechanism reported
by Kim et al. in ovarian cancer cell lines with acquired PARPi-resistance. 45 Examining the effectiveness of the newly identified
drug combinations in MDA-MB-231R cells, clonogenic survival assays
show that the combination of low-dose Curcumin, 8 , or 10 (1 μM) alongside a concentration gradient of Olaparib
(0.1–100 μM) retains the ability to inhibit colony formation
in a similar manner to the parental MDA-MB-231 cells ( Figure 4 b). Figure 4 (a) Western blot analysis
of selected DNA damage response activation
in native MDA-MB-231 cells and derived Olaparib-resistant MDA-MB-231R
cells following treatment with 5 μM Olaparib for 0, 3, and 24
h. Data expressed as mean ± SD of triplicate experiments. (b)
Clonogenic survival assays of MDA-MB-231R cells treated with single-agent
Olaparib (0.01, 1, 10, and 100 μM) or in combination with low-dose
(1 μM) Curcumin, 8 , or 10 (72 h treatment
time). Data expressed as mean ± SD of three independent experiments.
NT = untreated. ns = not significant, * P < 0.05,
** P < 0.01, and *** P < 0.001
by ANOVA.
## Growth Inhibition of Tumor Spheroid Models
Growth Inhibition of Tumor Spheroid Models 3D cancer
cell spheroids provide an improved model of the internal tumor microenvironment
and structure compared to conventional 2-D tissue culture. 46 We therefore examined the ability of the identified
synergistic pairs to inhibit growth of tumor spheroids, comparing
results to single-agent treatment conditions. MDA-MB-231 and MCF7
3D tumor spheroids were prepared and incubated with Curcumin, 8 , or 10 in the presence or absence of Olaparib.
Spheroids were imaged at 0, 3, 6, 9, and 12 days of incubation, and
their sizes were determined. While untreated spheroids showed an increase
in size, spheroids treated with combinations of Olaparib and Curcumin, 8 , or 10 showed complete disintegration at day
6 for MDA-MB-231 spheroids ( Figure 5 a,b) and at day 9 for MCF7 spheroids ( Figure 5 c,d). In addition to growth
studies, live/dead staining was performed on spheroids at 72 h incubation.
Visualizing spheroids by fluorescence microscopy, cell death (propidium
iodide, PI, positive staining) in the center of spheroids treated
with single-agent Curcumin, 8 , or 10 was
apparent ( Figure 5 e),
corresponding to a necrotic core. In co-treatment conditions of 10 and Olaparib, almost total cell death was observed, evidenced
by the absence of live-cell Calcein staining and abundant PI signal
( Figure 5 e). As fragmentation
appears to be the result of extensive cell death 47 and did not occur in untreated controls or single-agent
treatment conditions, this provides evidence that our synergistic
drug combinations are effective in spheroid models. Figure 5 Images of spheroids of
(a) MDA-MB-231 or (c) MCF7 breast cancer
cells and selected treatment groups. Scale bars = 500 μm. (b,
d) Quantification of volume of spheroids treated with the stated single
agent (1 μM) alone or in combination with Olaparib (10 μM).
Data expressed as mean ± SD of 18 spheroids from three independent
experiments. (e) Live/dead staining of MCF7 spheroids following treatments
with the stated single agent (1 μM) alone or in combination
with Olaparib (10 μM) for 72 h. Live cells indicated by Calcein
AM (green), dead cells by propidium iodide (PI, red). DNA staining
by Hoechst 33342 (blue) provides an indication of the total cell number.
Bright-field image also included. Scale bars = 200 μm.
## Characterization of Acute and Developmental Toxicity in Zebrafish
Embryos
Characterization of Acute and Developmental Toxicity in Zebrafish
Embryos As all synergistic combinations occur with the enhancement
of potentially genotoxic DSB damage, an understanding of the toxicity
of these compounds and combinations is paramount to their future applications.
Accordingly, Curcumin, 8 , or 10 alone and
in combination with Olaparib were profiled in wild-type zebrafish
( Danio rerio ) embryos, a model employed
to assess toxicity. 48 This was performed
for both single-agent conditions, and the synergistic pairs were identified.
Embryos were exposed to concentration gradients of compounds in the
absence or presence of Olaparib (10 mg/L) at 1 h post fertilization
(hpf). The survival and hatching rates were recorded at 24, 48, 72,
and 96 hpf. Low toxicity for all three compounds was observed, with
half maximal lethal concentration (LC 50 ) values for all
compounds greater than the maximum concentration employed (LC 50 s > 100 mg/L, Table S4 in the
SI). Combination treatments tested also showed low toxicity, although
the highest concentration of 8 tested (100 mg/L) alongside
Olaparib (10 mg/L) resulted in 75% survival at 72 hpf onward ( Figure 6 a). Encouragingly,
neither 10 nor Curcumin impacted the hatching rate significantly
compared to the untreated control; however, 8 showed
almost complete inhibition of hatching at concentrations 25 mg/L or
greater, indicating embryonic toxicity ( Figure 6 b). Interestingly, the combination of 8 and Olaparib had improved hatching rates compared to 8 as a single agent, an unexpected result considering the
respective levels of DSB damage generated by these treatment conditions
in our cellular studies. Figure 6 (a) Survival rates and (b) hatching rates of
zebrafish embryos
upon treatment with the stated single agent alone or in combination
with 10 mg/L Olaparib. Data expressed as percentage of survival or
hatching of 24 embryos from two independent experiments. hpf = hours
post fertilization. The morphological changes in the development of
embryos after exposure
to compounds provides an indication of developmental toxicity and
potential teratogenicity. 49 Accordingly,
morphological changes in the development of zebrafish embryos after
exposure to Olaparib, Curcumin, 8 , or 10 were examined at 24, 48, 72, and 96 hpf ( Figure 7 a). These experiments show that treatment
with >25 mg/L Olaparib resulted in an increase in morphological
abnormalities
above untreated controls in pericardial edema (PE), yolk sac edema
(YSE), and spinal deformity (SD) (45.8% ± 17.7 PE; 45.8% ±
29.5 YSE; 75.0% ± 23.6 SD in 25 mg/L OLAP-treated zebrafish embryos; P < 0.05 for OLAP vs untreated; Figure 7 b). In contrast to these results, treatment
with Curcumin, 8 , or 10 did not generate
significant morphological abnormalities, indicating that these compounds
are not teratogenic in zebrafish at concentrations up to 100 mg/L.
No substantial enhancement of morphological abnormalities was observed
for Curcumin, 8 , or 10 combined with a sub-toxic
concentration of Olaparib (10 mg/L), although minor increases for
the Curcumin and Olaparib combination were evident (4.2% ± 5.9
PE; 12.5% ± 5.9 YSE; 8.3% ± 11.8 SD in 100 mg/L CUR + OLAP-treated
zebrafish embryos; P > 0.05 for treated vs untreated; Figure 7 b). As Curcumin and 10 show the lowest acute and developmental toxicity in the
zebrafish embryo model, including in combination with Olaparib, we
conclude that these two molecules are the strongest candidates for
future advancement. Figure 7 (a) Morphological assessment of zebrafish embryonic development.
Normal zebrafish embryonic development at the (A) hatching stage (48
hpf) and (B) larval stage (72 hpf); (C, D) dead or coagulated embryos;
(E, F) non hatching; (G–L) morphological abnormalities; precardial
edema (PE), yolk sac edema (YSE), and spinal deformity (SD). Scale
bars = 500 μm. (b) Morphological abnormalities of zebrafish
embryos upon treatments with the stated compounds at 96 hpf. Data
expressed as percentage of survival or hatching of 24 embryos from
two independent experiments. ** P < 0.01 and *** P < 0.001 compared to the control group by ANOVA.
## Discussion and Conclusions
Discussion and Conclusions Examining cytotoxic potency
as
single agents toward TNBC cells,
RPC mono-intercalators 3 , 4 , and 7 displayed comparable—or greater—activity to cisplatin.
By comparing IC 50 concentrations of the bisbipyridine complexes 1 , 2 , and 5 toward MDA-MB-231 cells,
it is apparent that the selection of dmdppz as an intercalating ligand
promotes greater cytotoxicity over either PIP or p -HPIP. Previous work has shown PIP complexes to be more cytotoxic
than their dppz analogues; 39 therefore,
the order of cytotoxicity of intercalating ligands of dmdppz > p -HPIP > PIP > dppz can be derived. In a similar manner,
by comparing IC 50 concentrations within the [Ru(N^N) 2 (dmdppz)] 2+ sub-series, the order of cytotoxicity
for each N^N ancillary ligand can be seen to be 4,4′dmb >
5,5′dmb
∼ bpy (5,5′dmb = 5,5′-dimethyl-2,2′bipyridine,
4,4′dmb = 4,4′-dimethyl-2,2′bipyridine). While
cellular internalization was not examined in the present work, both
of these findings would be in agreement with improved cellular uptake
facilitated by increased ligand hydrophobicity, an established concept
that has been reported in numerous other studies. 28 , 30 , 39 , 50 − 52 Along with the results of cell-free DNA binding studies, these findings
also illustrate that methylated polypyridyl ligands can be employed
to increase both DNA binding affinity and cytotoxicity of RPCs. It
is also interesting to note that the most cytotoxic among these molecules— 3 , 4 , and 7 —showed an additive
relationship with Olaparib rather than synergistic. This result likely
indicates that these RPCs do not induce sufficient SSB damage or replication
stress for successful PARPi combination, despite possessing reasonable
anti-proliferative activities and high cell-free DNA binding affinities.
This can be contrasted to our previous results for Ru-PIP and [Ru(PIP) 2 (dmb)] 2+ , each of which contains a Ru(II) center
coordinated to multiple PIP or dppz ligands, where replication inhibition
and subsequent Olaparib synergy were demonstrated in both cases. 31 , 32 In turn, this would imply that RPCs coordinated to multiple intercalating
groups are required for replication fork stalling and subsequent PARPi
synergy by this mechanism of action. However, full structure–activity
relationship (SAR) studies would be required to expand upon these
observations. While the distinct molecular geometries and reactivities
of transition
metal complexes have been highlighted as an opportunity for chemical
diversity in drug discovery, 53 they are
rarely employed within chemical screening approaches. However, the
potential of this approach has been demonstrated by Cohen et al.,
who utilized a library of 71 metallofragments as 3D scaffolds for
fragment-based drug discovery. 54 Results
compared favorably to hits achieved by organic molecules, allowing
the authors to conclude that metallofragments are compatible with
current fragment-based drug discovery screening techniques. A meta-analysis
by Frei et al. demonstrated the potential for metallocompounds as
antibiotics, showing a significantly higher hit-rate (9.9%) when compared
to the purely organic molecules (0.87%) in the community for the open
antimicrobial drug discovery database. 55 Although the “micro-library” employed in the present
study is comparatively small, all the molecules selected for testing
were required to possess high DNA binding affinities and/or previously
determined DNA-damage-based cellular mechanisms of action. Combined
with the mixed organic/RPC library composition, these selection criteria
were chosen to increase the chances of identifying new PARPi synergistic
combinations and to test the hypothesis that inclusion of metallocompounds
would aid successful hit generation. It is therefore highly encouraging
that our mixed organic/RPC “micro library” (containing
a 53% RPC composition) successfully identified two metallocompounds
along with Curcumin as hits in our synergy assay screen (a 67% RPC
composition). In terms of in vitro Olaparib synergy,
it is notable that the two metallocompounds out-performed established
DNA-damaging chemotherapeutics such as cisplatin and gemcitabine and
also the ATR inhibitor Ceralasertib; all of which have been examined
in combination with Olaparib in clinical trials (refs ( 9 , 11 ) and clinical trial identifier NCT02576444 ).
Considering that there is evidence that Curcumin is a pan-assay interference
(PAIN) compound, 56 the two metallocompounds
arguably represent the strongest hits from our proof-of-concept library,
thereby providing clear justification for our mixed organic/metallocompound
library design, where the discovery of new synergistic PARPi combinations
was aided by the inclusion of metallocompounds within a phenotype
screen. Cellular studies have shown that the DNA-damaging agents
cisplatin 57 and gemcitabine 58 exhibit synergy with Olaparib in cancer cell
lines independent of
their BRCA status. In these cases, the single-strand breaks generated
by either molecule are then unrepaired due to PARP inhibition, resulting
in the accumulation of DSBs and cell death by apoptosis. A similar
mechanism of synergy is likely for 8 and 10 : our mechanistic studies indicate that they induce DNA damage, most
notably activation of the ATR pathway in response to SSB damage or
replication stress, and DSB DNA damage is then increased substantially
by the addition of Olaparib, triggering elevated apoptosis. Previous
studies have shown that 8 and 10 bind DNA
by non-covalent interactions 41 and cellular
uptake studies have revealed an intracellular concentration three-fold
greater than the external concentration. 59 In the current study, this would correspond to intracellular concentrations
in the low micromolar range achieving Olaparib synergy. When this
is combined with the relatively high DNA binding affinities of the
molecules ( K b = 3.3 × 10 6 and 4.4 × 10 5 M –1 for 8 and 10 respectively, Table S2 ) and the observed DNA damage response activation to each molecule,
this strongly implies that DNA is a cellular target for each molecule
and that DNA binding is responsible for resultant PARPi synergy. However,
we cannot discount the possibility that the observed synergy of 8 and 10 with Olaparib is obtained by multiple
mechanisms of action and/or the observed DNA damage response activation
is indirect, for example, via ROS generation. Investigation into additional
targets of 8 and 10 along with detailed
uptake/localization studies would prove illuminating to explore the
precise molecular mechanism of synergy in more detail. It is
also worth noting that 8 is also phototoxic
when exposed to high light doses, generating intracellular singlet
oxygen and cell-free DNA cleavage. 59 Therefore,
Olaparib synergy may be yet further enhanced by light and photoinduced
DNA damage by 8 . Considering that RPCs have made substantially
progress as photosensitizers for PDT, 60 with one such agent undergoing clinical trials for bladder cancer, 61 employing phototoxic RPCs that generate DNA
damage via single oxygen or ROS generation along with DDR inhibitors
could be a lucrative area of exploration. Considering that the majority
of DNA damage from the ionizing radiation employed in radiotherapy
are SSB breaks 62 and PARP inhibitors function
as excellent radiosensitizers due to the role of PARP enzymes in repairing
SSB damage, 63 it would be useful to similarly
explore PDT photosensitizers alongside PARPi. This has the advantage
that light can be employed to control the precise form of DNA damage
generated and means that the dose of light required for effective
phototoxicity could theoretically be reduced, thereby facilitating
use of weaker light sources that have greater penetrative depth in
tissue. Other studies examining RPCs as photosensitizers for PDT show
that RPCs completely penetrate a HeLa cervical cancer spheroid model
with a diameter of 800 μM as shown by a strong luminescence
signal observed upon treatment. 64 The fact
that our identified synergistic drug combinations are effective in
breast cancer spheroids, including aggressive TNBC, may be attributed
to the cell penetration ability of RPCs 8 or 10 , suggesting the need for future evaluations on drug penetration
of these RPCs into spheroid models. In conclusion, a drug synergy
screen identified two ruthenium(II)-rhenium(I)
polypyridyl metallomacrocycles as synergistic combinations with the
PARP inhibitor Olaparib in BRCA-proficient breast cancer cells, including
cells with Olaparib resistance. Mechanistic studies indicated that
the synergy is due to DNA damage enhancement, while the verification
of action in spheroid models, low cytotoxicity toward non-malignant
cells, and low zebrafish embryo toxicity make one of these candidates
particularly encouraging for further development as a cancer-specific
treatment in combination with Olaparib. Overall, this work supports
the concept that the PARP inhibitor combination therapy represents
a promising approach for cancer treatment, including toward aggressive
strains such as TNBC.
## Experimental Section
Experimental Section Chemistry General Chemical Methods Olaparib and Ceralasertib
were purchased from MedChemExpress, Berzosertib was purchased from
Abcam and Tamoxifen citrate was purchased from Tocris. All other chemicals
were purchased from SigmaAldrich and ThermoFisher Scientific. All
commercial reagents were used without purification unless otherwise
specified. 1 H and 13 C NMR spectra were obtained
using a Bruker Advance III 500 MHz Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectrometer.
HRMS (high-resolution mass spectroscopy) samples were analyzed at
the EPSRC UK National Mass Spectrometry Facility at Swansea University
using a ThermoScientific LTQ Orbitrap XL 1 Mass Spectrometer. Fourier
transform infrared spectra were run on a Perkin Elmer FT-IR Spectrometer
Spectrum TWO. Elemental analysis was performed by the Elemental Analysis
Service at London Metropolitan University. Analytical HPLC was carried
out on the Agilent system equipped with a Waters XBridge C18 (130
Å, 3.5 μm, 4.6 × 150 mm) analytical column. Water
with 0.1% trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) and acetonitrile with 0.1% TFA
were used as eluents. The flow rate was 1 mL/min, and 50% A:50% B
was used for 15 min. The purity of the final compounds was ≥95%
as determined by HPLC or elemental microanalysis. [Ru(N^N) 2 (PIP)] 2+ Compounds [Ru(bpy) 2 (PIP)] 2+ ( 1 ), [Ru(bpy) 2 (H-PIP)] 2+ ( 2 ), [Ru(phen) 2 (PIP)] 2+ ( 3 ), and [Ru(phen) 2 (H-PIP)] 2+ ( 4 ) (bpy = 2,2′bipyridine, phen = 1,10
phenanthroline, PIP = 2-(phenyl)-imidazo[4,5- f ][1,10]phenanthroline, p -HPIP = 2-(4-hydroxyphenyl)imidazo[4,5- f ][1,10]phenanthroline) were prepared by an adaptation of the previously
reported synthetic pathway 34 from Ru(N^N) 2 Cl 2 ·2H 2 O (where N^N = bpy or phen). 65 1 : Mass (Yield): 0.09 g (71.0%). 1 H NMR (CD 3 CN), δ ppm: 9.08 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.86 (d, 4H, J = 8.1 Hz),
8.51 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.47 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.27 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.07 (t, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz), 7.83 (d, 2H, J = 6.0 Hz), 7.76 (t, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 7.62 (t, 2H, J = 6.9 Hz),
7.57 (m, 1H), 7.43 (t, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz). Elemental
analysis (as PF 6 salt): Calcd: C, 46.86; H, 2.82; N, 11.21;
Found: C, 47.08; H, 2.87; N, 11.63. ESI-MS, m / z (%): 709.3 [M + ], 354.6 [M 2+ ]. 2 : Mass (Yield): 0.09 g (69.0%). 1 H NMR (CD 3 CN), δ ppm: 9.06 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz),
8.85 (d, 2H, J = 8.1 Hz), 8.51 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.47 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.12 (d, 2H, J = 9.2 Hz), 8.06 (t, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz),
7.82 (d, 2H, J = 5.7 Hz), 7.74 (t, 2H, J = 6.9 Hz), 7.42 (t, 4H, J = 6.9 Hz), 7.03 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 5.00 (s, 1H). Elemental analysis (as PF 6 salt): Calcd: C, 46.12; H, 2.78; N, 11.03; Found: C, 46.24;
H, 2.79; N, 11.27. ESI-MS, m / z (%):
726.1 [M + ], 363.1 [M 2+ ]. 3 : Mass (Yield): 0.10 g (69.2%). 1 H NMR
(CD 3 CN), δ ppm: 9.03 (d, 4H, J =
8.0 Hz), 8.94 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.57 (d, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.48 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz),
8.27 (d, 2H, J = 6.9 Hz), 8.23 (s, 2H), 8.13 (d,
2H, J = 6.9 Hz), 7.99 (d, 2H, J =
6.9 Hz), 7.93 (d, 4H, J = 6.9 Hz), 7.60 (m, 1H).
Elemental analysis (as PF 6 salt): Calcd: C, 49.29; H, 2.69;
N, 10.69; Found: C, 49.27; H, 2.51; N, 10.64. ESI-MS, m / z (%): 757.3 [M + ], 379.3 [M 2+ ]. 4 : Mass (Yield): 0.11 g (70.1%). 1 H NMR
(CD 3 CN), δ ppm: 9.05 (d, 4H, J =
6.9 Hz), 8.86 (d, 2H, J = 6.9 Hz), 8.52 (d, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.47 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz),
8.07 (d, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz), 7.83 (d, 2H, J = 5.7 Hz), 7.57 (s, 2H), 7.43 (t, 4H, J = 6.9 Hz),
7.04 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 5.00 (s, 1H). Elemental
analysis (as PF 6 salt): Calcd: C, 48.55; H, 2.65; N, 10.53;
Found: C, 48.32; H, 2.79; N, 10.53. ESI-MS, m / z (%): 774.1 [M + ], 387.0 [M 2+ ]. [Ru(N^N) 2 (dmdppz)] 2+ Compounds [Ru(bpy) 2 (dmdppz)] 2+ ( 5 ), [Ru(5,5′dmb) 2 (dmdppz)] 2+ ( 6 ), and [Ru(4,4′dmb) 2 (dmdppz)] 2+ ( 7 ) (dmdppz = 10,12-dimethyl-dipyrido[3,2- a :2′,3′- c ]phenazine, 5,5′dmb
= 5,5′-dimethyl-2,2′bipyridine, 4,4′dmb = 4,4′-dimethyl-2,2′bipyridine)
were prepared by an adaptation of a previously reported synthetic
pathway. 38 This involved preparation of
the [Ru(N^N) 2 (dpq)] 2+ (dpq = 1,10-phenanthroline-5,6-dione)
intermediate complex from the Ru(N^N) 2 Cl 2 ·2H 2 O starting material followed by condensation with 1,2-diamino-3,5-dimethylbenzene. Step 1: Formation
of the [Ru(N^N) 2 (dpq)] 2+ intermediate complex:
The starting material Ru(N^N) 2 Cl 2 ·2H 2 O (N^N = bpy, 5,5′dmb or 4,4′dmb,
prepared as in ref ( 65 )) and dpq (prepared as in ref ( 66 )) were added to 1:1 ethanol:water. The mixture was refluxed
under nitrogen gas for 3 h before being allowed to cool to room temperature
(RT). 1 mL of a saturated aqueous solution of ammonium hexafluorophosphate
was added, and the brown precipitate formed was collected via filtration
and washed with DI water followed by ether before drying. [Ru(bpy) 2 (dpq)] 2+ : Mass (Yield): 0.561 g
(78%). 1 H NMR (500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ,
ppm: 8.85 (d, J = 8.0 Hz, 4H), 8.65 (dd, J = 7.9, 1.1 Hz, 2H), 8.38 (d, J = 5.6
Hz, 2H), 8.25 (t, J = 7.9 Hz, 4H), 8.12 (m, 4H),
7.83 (dd, J = 7.9, 5.6 Hz, 2H), 7.60 (m, 4H). FTIR:
556, 831, 1426, 1444, 1448, and 1699 cm –1 . [Ru(5,5′dmb) 2 (dpq)] 2+ : Mass (Yield):
1.13 g (93%). 1 H NMR (500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 8.65 (d, J = 8.4 Hz, 4H), 8.62
(m, 2H), 8.34 (dd, J = 5.6, 1.2 Hz, 2H), 8.03 (d, J = 8.3 Hz, 4H), 7.89 (d, J = 35.2 Hz,
4H), 7.80 (m, 2H), 2.22 (s, 6H), 2.17 (s, 6H). FTIR: 556, 835, 1428,
1477, and 1699 cm –1 . [Ru(4,4′dmb) 2 (dpq)] 2+ : Mass (Yield):
0.708 g (89%). 1 H NMR (500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 8.69 (s, 4H), 8.60 (d, J = 6.9
Hz, 2H), 8.34 (m, 2H), 7.94 (d, J = 5.8 Hz, 2H),
7.86 (d, J = 5.8 Hz, 2H), 7.79 (m, 2H), 7.42 (d, J = 5.9 Hz, 2H), 7.38 (d, J = 5.4 Hz, 2H),
2.58 (s, 6H), 2.56 (s, 6H). FTIR: 557, 826, 1427, and 1704 cm –1 . Step 2: 1,2-Diamino-3,5-dimethylbenzene
was added to [Ru(N^N) 2 (dpq)](PF 6 ) 2 in hot, anhydrous methanol
in a 4.5:1 molar ratio. The mixture was refluxed for 6 h under nitrogen
and allowed to cool to RT. A saturated aqueous solution of ammonium
hexafluorophosphate was added, and the mixture was cooled on ice.
The bright orange precipitate was collected by filtration and recrystallized
from acetonitrile and ether. The crystals formed were collected by
filtration, washed with ether, and dried. 5 : Mass
(Yield): 0.164 g (70%). 1 H NMR
(500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 9.82 (s, 1H),
9.75 (d, J = 7.1 Hz, 1H), 8.88 (d, J = 9.5 Hz, 4H), 8.54 (dd, J = 7.7, 2.7 Hz, 2H),
8.29 (s, 2H), 8.15 (m, 9H), 7.90 (s, 1H), 7.67 (s, 2H), 7.43 (d, J = 1.4 Hz, 2H), 3.03 (s, 3H), 2.72 (s, 3H). 13 C NMR (126 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 157.5,
157.3, 153.7, 153.5, 152.3, 150.6, 143.7, 143.3, 138.1, 137.6, 134.6,
133.6, 127.9, 127.8, 127.6, 125.9, 124.5, 21.33, 16.30. HRMS for RuC 40 H 30 N 8 P 2 F 12 : [M
– 2PF 6 ] 2+ at 362.0814 and [M –
PF 6 ] + at 869.1272. FTIR: 557, 836, and 1447
cm –1 . Elemental analysis for [ 5 ](Cl) 2 ·6H 2 O, C4 0 H 42 N 8 RuCl 2 O 6 : Calc’d: C, 53.2; H, 4.7; N,
12.4. Found: C, 52.5; H, 5.2; N, 11.0. 6 : Mass
(Yield): 0.233 g (87%). 1 H NMR
(500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 9.78 (d, J = 7.2 Hz, 1H), 9.70 (m, 1H), 8.69 (d, J = 8.4 Hz, 2H), 8.65 (d, J = 8.3 Hz, 2H), 8.60 (t, J = 6.4 Hz, 2H), 8.49 (dd, J = 6.0, 2.7
Hz, 2H), 8.07 (d, J = 6.8 Hz, 3H), 7.97 (s, 1H),
7.87 (s, 2H), 7.23 (s, 2H), 7.18 (s, 2H), 3.03 (s, 3H), 2.71 (s, 3H),
2.27 (s, 6H), 2.02 (s, 6H). 13 C NMR (126 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 155.3, 154.8, 153.8, 153.5, 152.0,
151.7, 138.7, 138.6, 138.3, 134.5, 133.3, 127.4, 125.7, 123.4, 123.3,
122.9, 21.34, 17.6, 17.5, 17.4, 16.30. HRMS for RuC 44 H 38 N 8 Cl 2 : [M – 2Cl] 2+ at 390.1123. FTIR: 557, 837, and 1477 cm –1 . Elemental
analysis for [ 6 ](Cl) 2 ·6H 2 O,
C 44 H 50 Cl 2 N 8 O 6 Ru: Calc’d: C, 55.1; H, 5.3; N, 11.7. Found: C, 53.0; H, 5.4;
N, 11.1. 7 : Mass (Yield): 0.544 g (81%). 1 H NMR
(500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 9.76 (d, J = 7.6 Hz, 1H), 9.69 (d, J = 8.1 Hz, 1H),
8.74 (s, 2H), 8.70 (s, 2H), 8.51 (m, 2H), 8.08 (d, J = 6.2 Hz, 2H), 8.05 (m, 2H), 7.98 (dd, J = 5.7,
1.8 Hz, 2H), 7.88 (d, J = 2.8 Hz, 2H), 7.48 (d, J = 5.6 Hz, 2H), 7.23 (d, J = 5.9 Hz, 2H),
3.02 (s, 3H), 2.71 (s, 3H), 2.62 (s, 6H), 2.51 (s, 6H). 13 C NMR (126 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 156.9,
154.6, 154.5, 151.4, 151.1, 150.4, 150.3, 137.1, 134.8, 133.2, 128.6,
128.4, 127.4, 125.8, 125.11, 125.03, 21.32, 20.3, 20.2, 16.3. HRMS
for RuC 44 H 38 N 8 Cl 2 : [M
– 2Cl] 2+ at 390.1130. FTIR: 556, 840, and 1414 cm –1 . Elemental analysis for [ 7 ](PF 6 ) 2 , C 44 H 38 N 8 RuP 2 F 12 : Calc’d: C, 49.4; H, 3.6; N, 10.4. Found: C,
47.9; H, 3.6; N, 10.1. Ru Macrocycles Ru( bpy )Re ( 8 ), Ru(phen)Re ( 9 ), and Ru(dppz)Re ( 10 )
were synthesized and characterized as reported previously. 36 , 37 DNA Binding Studies Luminescence titrations were carried
out with the addition of an aqueous solution of concentrated calf
thymus DNA in aqueous Tris buffer (25 mM NaCl, 5 mM Tris, pH = 7)
to 3 μM 5 , 6 , and 7 .
After each addition of DNA, the solution was mixed by a pipette and
allowed to equilibrate for 2 min. The spectra were recorded on a Perkin
Elmer Fluorescence Spectrometer LS 55. At least 20 data points before
the emission intensity reached a maximum were obtained. The luminescence
emission spectra were obtained using an excitation wavelength of 450
nm, and the emission intensities were measured from 500 to 800 nm.
The AUC (area under the curve) for each spectrum were used to generate
Scatchard plots and fit to the McGhee von Hippel binding model, 67 in which neither the site size nor binding constant
was defined, to determine K b and n . The binding constant of 3 with calf-thymus
DNA was determined from UV–Vis titrations, as described by
Liu et al. 34 Biology Reagents Antibodies for p-Chk1 (Ser345), p-ATR (Thr1989),
total ATR, p-ATM (Ser 1981), total ATM, p-histone H2AX (Ser139), β-actin,
and HRP-linked secondary antibody were purchased from Cell Signaling
Technology (CST). Antibodies for PARP1, total Chk1, and Alexa-Fluor
488 conjugated secondary antibodies were purchased from Abcam. Antibodies
for PARG and P-gp were purchased from Santa Cruz Biotechnology and
Elabscience, respectively. All ruthenium(II) compounds were converted
to their chloride salts by anion metathesis. Stock solutions of all
compounds—except cisplatin—were prepared at 100 mM in
100% dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and further diluted using Dulbecco’s
modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM). The final DMSO concentration
employed in the cell studies was 0.1%. Stock solutions of cisplatin
(2 mM) were prepared in phosphate buffered saline (PBS). Cell Culture MCF7 and MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cell
lines were cultured in DMEM supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum
(FBS) and 1% penicillin/streptomycin antibiotic. The MCF10A normal
breast cell line was cultured in DMEM supplemented with 5% horse serum,
0.5 μg/mL hydrocortisone, 20 ng/mL recombinant human EGF (hEGF),
10 μg/mL insulin, and 1% penicillin/streptomycin antibiotic.
Cells were maintained at 37 °C under a humified atmosphere containing
5% CO 2 and routinely subcultured with trypsin. Generation of Olaparib-Resistant MDA-MB-231 Cells The
Olaparib-resistant MDA-MB-231 cell line (MDA-MB-231R) was developed
from the parental MDA-MB-231 cell line by long-term drug exposure
(∼8 months, 10–100 μM Olaparib) in a similar manner
described by Kim et al. 45 MDA-MB-231 cells
were seeded at a density of 1.5 × 10 5 cells in a 25
cm 2 flask and allowed to adhere for 24 h. Cells were treated
with a starting Olaparib concentration of 10 μM, and treatments
were refreshed every 3 days. After each week, the confluency was assessed:
if confluency is <50%, the treatment was stopped; if confluency
is at 50–70%, the treatment was maintained; and if confluency
is over 70%, a portion of the cells was frozen. When the cells adapted
to a new drug concentration, cells were reseeded at a density of 1.5
× 10 5 cells in a new 25 cm 2 flask and allowed
to adhere before the next exposure to the increased concentration
of Olaparib. This procedure was repeated to achieve a final concentration
of Olaparib of 100 μM. Following this, MDA-MB-231R cells were
maintained in a low concentration of Olaparib (10 μM) to preserve
resistance. The MTT assay and clonogenic survival assay were conducted
to monitor the sensitivity of resistant cells. Prior to any downstream
studies, MDA-MB-231R cells were grown without Olaparib treatments
for a single passage. MTT Assay Cells were seeded at 5 × 10 3 cells/well for MCF7 cells and 1 × 10 4 cells/well
for MDA-MB-231 and MCF10A cells, respectively, in 96-well plates,
allowed to adhere for 24 h, and treated as described in the main text.
Following treatment, solutions were removed, thiazolyl blue tetrazolium
bromide (MTT, 0.5 mg/mL) reagent was added to the cells, and plates
were incubated for 4 h. The reduced purple formazan crystals were
solubilized with 100 μL of DMSO, and the absorbance at 570 nm
(620 nm as reference wavelength) was measured using a microplate reader.
The average in percent reduction of cell viability was expressed relative
to untreated control cells. The combinatorial effect was evaluated
by the generation of the compound dose–response curve and a
shift of the IC 50 value in the presence or absence of Olaparib
(graphed and calculated using GraphPad Prism software). Drug Interaction Analysis Dose–effect curves
for single agents and their combinations were generated from the MTT
assay data, and the combination index (CI) values were calculated
using CalcuSyn and CompuSyn software (Biosoft, Cambridge, UK) as established
by Chou and Talalay. 43 CI < 0.9 indicates
synergism, CI = 0.9–1.0 indicates additive, and CI > 1 indicates
antagonism. GraphPad Prism Software was used to generate a 3-color
scale based on CI values obtained, where synergism is represented
by green, additive by yellow, and antagonism by red. The colors of
each CI value were interpolated in between these constraints accordingly. Clonogenic Survival Assay Cells were seeded at 1 ×
10 3 cells/well in 6-well plates, allowed to adhere for
24 h, and treated as described in the main text. After treatment,
solutions were removed, and cells were cultured in compound-free medium
for 7–10 days to allow colony formation. Cells were then washed
(1× PBS, twice), fixed (ice-cold 100% methanol, 15–20
min, 4 °C), and stained (0.5% crystal violet solution, 20 min).
The staining solution was washed with water, and images were photographed
with a digital camera. Individual colonies were counted using ImageJ
software, and the survival fraction was determined (normalized to
controls). Cell Cycle Analysis Cells were seeded at 3 × 10 5 cells/well in 6-well plates, allowed to adhere for 24 h,
and treated as described in the main text. Following treatment, cells
were trypsinized and washed with 1× PBS twice. This was followed
by fixation in ice-cold 70% ethanol for at least overnight at 4 °C.
After fixation, fixed cells were centrifuged (1000 rpm, 5 min), and
the resulting cell pellets were washed with 1× PBS twice. Samples
were resuspended in 500 μL of 1× PBS, treated with RNase
A solution (5 μL, 10 mg/mL, 15 min), and stained with propidium
iodide (PI) (2 μL, 5 mg/mL, in the dark). Thereafter, samples
were acquired and analyzed with a NovoCyte flow cytometer (Agilent
Technologies) and NovoExpress software. For each sample, a minimum
of 10,000 cells were counted. Apoptosis Annexin V-FITC/PI Assay Cells were seeded
at 3 × 10 5 cells/well in 6-well plates, allowed to
adhere for 24 h, and treated as described in the main text. After
treatment, cells were trypsinized and washed with 1× PBS twice.
This was followed by the addition of 500 μL of 1× binding
buffer and 5 μL of Annexin V-FITC (Invitrogen). The cell-containing
mixture was incubated for 20 min at RT. A total of 5 μL of PI
(20 μg/mL) was added prior to flow cytometric analysis using
a flow cytometer, and results were analyzed using NovoExpress software.
For each sample, a minimum of 10,000 cells were counted. Determination of Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) Levels Cells were seeded in 6-well plate at density of 1 × 10 5 cells/well, allowed to adhere for 24 h, and incubated with 10 μM
2′,7′-dichlorofluorescein diacetate (DCFDA) in serum-free
culture media for 30 min at 37 °C in the dark. Upon completion,
DCFDA solutions were removed, cells were washed with 1× PBS twice,
and treated as described in the main text. Following incubation, resultant
cells were harvested, washed with 1× PBS twice, and resuspended
in 1× PBS. The intensity of the formed 2′7′-dichlorofluorescein
(DCF) as a result of carboxy-DCFDA hydrolysis by intracellular ROS
was analyzed using a flow cytometer and NovoExpress software at an
excitation and emission wavelength of 488 nm and 525 nm, respectively.
For each sample, a minimum of 10,000 cells were counted. γH2AX Immunostaining Cells were seeded at 3 ×
10 5 cells/well in 6-well plates, allowed to adhere for
24 h, and treated as described in the main text. Following treatment,
cells were trypsinized and washed with 1× PBS twice. Cells were
then fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) for 15 min at RT. Following
fixation, cells were washed with 1× PBS and resuspended in 500
μL of 1× PBS. Thereafter, cells were permeabilized by adding
ice-cold 100% methanol slowly to pre-chilled cells while gently vortexing
to a final concentration of 90% methanol and left on ice for 10 min.
Cells were then washed in excess 1× PBS and incubated with diluted
primary antibody (γH2AX) for 1 h at RT. Following incubation,
cells were washed with antibody dilution buffer and incubated with
diluted fluorochrome-conjugated secondary antibody (30 min, RT, in
the dark). Thereafter, samples were washed with antibody dilution
buffer and resuspended in 500 μL of 1× PBS. Samples were
acquired and analyzed with a NovoCyte flow cytometer and NovoExpress
software. For each sample, a minimum of 10,000 cells were counted. Alkaline Comet Assay Cells were seeded in 24-well plates
at a density of 1 × 10 5 cells/well, allowed to adhere
for 24 h, and treated as described in the main text. Following incubation,
cells were harvested and resuspended in ice-cold 1× PBS. A total
of 16 μL of cell suspension was mixed with 160 μL of 1%
low melting agarose (1/10 ratio; v/v). A total of 80 μL of cell
suspension was immediately dropped onto the pre-coated agarose slides
(1% normal melting agarose) and covered with coverslips, and slides
were cooled (15 min, 4 °C, in the dark). Thereafter, coverslips
were removed, and slides were immersed in pre-chilled lysis buffer
(2.5 mM NaCl, 100 mM Na 2 EDTA, 100 mM Tris–HCl, and
1.6 g of NaOH; pH 10) for 2 h at 4 °C in the dark. Thereafter,
slides were immersed in pre-chilled alkaline solution (1 mM Na 2 EDTA and 300 mM NaOH; pH > 13) for 1 h at 4 °C in
the
dark. Electrophoresis was conducted in a chamber filled with pre-chilled
alkaline electrophoresis solution (300 mM NaOH and 1.0 mM EDTA; pH
> 13) under standard conditions (22 V; 300 mA; 1 V/cm) for 30 min
in the dark. Slides were then neutralized with neutralization buffer
(0.4 M Tris–HCl, pH 7.5) for 10 min, washed (ice-cold water,
2×, 10 min each), fixed (ice-cold 70% ethanol, 5 min), and air-dried
for 15–30 min. Thereafter, slides were stained with 5 μg/mL
Hoechst 33342 solution (30 min, RT, in the dark) and imaged using
a fluorescence microscope (Zeiss Axio Vert.A1). At least 50–100
cells were analyzed per treatment. The percentage of DNA in the tail
was used as a parameter of DNA damage. Immunoblotting Cells were treated as described in the
main text. After treatment, cells were washed with ice-cold 1×
PBS and lysed in RIPA (radioimmunoprecipitation assay) buffer containing
protease inhibitors and phosphatase inhibitors. Aliquots of cell lysates
(20–40 μg of total protein) were resolved by 4–20%
Mini-PROTEAN TGX precast protein gels, transferred onto a nitrocellulose
membrane, and probed with primary antibodies in 5% BSA (bovine serum
albumin) in TBS-T (0.1% Tween 20 in 1× TBS) solutions. Reactions
were visualized with a suitable horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-conjugated
secondary antibody. Signal Fire ECL reagent (CST) or WesternBright
ECL HRP substrate (Advansta) chemiluminescent substrates with a Syngene
G:Box gel documentation system were used to visualize protein expression.
ImageJ software was used for densitometry data acquisition. Spheroid Growth Studies Spheroids were grown using
a liquid overlay technique. Cells were seeded in agarose-coated (50
μL, 0.6%) 96-well plates at 2000, 4000, 6000, 8000, and 10,000
cells/well and incubated for 15 days at 37 °C such that each
well contained a single spheroid. Formation of spheroids was observed
every three days, and spheroids were imaged using a microscope attached
to a digital camera at days 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15. During growth, 50%
of the media was exchanged every two to three days. The volume and
diameter of spheroids were determined by measuring their cross-sectional
area using ImageJ software (data not shown). Spheroid Growth Inhibition Studies Spheroids were grown
as described initially. The initial cell seeding density was chosen
such that spheroids reached a diameter of about 400–500 μM
after 3 days (4000 cells/well and 8000 cells/well for MDA-MB-231 and
MCF7, respectively). Spheroids were treated with the identified combinations
and single drugs alone for 72 h. Every other day thereafter, 50% of
the treatment-containing medium was replaced. Spheroids were imaged
every three days for a period of 12 days using a microscope attached
to a digital camera. The structural integrity of spheroids following
treatments was observed, and the volume was measured as initially
described. Spheroid Live/Dead Staining Spheroids were grown in
agarose-coated (172 μL, 0.6%) 48-well plates. Spheroids were
then incubated with the identified combinations and single drugs alone
for 72 h by replacing 50% of the medium with treatment-containing
media. Following this, half of the culture media was replaced with
staining solutions at 2× of their final concentrations for 30
min at 37 °C in the dark. The final concentrations used were
1 μM, 5 μg/mL, and 2 μg/mL for Calcein AM (Abcam),
Hoechst 33342, and PI in 1× PBS, respectively. Next, spheroids
were washed with 1× PBS and fixed with 4% PFA for 30 min at RT.
After fixation, spheroids were washed with 1× PBS twice and the
triple-stained spheroids were imaged using a fluorescence microscope
(Zeiss Axio Vert.A1) to evaluate cellular viability. Zebrafish (ZF) Embryo Toxicity The zebrafish embryo
toxicity study was conducted according to the guidelines for care
and use of Animal Biochemistry & Biotechnology Laboratory, Faculty
of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia
(UPM), which has been approved by the Institutional Animal Care and
Use Committee (IACUC) of UPM (UPM/IACUC/AUP No. R059/2018). Wild-type
zebrafish embryos were obtained from breeding facilities at Danio
Assay Laboratories Sdn.Bhd. (Universiti Putra Malaysia). Newly fertilized
eggs at less than 1 hpf were collected and washed with deionized water
and incubated at RT (28 ± 1 °C) in Danio-SprintM embryo
media containing 0.1% DMSO. Embryos were then transferred into 96-well
plates (one embryo/well) and exposed to concentration gradients of
compound(s) (1.56 to 100 mg/L) alone or in combination with 10 mg/L
Olaparib. Danio-SprintM embryo media were used as a control. Survival
and hatching rates were observed under a microscope attached with
a digital camera and imaged at 24, 48, 72, and 96 hpf. Morphological
changes in the development of ZF embryos after exposure to compounds
(pericardial edema, yolk sac edema, and spinal deformity) were also
observed. Four lethal endpoints were evaluated including coagulated
embryos, lack of somite formation, non-detachment of the tail, and
lack of heartbeat. All these characteristics were recorded every 24
hpf, except the heartbeat, which is visible after 48 hpf. The LC 50 values, known as the concentration of compound(s) that causes
death of 50% of zebrafish embryo/larvae, were determined by using
the GraphPad Prism software. Statistical Analysis Statistical analysis of the data
was carried out using GraphPad Prism software in which the data obtained
was analyzed using Student’s t -test or one-way
analysis of variance (ANOVA). The differences between the groups were
considered significant when P values generated were
less than 0.05.
## Chemistry
Chemistry General Chemical Methods Olaparib and Ceralasertib
were purchased from MedChemExpress, Berzosertib was purchased from
Abcam and Tamoxifen citrate was purchased from Tocris. All other chemicals
were purchased from SigmaAldrich and ThermoFisher Scientific. All
commercial reagents were used without purification unless otherwise
specified. 1 H and 13 C NMR spectra were obtained
using a Bruker Advance III 500 MHz Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectrometer.
HRMS (high-resolution mass spectroscopy) samples were analyzed at
the EPSRC UK National Mass Spectrometry Facility at Swansea University
using a ThermoScientific LTQ Orbitrap XL 1 Mass Spectrometer. Fourier
transform infrared spectra were run on a Perkin Elmer FT-IR Spectrometer
Spectrum TWO. Elemental analysis was performed by the Elemental Analysis
Service at London Metropolitan University. Analytical HPLC was carried
out on the Agilent system equipped with a Waters XBridge C18 (130
Å, 3.5 μm, 4.6 × 150 mm) analytical column. Water
with 0.1% trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) and acetonitrile with 0.1% TFA
were used as eluents. The flow rate was 1 mL/min, and 50% A:50% B
was used for 15 min. The purity of the final compounds was ≥95%
as determined by HPLC or elemental microanalysis. [Ru(N^N) 2 (PIP)] 2+ Compounds [Ru(bpy) 2 (PIP)] 2+ ( 1 ), [Ru(bpy) 2 (H-PIP)] 2+ ( 2 ), [Ru(phen) 2 (PIP)] 2+ ( 3 ), and [Ru(phen) 2 (H-PIP)] 2+ ( 4 ) (bpy = 2,2′bipyridine, phen = 1,10
phenanthroline, PIP = 2-(phenyl)-imidazo[4,5- f ][1,10]phenanthroline, p -HPIP = 2-(4-hydroxyphenyl)imidazo[4,5- f ][1,10]phenanthroline) were prepared by an adaptation of the previously
reported synthetic pathway 34 from Ru(N^N) 2 Cl 2 ·2H 2 O (where N^N = bpy or phen). 65 1 : Mass (Yield): 0.09 g (71.0%). 1 H NMR (CD 3 CN), δ ppm: 9.08 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.86 (d, 4H, J = 8.1 Hz),
8.51 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.47 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.27 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.07 (t, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz), 7.83 (d, 2H, J = 6.0 Hz), 7.76 (t, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 7.62 (t, 2H, J = 6.9 Hz),
7.57 (m, 1H), 7.43 (t, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz). Elemental
analysis (as PF 6 salt): Calcd: C, 46.86; H, 2.82; N, 11.21;
Found: C, 47.08; H, 2.87; N, 11.63. ESI-MS, m / z (%): 709.3 [M + ], 354.6 [M 2+ ]. 2 : Mass (Yield): 0.09 g (69.0%). 1 H NMR (CD 3 CN), δ ppm: 9.06 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz),
8.85 (d, 2H, J = 8.1 Hz), 8.51 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.47 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.12 (d, 2H, J = 9.2 Hz), 8.06 (t, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz),
7.82 (d, 2H, J = 5.7 Hz), 7.74 (t, 2H, J = 6.9 Hz), 7.42 (t, 4H, J = 6.9 Hz), 7.03 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 5.00 (s, 1H). Elemental analysis (as PF 6 salt): Calcd: C, 46.12; H, 2.78; N, 11.03; Found: C, 46.24;
H, 2.79; N, 11.27. ESI-MS, m / z (%):
726.1 [M + ], 363.1 [M 2+ ]. 3 : Mass (Yield): 0.10 g (69.2%). 1 H NMR
(CD 3 CN), δ ppm: 9.03 (d, 4H, J =
8.0 Hz), 8.94 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.57 (d, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.48 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz),
8.27 (d, 2H, J = 6.9 Hz), 8.23 (s, 2H), 8.13 (d,
2H, J = 6.9 Hz), 7.99 (d, 2H, J =
6.9 Hz), 7.93 (d, 4H, J = 6.9 Hz), 7.60 (m, 1H).
Elemental analysis (as PF 6 salt): Calcd: C, 49.29; H, 2.69;
N, 10.69; Found: C, 49.27; H, 2.51; N, 10.64. ESI-MS, m / z (%): 757.3 [M + ], 379.3 [M 2+ ]. 4 : Mass (Yield): 0.11 g (70.1%). 1 H NMR
(CD 3 CN), δ ppm: 9.05 (d, 4H, J =
6.9 Hz), 8.86 (d, 2H, J = 6.9 Hz), 8.52 (d, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.47 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz),
8.07 (d, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz), 7.83 (d, 2H, J = 5.7 Hz), 7.57 (s, 2H), 7.43 (t, 4H, J = 6.9 Hz),
7.04 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 5.00 (s, 1H). Elemental
analysis (as PF 6 salt): Calcd: C, 48.55; H, 2.65; N, 10.53;
Found: C, 48.32; H, 2.79; N, 10.53. ESI-MS, m / z (%): 774.1 [M + ], 387.0 [M 2+ ]. [Ru(N^N) 2 (dmdppz)] 2+ Compounds [Ru(bpy) 2 (dmdppz)] 2+ ( 5 ), [Ru(5,5′dmb) 2 (dmdppz)] 2+ ( 6 ), and [Ru(4,4′dmb) 2 (dmdppz)] 2+ ( 7 ) (dmdppz = 10,12-dimethyl-dipyrido[3,2- a :2′,3′- c ]phenazine, 5,5′dmb
= 5,5′-dimethyl-2,2′bipyridine, 4,4′dmb = 4,4′-dimethyl-2,2′bipyridine)
were prepared by an adaptation of a previously reported synthetic
pathway. 38 This involved preparation of
the [Ru(N^N) 2 (dpq)] 2+ (dpq = 1,10-phenanthroline-5,6-dione)
intermediate complex from the Ru(N^N) 2 Cl 2 ·2H 2 O starting material followed by condensation with 1,2-diamino-3,5-dimethylbenzene. Step 1: Formation
of the [Ru(N^N) 2 (dpq)] 2+ intermediate complex:
The starting material Ru(N^N) 2 Cl 2 ·2H 2 O (N^N = bpy, 5,5′dmb or 4,4′dmb,
prepared as in ref ( 65 )) and dpq (prepared as in ref ( 66 )) were added to 1:1 ethanol:water. The mixture was refluxed
under nitrogen gas for 3 h before being allowed to cool to room temperature
(RT). 1 mL of a saturated aqueous solution of ammonium hexafluorophosphate
was added, and the brown precipitate formed was collected via filtration
and washed with DI water followed by ether before drying. [Ru(bpy) 2 (dpq)] 2+ : Mass (Yield): 0.561 g
(78%). 1 H NMR (500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ,
ppm: 8.85 (d, J = 8.0 Hz, 4H), 8.65 (dd, J = 7.9, 1.1 Hz, 2H), 8.38 (d, J = 5.6
Hz, 2H), 8.25 (t, J = 7.9 Hz, 4H), 8.12 (m, 4H),
7.83 (dd, J = 7.9, 5.6 Hz, 2H), 7.60 (m, 4H). FTIR:
556, 831, 1426, 1444, 1448, and 1699 cm –1 . [Ru(5,5′dmb) 2 (dpq)] 2+ : Mass (Yield):
1.13 g (93%). 1 H NMR (500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 8.65 (d, J = 8.4 Hz, 4H), 8.62
(m, 2H), 8.34 (dd, J = 5.6, 1.2 Hz, 2H), 8.03 (d, J = 8.3 Hz, 4H), 7.89 (d, J = 35.2 Hz,
4H), 7.80 (m, 2H), 2.22 (s, 6H), 2.17 (s, 6H). FTIR: 556, 835, 1428,
1477, and 1699 cm –1 . [Ru(4,4′dmb) 2 (dpq)] 2+ : Mass (Yield):
0.708 g (89%). 1 H NMR (500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 8.69 (s, 4H), 8.60 (d, J = 6.9
Hz, 2H), 8.34 (m, 2H), 7.94 (d, J = 5.8 Hz, 2H),
7.86 (d, J = 5.8 Hz, 2H), 7.79 (m, 2H), 7.42 (d, J = 5.9 Hz, 2H), 7.38 (d, J = 5.4 Hz, 2H),
2.58 (s, 6H), 2.56 (s, 6H). FTIR: 557, 826, 1427, and 1704 cm –1 . Step 2: 1,2-Diamino-3,5-dimethylbenzene
was added to [Ru(N^N) 2 (dpq)](PF 6 ) 2 in hot, anhydrous methanol
in a 4.5:1 molar ratio. The mixture was refluxed for 6 h under nitrogen
and allowed to cool to RT. A saturated aqueous solution of ammonium
hexafluorophosphate was added, and the mixture was cooled on ice.
The bright orange precipitate was collected by filtration and recrystallized
from acetonitrile and ether. The crystals formed were collected by
filtration, washed with ether, and dried. 5 : Mass
(Yield): 0.164 g (70%). 1 H NMR
(500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 9.82 (s, 1H),
9.75 (d, J = 7.1 Hz, 1H), 8.88 (d, J = 9.5 Hz, 4H), 8.54 (dd, J = 7.7, 2.7 Hz, 2H),
8.29 (s, 2H), 8.15 (m, 9H), 7.90 (s, 1H), 7.67 (s, 2H), 7.43 (d, J = 1.4 Hz, 2H), 3.03 (s, 3H), 2.72 (s, 3H). 13 C NMR (126 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 157.5,
157.3, 153.7, 153.5, 152.3, 150.6, 143.7, 143.3, 138.1, 137.6, 134.6,
133.6, 127.9, 127.8, 127.6, 125.9, 124.5, 21.33, 16.30. HRMS for RuC 40 H 30 N 8 P 2 F 12 : [M
– 2PF 6 ] 2+ at 362.0814 and [M –
PF 6 ] + at 869.1272. FTIR: 557, 836, and 1447
cm –1 . Elemental analysis for [ 5 ](Cl) 2 ·6H 2 O, C4 0 H 42 N 8 RuCl 2 O 6 : Calc’d: C, 53.2; H, 4.7; N,
12.4. Found: C, 52.5; H, 5.2; N, 11.0. 6 : Mass
(Yield): 0.233 g (87%). 1 H NMR
(500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 9.78 (d, J = 7.2 Hz, 1H), 9.70 (m, 1H), 8.69 (d, J = 8.4 Hz, 2H), 8.65 (d, J = 8.3 Hz, 2H), 8.60 (t, J = 6.4 Hz, 2H), 8.49 (dd, J = 6.0, 2.7
Hz, 2H), 8.07 (d, J = 6.8 Hz, 3H), 7.97 (s, 1H),
7.87 (s, 2H), 7.23 (s, 2H), 7.18 (s, 2H), 3.03 (s, 3H), 2.71 (s, 3H),
2.27 (s, 6H), 2.02 (s, 6H). 13 C NMR (126 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 155.3, 154.8, 153.8, 153.5, 152.0,
151.7, 138.7, 138.6, 138.3, 134.5, 133.3, 127.4, 125.7, 123.4, 123.3,
122.9, 21.34, 17.6, 17.5, 17.4, 16.30. HRMS for RuC 44 H 38 N 8 Cl 2 : [M – 2Cl] 2+ at 390.1123. FTIR: 557, 837, and 1477 cm –1 . Elemental
analysis for [ 6 ](Cl) 2 ·6H 2 O,
C 44 H 50 Cl 2 N 8 O 6 Ru: Calc’d: C, 55.1; H, 5.3; N, 11.7. Found: C, 53.0; H, 5.4;
N, 11.1. 7 : Mass (Yield): 0.544 g (81%). 1 H NMR
(500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 9.76 (d, J = 7.6 Hz, 1H), 9.69 (d, J = 8.1 Hz, 1H),
8.74 (s, 2H), 8.70 (s, 2H), 8.51 (m, 2H), 8.08 (d, J = 6.2 Hz, 2H), 8.05 (m, 2H), 7.98 (dd, J = 5.7,
1.8 Hz, 2H), 7.88 (d, J = 2.8 Hz, 2H), 7.48 (d, J = 5.6 Hz, 2H), 7.23 (d, J = 5.9 Hz, 2H),
3.02 (s, 3H), 2.71 (s, 3H), 2.62 (s, 6H), 2.51 (s, 6H). 13 C NMR (126 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 156.9,
154.6, 154.5, 151.4, 151.1, 150.4, 150.3, 137.1, 134.8, 133.2, 128.6,
128.4, 127.4, 125.8, 125.11, 125.03, 21.32, 20.3, 20.2, 16.3. HRMS
for RuC 44 H 38 N 8 Cl 2 : [M
– 2Cl] 2+ at 390.1130. FTIR: 556, 840, and 1414 cm –1 . Elemental analysis for [ 7 ](PF 6 ) 2 , C 44 H 38 N 8 RuP 2 F 12 : Calc’d: C, 49.4; H, 3.6; N, 10.4. Found: C,
47.9; H, 3.6; N, 10.1. Ru Macrocycles Ru( bpy )Re ( 8 ), Ru(phen)Re ( 9 ), and Ru(dppz)Re ( 10 )
were synthesized and characterized as reported previously. 36 , 37 DNA Binding Studies Luminescence titrations were carried
out with the addition of an aqueous solution of concentrated calf
thymus DNA in aqueous Tris buffer (25 mM NaCl, 5 mM Tris, pH = 7)
to 3 μM 5 , 6 , and 7 .
After each addition of DNA, the solution was mixed by a pipette and
allowed to equilibrate for 2 min. The spectra were recorded on a Perkin
Elmer Fluorescence Spectrometer LS 55. At least 20 data points before
the emission intensity reached a maximum were obtained. The luminescence
emission spectra were obtained using an excitation wavelength of 450
nm, and the emission intensities were measured from 500 to 800 nm.
The AUC (area under the curve) for each spectrum were used to generate
Scatchard plots and fit to the McGhee von Hippel binding model, 67 in which neither the site size nor binding constant
was defined, to determine K b and n . The binding constant of 3 with calf-thymus
DNA was determined from UV–Vis titrations, as described by
Liu et al. 34
## General Chemical Methods
General Chemical Methods Olaparib and Ceralasertib
were purchased from MedChemExpress, Berzosertib was purchased from
Abcam and Tamoxifen citrate was purchased from Tocris. All other chemicals
were purchased from SigmaAldrich and ThermoFisher Scientific. All
commercial reagents were used without purification unless otherwise
specified. 1 H and 13 C NMR spectra were obtained
using a Bruker Advance III 500 MHz Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectrometer.
HRMS (high-resolution mass spectroscopy) samples were analyzed at
the EPSRC UK National Mass Spectrometry Facility at Swansea University
using a ThermoScientific LTQ Orbitrap XL 1 Mass Spectrometer. Fourier
transform infrared spectra were run on a Perkin Elmer FT-IR Spectrometer
Spectrum TWO. Elemental analysis was performed by the Elemental Analysis
Service at London Metropolitan University. Analytical HPLC was carried
out on the Agilent system equipped with a Waters XBridge C18 (130
Å, 3.5 μm, 4.6 × 150 mm) analytical column. Water
with 0.1% trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) and acetonitrile with 0.1% TFA
were used as eluents. The flow rate was 1 mL/min, and 50% A:50% B
was used for 15 min. The purity of the final compounds was ≥95%
as determined by HPLC or elemental microanalysis.
## [Ru(N^N)
[Ru(N^N) 2 (PIP)] 2+ Compounds [Ru(bpy) 2 (PIP)] 2+ ( 1 ), [Ru(bpy) 2 (H-PIP)] 2+ ( 2 ), [Ru(phen) 2 (PIP)] 2+ ( 3 ), and [Ru(phen) 2 (H-PIP)] 2+ ( 4 ) (bpy = 2,2′bipyridine, phen = 1,10
phenanthroline, PIP = 2-(phenyl)-imidazo[4,5- f ][1,10]phenanthroline, p -HPIP = 2-(4-hydroxyphenyl)imidazo[4,5- f ][1,10]phenanthroline) were prepared by an adaptation of the previously
reported synthetic pathway 34 from Ru(N^N) 2 Cl 2 ·2H 2 O (where N^N = bpy or phen). 65 1 : Mass (Yield): 0.09 g (71.0%). 1 H NMR (CD 3 CN), δ ppm: 9.08 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.86 (d, 4H, J = 8.1 Hz),
8.51 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.47 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.27 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.07 (t, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz), 7.83 (d, 2H, J = 6.0 Hz), 7.76 (t, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 7.62 (t, 2H, J = 6.9 Hz),
7.57 (m, 1H), 7.43 (t, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz). Elemental
analysis (as PF 6 salt): Calcd: C, 46.86; H, 2.82; N, 11.21;
Found: C, 47.08; H, 2.87; N, 11.63. ESI-MS, m / z (%): 709.3 [M + ], 354.6 [M 2+ ]. 2 : Mass (Yield): 0.09 g (69.0%). 1 H NMR (CD 3 CN), δ ppm: 9.06 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz),
8.85 (d, 2H, J = 8.1 Hz), 8.51 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.47 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.12 (d, 2H, J = 9.2 Hz), 8.06 (t, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz),
7.82 (d, 2H, J = 5.7 Hz), 7.74 (t, 2H, J = 6.9 Hz), 7.42 (t, 4H, J = 6.9 Hz), 7.03 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 5.00 (s, 1H). Elemental analysis (as PF 6 salt): Calcd: C, 46.12; H, 2.78; N, 11.03; Found: C, 46.24;
H, 2.79; N, 11.27. ESI-MS, m / z (%):
726.1 [M + ], 363.1 [M 2+ ]. 3 : Mass (Yield): 0.10 g (69.2%). 1 H NMR
(CD 3 CN), δ ppm: 9.03 (d, 4H, J =
8.0 Hz), 8.94 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.57 (d, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.48 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz),
8.27 (d, 2H, J = 6.9 Hz), 8.23 (s, 2H), 8.13 (d,
2H, J = 6.9 Hz), 7.99 (d, 2H, J =
6.9 Hz), 7.93 (d, 4H, J = 6.9 Hz), 7.60 (m, 1H).
Elemental analysis (as PF 6 salt): Calcd: C, 49.29; H, 2.69;
N, 10.69; Found: C, 49.27; H, 2.51; N, 10.64. ESI-MS, m / z (%): 757.3 [M + ], 379.3 [M 2+ ]. 4 : Mass (Yield): 0.11 g (70.1%). 1 H NMR
(CD 3 CN), δ ppm: 9.05 (d, 4H, J =
6.9 Hz), 8.86 (d, 2H, J = 6.9 Hz), 8.52 (d, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz), 8.47 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz),
8.07 (d, 4H, J = 8.0 Hz), 7.83 (d, 2H, J = 5.7 Hz), 7.57 (s, 2H), 7.43 (t, 4H, J = 6.9 Hz),
7.04 (d, 2H, J = 8.0 Hz), 5.00 (s, 1H). Elemental
analysis (as PF 6 salt): Calcd: C, 48.55; H, 2.65; N, 10.53;
Found: C, 48.32; H, 2.79; N, 10.53. ESI-MS, m / z (%): 774.1 [M + ], 387.0 [M 2+ ].
## [Ru(N^N)
[Ru(N^N) 2 (dmdppz)] 2+ Compounds [Ru(bpy) 2 (dmdppz)] 2+ ( 5 ), [Ru(5,5′dmb) 2 (dmdppz)] 2+ ( 6 ), and [Ru(4,4′dmb) 2 (dmdppz)] 2+ ( 7 ) (dmdppz = 10,12-dimethyl-dipyrido[3,2- a :2′,3′- c ]phenazine, 5,5′dmb
= 5,5′-dimethyl-2,2′bipyridine, 4,4′dmb = 4,4′-dimethyl-2,2′bipyridine)
were prepared by an adaptation of a previously reported synthetic
pathway. 38 This involved preparation of
the [Ru(N^N) 2 (dpq)] 2+ (dpq = 1,10-phenanthroline-5,6-dione)
intermediate complex from the Ru(N^N) 2 Cl 2 ·2H 2 O starting material followed by condensation with 1,2-diamino-3,5-dimethylbenzene. Step 1: Formation
of the [Ru(N^N) 2 (dpq)] 2+ intermediate complex:
The starting material Ru(N^N) 2 Cl 2 ·2H 2 O (N^N = bpy, 5,5′dmb or 4,4′dmb,
prepared as in ref ( 65 )) and dpq (prepared as in ref ( 66 )) were added to 1:1 ethanol:water. The mixture was refluxed
under nitrogen gas for 3 h before being allowed to cool to room temperature
(RT). 1 mL of a saturated aqueous solution of ammonium hexafluorophosphate
was added, and the brown precipitate formed was collected via filtration
and washed with DI water followed by ether before drying. [Ru(bpy) 2 (dpq)] 2+ : Mass (Yield): 0.561 g
(78%). 1 H NMR (500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ,
ppm: 8.85 (d, J = 8.0 Hz, 4H), 8.65 (dd, J = 7.9, 1.1 Hz, 2H), 8.38 (d, J = 5.6
Hz, 2H), 8.25 (t, J = 7.9 Hz, 4H), 8.12 (m, 4H),
7.83 (dd, J = 7.9, 5.6 Hz, 2H), 7.60 (m, 4H). FTIR:
556, 831, 1426, 1444, 1448, and 1699 cm –1 . [Ru(5,5′dmb) 2 (dpq)] 2+ : Mass (Yield):
1.13 g (93%). 1 H NMR (500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 8.65 (d, J = 8.4 Hz, 4H), 8.62
(m, 2H), 8.34 (dd, J = 5.6, 1.2 Hz, 2H), 8.03 (d, J = 8.3 Hz, 4H), 7.89 (d, J = 35.2 Hz,
4H), 7.80 (m, 2H), 2.22 (s, 6H), 2.17 (s, 6H). FTIR: 556, 835, 1428,
1477, and 1699 cm –1 . [Ru(4,4′dmb) 2 (dpq)] 2+ : Mass (Yield):
0.708 g (89%). 1 H NMR (500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 8.69 (s, 4H), 8.60 (d, J = 6.9
Hz, 2H), 8.34 (m, 2H), 7.94 (d, J = 5.8 Hz, 2H),
7.86 (d, J = 5.8 Hz, 2H), 7.79 (m, 2H), 7.42 (d, J = 5.9 Hz, 2H), 7.38 (d, J = 5.4 Hz, 2H),
2.58 (s, 6H), 2.56 (s, 6H). FTIR: 557, 826, 1427, and 1704 cm –1 . Step 2: 1,2-Diamino-3,5-dimethylbenzene
was added to [Ru(N^N) 2 (dpq)](PF 6 ) 2 in hot, anhydrous methanol
in a 4.5:1 molar ratio. The mixture was refluxed for 6 h under nitrogen
and allowed to cool to RT. A saturated aqueous solution of ammonium
hexafluorophosphate was added, and the mixture was cooled on ice.
The bright orange precipitate was collected by filtration and recrystallized
from acetonitrile and ether. The crystals formed were collected by
filtration, washed with ether, and dried. 5 : Mass
(Yield): 0.164 g (70%). 1 H NMR
(500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 9.82 (s, 1H),
9.75 (d, J = 7.1 Hz, 1H), 8.88 (d, J = 9.5 Hz, 4H), 8.54 (dd, J = 7.7, 2.7 Hz, 2H),
8.29 (s, 2H), 8.15 (m, 9H), 7.90 (s, 1H), 7.67 (s, 2H), 7.43 (d, J = 1.4 Hz, 2H), 3.03 (s, 3H), 2.72 (s, 3H). 13 C NMR (126 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 157.5,
157.3, 153.7, 153.5, 152.3, 150.6, 143.7, 143.3, 138.1, 137.6, 134.6,
133.6, 127.9, 127.8, 127.6, 125.9, 124.5, 21.33, 16.30. HRMS for RuC 40 H 30 N 8 P 2 F 12 : [M
– 2PF 6 ] 2+ at 362.0814 and [M –
PF 6 ] + at 869.1272. FTIR: 557, 836, and 1447
cm –1 . Elemental analysis for [ 5 ](Cl) 2 ·6H 2 O, C4 0 H 42 N 8 RuCl 2 O 6 : Calc’d: C, 53.2; H, 4.7; N,
12.4. Found: C, 52.5; H, 5.2; N, 11.0. 6 : Mass
(Yield): 0.233 g (87%). 1 H NMR
(500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 9.78 (d, J = 7.2 Hz, 1H), 9.70 (m, 1H), 8.69 (d, J = 8.4 Hz, 2H), 8.65 (d, J = 8.3 Hz, 2H), 8.60 (t, J = 6.4 Hz, 2H), 8.49 (dd, J = 6.0, 2.7
Hz, 2H), 8.07 (d, J = 6.8 Hz, 3H), 7.97 (s, 1H),
7.87 (s, 2H), 7.23 (s, 2H), 7.18 (s, 2H), 3.03 (s, 3H), 2.71 (s, 3H),
2.27 (s, 6H), 2.02 (s, 6H). 13 C NMR (126 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 155.3, 154.8, 153.8, 153.5, 152.0,
151.7, 138.7, 138.6, 138.3, 134.5, 133.3, 127.4, 125.7, 123.4, 123.3,
122.9, 21.34, 17.6, 17.5, 17.4, 16.30. HRMS for RuC 44 H 38 N 8 Cl 2 : [M – 2Cl] 2+ at 390.1123. FTIR: 557, 837, and 1477 cm –1 . Elemental
analysis for [ 6 ](Cl) 2 ·6H 2 O,
C 44 H 50 Cl 2 N 8 O 6 Ru: Calc’d: C, 55.1; H, 5.3; N, 11.7. Found: C, 53.0; H, 5.4;
N, 11.1. 7 : Mass (Yield): 0.544 g (81%). 1 H NMR
(500 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 9.76 (d, J = 7.6 Hz, 1H), 9.69 (d, J = 8.1 Hz, 1H),
8.74 (s, 2H), 8.70 (s, 2H), 8.51 (m, 2H), 8.08 (d, J = 6.2 Hz, 2H), 8.05 (m, 2H), 7.98 (dd, J = 5.7,
1.8 Hz, 2H), 7.88 (d, J = 2.8 Hz, 2H), 7.48 (d, J = 5.6 Hz, 2H), 7.23 (d, J = 5.9 Hz, 2H),
3.02 (s, 3H), 2.71 (s, 3H), 2.62 (s, 6H), 2.51 (s, 6H). 13 C NMR (126 MHz, C 3 D 6 O), δ, ppm: 156.9,
154.6, 154.5, 151.4, 151.1, 150.4, 150.3, 137.1, 134.8, 133.2, 128.6,
128.4, 127.4, 125.8, 125.11, 125.03, 21.32, 20.3, 20.2, 16.3. HRMS
for RuC 44 H 38 N 8 Cl 2 : [M
– 2Cl] 2+ at 390.1130. FTIR: 556, 840, and 1414 cm –1 . Elemental analysis for [ 7 ](PF 6 ) 2 , C 44 H 38 N 8 RuP 2 F 12 : Calc’d: C, 49.4; H, 3.6; N, 10.4. Found: C,
47.9; H, 3.6; N, 10.1.
## Ru Macrocycles
Ru Macrocycles Ru( bpy )Re ( 8 ), Ru(phen)Re ( 9 ), and Ru(dppz)Re ( 10 )
were synthesized and characterized as reported previously. 36 , 37
## DNA Binding Studies
DNA Binding Studies Luminescence titrations were carried
out with the addition of an aqueous solution of concentrated calf
thymus DNA in aqueous Tris buffer (25 mM NaCl, 5 mM Tris, pH = 7)
to 3 μM 5 , 6 , and 7 .
After each addition of DNA, the solution was mixed by a pipette and
allowed to equilibrate for 2 min. The spectra were recorded on a Perkin
Elmer Fluorescence Spectrometer LS 55. At least 20 data points before
the emission intensity reached a maximum were obtained. The luminescence
emission spectra were obtained using an excitation wavelength of 450
nm, and the emission intensities were measured from 500 to 800 nm.
The AUC (area under the curve) for each spectrum were used to generate
Scatchard plots and fit to the McGhee von Hippel binding model, 67 in which neither the site size nor binding constant
was defined, to determine K b and n . The binding constant of 3 with calf-thymus
DNA was determined from UV–Vis titrations, as described by
Liu et al. 34
## Biology
Biology Reagents Antibodies for p-Chk1 (Ser345), p-ATR (Thr1989),
total ATR, p-ATM (Ser 1981), total ATM, p-histone H2AX (Ser139), β-actin,
and HRP-linked secondary antibody were purchased from Cell Signaling
Technology (CST). Antibodies for PARP1, total Chk1, and Alexa-Fluor
488 conjugated secondary antibodies were purchased from Abcam. Antibodies
for PARG and P-gp were purchased from Santa Cruz Biotechnology and
Elabscience, respectively. All ruthenium(II) compounds were converted
to their chloride salts by anion metathesis. Stock solutions of all
compounds—except cisplatin—were prepared at 100 mM in
100% dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and further diluted using Dulbecco’s
modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM). The final DMSO concentration
employed in the cell studies was 0.1%. Stock solutions of cisplatin
(2 mM) were prepared in phosphate buffered saline (PBS). Cell Culture MCF7 and MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cell
lines were cultured in DMEM supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum
(FBS) and 1% penicillin/streptomycin antibiotic. The MCF10A normal
breast cell line was cultured in DMEM supplemented with 5% horse serum,
0.5 μg/mL hydrocortisone, 20 ng/mL recombinant human EGF (hEGF),
10 μg/mL insulin, and 1% penicillin/streptomycin antibiotic.
Cells were maintained at 37 °C under a humified atmosphere containing
5% CO 2 and routinely subcultured with trypsin. Generation of Olaparib-Resistant MDA-MB-231 Cells The
Olaparib-resistant MDA-MB-231 cell line (MDA-MB-231R) was developed
from the parental MDA-MB-231 cell line by long-term drug exposure
(∼8 months, 10–100 μM Olaparib) in a similar manner
described by Kim et al. 45 MDA-MB-231 cells
were seeded at a density of 1.5 × 10 5 cells in a 25
cm 2 flask and allowed to adhere for 24 h. Cells were treated
with a starting Olaparib concentration of 10 μM, and treatments
were refreshed every 3 days. After each week, the confluency was assessed:
if confluency is <50%, the treatment was stopped; if confluency
is at 50–70%, the treatment was maintained; and if confluency
is over 70%, a portion of the cells was frozen. When the cells adapted
to a new drug concentration, cells were reseeded at a density of 1.5
× 10 5 cells in a new 25 cm 2 flask and allowed
to adhere before the next exposure to the increased concentration
of Olaparib. This procedure was repeated to achieve a final concentration
of Olaparib of 100 μM. Following this, MDA-MB-231R cells were
maintained in a low concentration of Olaparib (10 μM) to preserve
resistance. The MTT assay and clonogenic survival assay were conducted
to monitor the sensitivity of resistant cells. Prior to any downstream
studies, MDA-MB-231R cells were grown without Olaparib treatments
for a single passage. MTT Assay Cells were seeded at 5 × 10 3 cells/well for MCF7 cells and 1 × 10 4 cells/well
for MDA-MB-231 and MCF10A cells, respectively, in 96-well plates,
allowed to adhere for 24 h, and treated as described in the main text.
Following treatment, solutions were removed, thiazolyl blue tetrazolium
bromide (MTT, 0.5 mg/mL) reagent was added to the cells, and plates
were incubated for 4 h. The reduced purple formazan crystals were
solubilized with 100 μL of DMSO, and the absorbance at 570 nm
(620 nm as reference wavelength) was measured using a microplate reader.
The average in percent reduction of cell viability was expressed relative
to untreated control cells. The combinatorial effect was evaluated
by the generation of the compound dose–response curve and a
shift of the IC 50 value in the presence or absence of Olaparib
(graphed and calculated using GraphPad Prism software). Drug Interaction Analysis Dose–effect curves
for single agents and their combinations were generated from the MTT
assay data, and the combination index (CI) values were calculated
using CalcuSyn and CompuSyn software (Biosoft, Cambridge, UK) as established
by Chou and Talalay. 43 CI < 0.9 indicates
synergism, CI = 0.9–1.0 indicates additive, and CI > 1 indicates
antagonism. GraphPad Prism Software was used to generate a 3-color
scale based on CI values obtained, where synergism is represented
by green, additive by yellow, and antagonism by red. The colors of
each CI value were interpolated in between these constraints accordingly. Clonogenic Survival Assay Cells were seeded at 1 ×
10 3 cells/well in 6-well plates, allowed to adhere for
24 h, and treated as described in the main text. After treatment,
solutions were removed, and cells were cultured in compound-free medium
for 7–10 days to allow colony formation. Cells were then washed
(1× PBS, twice), fixed (ice-cold 100% methanol, 15–20
min, 4 °C), and stained (0.5% crystal violet solution, 20 min).
The staining solution was washed with water, and images were photographed
with a digital camera. Individual colonies were counted using ImageJ
software, and the survival fraction was determined (normalized to
controls). Cell Cycle Analysis Cells were seeded at 3 × 10 5 cells/well in 6-well plates, allowed to adhere for 24 h,
and treated as described in the main text. Following treatment, cells
were trypsinized and washed with 1× PBS twice. This was followed
by fixation in ice-cold 70% ethanol for at least overnight at 4 °C.
After fixation, fixed cells were centrifuged (1000 rpm, 5 min), and
the resulting cell pellets were washed with 1× PBS twice. Samples
were resuspended in 500 μL of 1× PBS, treated with RNase
A solution (5 μL, 10 mg/mL, 15 min), and stained with propidium
iodide (PI) (2 μL, 5 mg/mL, in the dark). Thereafter, samples
were acquired and analyzed with a NovoCyte flow cytometer (Agilent
Technologies) and NovoExpress software. For each sample, a minimum
of 10,000 cells were counted. Apoptosis Annexin V-FITC/PI Assay Cells were seeded
at 3 × 10 5 cells/well in 6-well plates, allowed to
adhere for 24 h, and treated as described in the main text. After
treatment, cells were trypsinized and washed with 1× PBS twice.
This was followed by the addition of 500 μL of 1× binding
buffer and 5 μL of Annexin V-FITC (Invitrogen). The cell-containing
mixture was incubated for 20 min at RT. A total of 5 μL of PI
(20 μg/mL) was added prior to flow cytometric analysis using
a flow cytometer, and results were analyzed using NovoExpress software.
For each sample, a minimum of 10,000 cells were counted. Determination of Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) Levels Cells were seeded in 6-well plate at density of 1 × 10 5 cells/well, allowed to adhere for 24 h, and incubated with 10 μM
2′,7′-dichlorofluorescein diacetate (DCFDA) in serum-free
culture media for 30 min at 37 °C in the dark. Upon completion,
DCFDA solutions were removed, cells were washed with 1× PBS twice,
and treated as described in the main text. Following incubation, resultant
cells were harvested, washed with 1× PBS twice, and resuspended
in 1× PBS. The intensity of the formed 2′7′-dichlorofluorescein
(DCF) as a result of carboxy-DCFDA hydrolysis by intracellular ROS
was analyzed using a flow cytometer and NovoExpress software at an
excitation and emission wavelength of 488 nm and 525 nm, respectively.
For each sample, a minimum of 10,000 cells were counted. γH2AX Immunostaining Cells were seeded at 3 ×
10 5 cells/well in 6-well plates, allowed to adhere for
24 h, and treated as described in the main text. Following treatment,
cells were trypsinized and washed with 1× PBS twice. Cells were
then fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) for 15 min at RT. Following
fixation, cells were washed with 1× PBS and resuspended in 500
μL of 1× PBS. Thereafter, cells were permeabilized by adding
ice-cold 100% methanol slowly to pre-chilled cells while gently vortexing
to a final concentration of 90% methanol and left on ice for 10 min.
Cells were then washed in excess 1× PBS and incubated with diluted
primary antibody (γH2AX) for 1 h at RT. Following incubation,
cells were washed with antibody dilution buffer and incubated with
diluted fluorochrome-conjugated secondary antibody (30 min, RT, in
the dark). Thereafter, samples were washed with antibody dilution
buffer and resuspended in 500 μL of 1× PBS. Samples were
acquired and analyzed with a NovoCyte flow cytometer and NovoExpress
software. For each sample, a minimum of 10,000 cells were counted. Alkaline Comet Assay Cells were seeded in 24-well plates
at a density of 1 × 10 5 cells/well, allowed to adhere
for 24 h, and treated as described in the main text. Following incubation,
cells were harvested and resuspended in ice-cold 1× PBS. A total
of 16 μL of cell suspension was mixed with 160 μL of 1%
low melting agarose (1/10 ratio; v/v). A total of 80 μL of cell
suspension was immediately dropped onto the pre-coated agarose slides
(1% normal melting agarose) and covered with coverslips, and slides
were cooled (15 min, 4 °C, in the dark). Thereafter, coverslips
were removed, and slides were immersed in pre-chilled lysis buffer
(2.5 mM NaCl, 100 mM Na 2 EDTA, 100 mM Tris–HCl, and
1.6 g of NaOH; pH 10) for 2 h at 4 °C in the dark. Thereafter,
slides were immersed in pre-chilled alkaline solution (1 mM Na 2 EDTA and 300 mM NaOH; pH > 13) for 1 h at 4 °C in
the
dark. Electrophoresis was conducted in a chamber filled with pre-chilled
alkaline electrophoresis solution (300 mM NaOH and 1.0 mM EDTA; pH
> 13) under standard conditions (22 V; 300 mA; 1 V/cm) for 30 min
in the dark. Slides were then neutralized with neutralization buffer
(0.4 M Tris–HCl, pH 7.5) for 10 min, washed (ice-cold water,
2×, 10 min each), fixed (ice-cold 70% ethanol, 5 min), and air-dried
for 15–30 min. Thereafter, slides were stained with 5 μg/mL
Hoechst 33342 solution (30 min, RT, in the dark) and imaged using
a fluorescence microscope (Zeiss Axio Vert.A1). At least 50–100
cells were analyzed per treatment. The percentage of DNA in the tail
was used as a parameter of DNA damage. Immunoblotting Cells were treated as described in the
main text. After treatment, cells were washed with ice-cold 1×
PBS and lysed in RIPA (radioimmunoprecipitation assay) buffer containing
protease inhibitors and phosphatase inhibitors. Aliquots of cell lysates
(20–40 μg of total protein) were resolved by 4–20%
Mini-PROTEAN TGX precast protein gels, transferred onto a nitrocellulose
membrane, and probed with primary antibodies in 5% BSA (bovine serum
albumin) in TBS-T (0.1% Tween 20 in 1× TBS) solutions. Reactions
were visualized with a suitable horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-conjugated
secondary antibody. Signal Fire ECL reagent (CST) or WesternBright
ECL HRP substrate (Advansta) chemiluminescent substrates with a Syngene
G:Box gel documentation system were used to visualize protein expression.
ImageJ software was used for densitometry data acquisition. Spheroid Growth Studies Spheroids were grown using
a liquid overlay technique. Cells were seeded in agarose-coated (50
μL, 0.6%) 96-well plates at 2000, 4000, 6000, 8000, and 10,000
cells/well and incubated for 15 days at 37 °C such that each
well contained a single spheroid. Formation of spheroids was observed
every three days, and spheroids were imaged using a microscope attached
to a digital camera at days 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15. During growth, 50%
of the media was exchanged every two to three days. The volume and
diameter of spheroids were determined by measuring their cross-sectional
area using ImageJ software (data not shown). Spheroid Growth Inhibition Studies Spheroids were grown
as described initially. The initial cell seeding density was chosen
such that spheroids reached a diameter of about 400–500 μM
after 3 days (4000 cells/well and 8000 cells/well for MDA-MB-231 and
MCF7, respectively). Spheroids were treated with the identified combinations
and single drugs alone for 72 h. Every other day thereafter, 50% of
the treatment-containing medium was replaced. Spheroids were imaged
every three days for a period of 12 days using a microscope attached
to a digital camera. The structural integrity of spheroids following
treatments was observed, and the volume was measured as initially
described. Spheroid Live/Dead Staining Spheroids were grown in
agarose-coated (172 μL, 0.6%) 48-well plates. Spheroids were
then incubated with the identified combinations and single drugs alone
for 72 h by replacing 50% of the medium with treatment-containing
media. Following this, half of the culture media was replaced with
staining solutions at 2× of their final concentrations for 30
min at 37 °C in the dark. The final concentrations used were
1 μM, 5 μg/mL, and 2 μg/mL for Calcein AM (Abcam),
Hoechst 33342, and PI in 1× PBS, respectively. Next, spheroids
were washed with 1× PBS and fixed with 4% PFA for 30 min at RT.
After fixation, spheroids were washed with 1× PBS twice and the
triple-stained spheroids were imaged using a fluorescence microscope
(Zeiss Axio Vert.A1) to evaluate cellular viability. Zebrafish (ZF) Embryo Toxicity The zebrafish embryo
toxicity study was conducted according to the guidelines for care
and use of Animal Biochemistry & Biotechnology Laboratory, Faculty
of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia
(UPM), which has been approved by the Institutional Animal Care and
Use Committee (IACUC) of UPM (UPM/IACUC/AUP No. R059/2018). Wild-type
zebrafish embryos were obtained from breeding facilities at Danio
Assay Laboratories Sdn.Bhd. (Universiti Putra Malaysia). Newly fertilized
eggs at less than 1 hpf were collected and washed with deionized water
and incubated at RT (28 ± 1 °C) in Danio-SprintM embryo
media containing 0.1% DMSO. Embryos were then transferred into 96-well
plates (one embryo/well) and exposed to concentration gradients of
compound(s) (1.56 to 100 mg/L) alone or in combination with 10 mg/L
Olaparib. Danio-SprintM embryo media were used as a control. Survival
and hatching rates were observed under a microscope attached with
a digital camera and imaged at 24, 48, 72, and 96 hpf. Morphological
changes in the development of ZF embryos after exposure to compounds
(pericardial edema, yolk sac edema, and spinal deformity) were also
observed. Four lethal endpoints were evaluated including coagulated
embryos, lack of somite formation, non-detachment of the tail, and
lack of heartbeat. All these characteristics were recorded every 24
hpf, except the heartbeat, which is visible after 48 hpf. The LC 50 values, known as the concentration of compound(s) that causes
death of 50% of zebrafish embryo/larvae, were determined by using
the GraphPad Prism software. Statistical Analysis Statistical analysis of the data
was carried out using GraphPad Prism software in which the data obtained
was analyzed using Student’s t -test or one-way
analysis of variance (ANOVA). The differences between the groups were
considered significant when P values generated were
less than 0.05.
## Reagents
Reagents Antibodies for p-Chk1 (Ser345), p-ATR (Thr1989),
total ATR, p-ATM (Ser 1981), total ATM, p-histone H2AX (Ser139), β-actin,
and HRP-linked secondary antibody were purchased from Cell Signaling
Technology (CST). Antibodies for PARP1, total Chk1, and Alexa-Fluor
488 conjugated secondary antibodies were purchased from Abcam. Antibodies
for PARG and P-gp were purchased from Santa Cruz Biotechnology and
Elabscience, respectively. All ruthenium(II) compounds were converted
to their chloride salts by anion metathesis. Stock solutions of all
compounds—except cisplatin—were prepared at 100 mM in
100% dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and further diluted using Dulbecco’s
modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM). The final DMSO concentration
employed in the cell studies was 0.1%. Stock solutions of cisplatin
(2 mM) were prepared in phosphate buffered saline (PBS).
## Cell Culture
Cell Culture MCF7 and MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cell
lines were cultured in DMEM supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum
(FBS) and 1% penicillin/streptomycin antibiotic. The MCF10A normal
breast cell line was cultured in DMEM supplemented with 5% horse serum,
0.5 μg/mL hydrocortisone, 20 ng/mL recombinant human EGF (hEGF),
10 μg/mL insulin, and 1% penicillin/streptomycin antibiotic.
Cells were maintained at 37 °C under a humified atmosphere containing
5% CO 2 and routinely subcultured with trypsin.
## Generation of Olaparib-Resistant MDA-MB-231 Cells
Generation of Olaparib-Resistant MDA-MB-231 Cells The
Olaparib-resistant MDA-MB-231 cell line (MDA-MB-231R) was developed
from the parental MDA-MB-231 cell line by long-term drug exposure
(∼8 months, 10–100 μM Olaparib) in a similar manner
described by Kim et al. 45 MDA-MB-231 cells
were seeded at a density of 1.5 × 10 5 cells in a 25
cm 2 flask and allowed to adhere for 24 h. Cells were treated
with a starting Olaparib concentration of 10 μM, and treatments
were refreshed every 3 days. After each week, the confluency was assessed:
if confluency is <50%, the treatment was stopped; if confluency
is at 50–70%, the treatment was maintained; and if confluency
is over 70%, a portion of the cells was frozen. When the cells adapted
to a new drug concentration, cells were reseeded at a density of 1.5
× 10 5 cells in a new 25 cm 2 flask and allowed
to adhere before the next exposure to the increased concentration
of Olaparib. This procedure was repeated to achieve a final concentration
of Olaparib of 100 μM. Following this, MDA-MB-231R cells were
maintained in a low concentration of Olaparib (10 μM) to preserve
resistance. The MTT assay and clonogenic survival assay were conducted
to monitor the sensitivity of resistant cells. Prior to any downstream
studies, MDA-MB-231R cells were grown without Olaparib treatments
for a single passage.
## MTT Assay
MTT Assay Cells were seeded at 5 × 10 3 cells/well for MCF7 cells and 1 × 10 4 cells/well
for MDA-MB-231 and MCF10A cells, respectively, in 96-well plates,
allowed to adhere for 24 h, and treated as described in the main text.
Following treatment, solutions were removed, thiazolyl blue tetrazolium
bromide (MTT, 0.5 mg/mL) reagent was added to the cells, and plates
were incubated for 4 h. The reduced purple formazan crystals were
solubilized with 100 μL of DMSO, and the absorbance at 570 nm
(620 nm as reference wavelength) was measured using a microplate reader.
The average in percent reduction of cell viability was expressed relative
to untreated control cells. The combinatorial effect was evaluated
by the generation of the compound dose–response curve and a
shift of the IC 50 value in the presence or absence of Olaparib
(graphed and calculated using GraphPad Prism software).
## Drug Interaction Analysis
Drug Interaction Analysis Dose–effect curves
for single agents and their combinations were generated from the MTT
assay data, and the combination index (CI) values were calculated
using CalcuSyn and CompuSyn software (Biosoft, Cambridge, UK) as established
by Chou and Talalay. 43 CI < 0.9 indicates
synergism, CI = 0.9–1.0 indicates additive, and CI > 1 indicates
antagonism. GraphPad Prism Software was used to generate a 3-color
scale based on CI values obtained, where synergism is represented
by green, additive by yellow, and antagonism by red. The colors of
each CI value were interpolated in between these constraints accordingly.
## Clonogenic Survival Assay
Clonogenic Survival Assay Cells were seeded at 1 ×
10 3 cells/well in 6-well plates, allowed to adhere for
24 h, and treated as described in the main text. After treatment,
solutions were removed, and cells were cultured in compound-free medium
for 7–10 days to allow colony formation. Cells were then washed
(1× PBS, twice), fixed (ice-cold 100% methanol, 15–20
min, 4 °C), and stained (0.5% crystal violet solution, 20 min).
The staining solution was washed with water, and images were photographed
with a digital camera. Individual colonies were counted using ImageJ
software, and the survival fraction was determined (normalized to
controls).
## Cell Cycle Analysis
Cell Cycle Analysis Cells were seeded at 3 × 10 5 cells/well in 6-well plates, allowed to adhere for 24 h,
and treated as described in the main text. Following treatment, cells
were trypsinized and washed with 1× PBS twice. This was followed
by fixation in ice-cold 70% ethanol for at least overnight at 4 °C.
After fixation, fixed cells were centrifuged (1000 rpm, 5 min), and
the resulting cell pellets were washed with 1× PBS twice. Samples
were resuspended in 500 μL of 1× PBS, treated with RNase
A solution (5 μL, 10 mg/mL, 15 min), and stained with propidium
iodide (PI) (2 μL, 5 mg/mL, in the dark). Thereafter, samples
were acquired and analyzed with a NovoCyte flow cytometer (Agilent
Technologies) and NovoExpress software. For each sample, a minimum
of 10,000 cells were counted.
## Apoptosis Annexin V-FITC/PI Assay
Apoptosis Annexin V-FITC/PI Assay Cells were seeded
at 3 × 10 5 cells/well in 6-well plates, allowed to
adhere for 24 h, and treated as described in the main text. After
treatment, cells were trypsinized and washed with 1× PBS twice.
This was followed by the addition of 500 μL of 1× binding
buffer and 5 μL of Annexin V-FITC (Invitrogen). The cell-containing
mixture was incubated for 20 min at RT. A total of 5 μL of PI
(20 μg/mL) was added prior to flow cytometric analysis using
a flow cytometer, and results were analyzed using NovoExpress software.
For each sample, a minimum of 10,000 cells were counted.
## Determination of Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) Levels
Determination of Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) Levels Cells were seeded in 6-well plate at density of 1 × 10 5 cells/well, allowed to adhere for 24 h, and incubated with 10 μM
2′,7′-dichlorofluorescein diacetate (DCFDA) in serum-free
culture media for 30 min at 37 °C in the dark. Upon completion,
DCFDA solutions were removed, cells were washed with 1× PBS twice,
and treated as described in the main text. Following incubation, resultant
cells were harvested, washed with 1× PBS twice, and resuspended
in 1× PBS. The intensity of the formed 2′7′-dichlorofluorescein
(DCF) as a result of carboxy-DCFDA hydrolysis by intracellular ROS
was analyzed using a flow cytometer and NovoExpress software at an
excitation and emission wavelength of 488 nm and 525 nm, respectively.
For each sample, a minimum of 10,000 cells were counted.
## γH2AX Immunostaining
γH2AX Immunostaining Cells were seeded at 3 ×
10 5 cells/well in 6-well plates, allowed to adhere for
24 h, and treated as described in the main text. Following treatment,
cells were trypsinized and washed with 1× PBS twice. Cells were
then fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) for 15 min at RT. Following
fixation, cells were washed with 1× PBS and resuspended in 500
μL of 1× PBS. Thereafter, cells were permeabilized by adding
ice-cold 100% methanol slowly to pre-chilled cells while gently vortexing
to a final concentration of 90% methanol and left on ice for 10 min.
Cells were then washed in excess 1× PBS and incubated with diluted
primary antibody (γH2AX) for 1 h at RT. Following incubation,
cells were washed with antibody dilution buffer and incubated with
diluted fluorochrome-conjugated secondary antibody (30 min, RT, in
the dark). Thereafter, samples were washed with antibody dilution
buffer and resuspended in 500 μL of 1× PBS. Samples were
acquired and analyzed with a NovoCyte flow cytometer and NovoExpress
software. For each sample, a minimum of 10,000 cells were counted.
## Alkaline Comet Assay
Alkaline Comet Assay Cells were seeded in 24-well plates
at a density of 1 × 10 5 cells/well, allowed to adhere
for 24 h, and treated as described in the main text. Following incubation,
cells were harvested and resuspended in ice-cold 1× PBS. A total
of 16 μL of cell suspension was mixed with 160 μL of 1%
low melting agarose (1/10 ratio; v/v). A total of 80 μL of cell
suspension was immediately dropped onto the pre-coated agarose slides
(1% normal melting agarose) and covered with coverslips, and slides
were cooled (15 min, 4 °C, in the dark). Thereafter, coverslips
were removed, and slides were immersed in pre-chilled lysis buffer
(2.5 mM NaCl, 100 mM Na 2 EDTA, 100 mM Tris–HCl, and
1.6 g of NaOH; pH 10) for 2 h at 4 °C in the dark. Thereafter,
slides were immersed in pre-chilled alkaline solution (1 mM Na 2 EDTA and 300 mM NaOH; pH > 13) for 1 h at 4 °C in
the
dark. Electrophoresis was conducted in a chamber filled with pre-chilled
alkaline electrophoresis solution (300 mM NaOH and 1.0 mM EDTA; pH
> 13) under standard conditions (22 V; 300 mA; 1 V/cm) for 30 min
in the dark. Slides were then neutralized with neutralization buffer
(0.4 M Tris–HCl, pH 7.5) for 10 min, washed (ice-cold water,
2×, 10 min each), fixed (ice-cold 70% ethanol, 5 min), and air-dried
for 15–30 min. Thereafter, slides were stained with 5 μg/mL
Hoechst 33342 solution (30 min, RT, in the dark) and imaged using
a fluorescence microscope (Zeiss Axio Vert.A1). At least 50–100
cells were analyzed per treatment. The percentage of DNA in the tail
was used as a parameter of DNA damage.
## Immunoblotting
Immunoblotting Cells were treated as described in the
main text. After treatment, cells were washed with ice-cold 1×
PBS and lysed in RIPA (radioimmunoprecipitation assay) buffer containing
protease inhibitors and phosphatase inhibitors. Aliquots of cell lysates
(20–40 μg of total protein) were resolved by 4–20%
Mini-PROTEAN TGX precast protein gels, transferred onto a nitrocellulose
membrane, and probed with primary antibodies in 5% BSA (bovine serum
albumin) in TBS-T (0.1% Tween 20 in 1× TBS) solutions. Reactions
were visualized with a suitable horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-conjugated
secondary antibody. Signal Fire ECL reagent (CST) or WesternBright
ECL HRP substrate (Advansta) chemiluminescent substrates with a Syngene
G:Box gel documentation system were used to visualize protein expression.
ImageJ software was used for densitometry data acquisition.
## Spheroid Growth Studies
Spheroid Growth Studies Spheroids were grown using
a liquid overlay technique. Cells were seeded in agarose-coated (50
μL, 0.6%) 96-well plates at 2000, 4000, 6000, 8000, and 10,000
cells/well and incubated for 15 days at 37 °C such that each
well contained a single spheroid. Formation of spheroids was observed
every three days, and spheroids were imaged using a microscope attached
to a digital camera at days 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15. During growth, 50%
of the media was exchanged every two to three days. The volume and
diameter of spheroids were determined by measuring their cross-sectional
area using ImageJ software (data not shown).
## Spheroid Growth Inhibition Studies
Spheroid Growth Inhibition Studies Spheroids were grown
as described initially. The initial cell seeding density was chosen
such that spheroids reached a diameter of about 400–500 μM
after 3 days (4000 cells/well and 8000 cells/well for MDA-MB-231 and
MCF7, respectively). Spheroids were treated with the identified combinations
and single drugs alone for 72 h. Every other day thereafter, 50% of
the treatment-containing medium was replaced. Spheroids were imaged
every three days for a period of 12 days using a microscope attached
to a digital camera. The structural integrity of spheroids following
treatments was observed, and the volume was measured as initially
described.
## Spheroid Live/Dead Staining
Spheroid Live/Dead Staining Spheroids were grown in
agarose-coated (172 μL, 0.6%) 48-well plates. Spheroids were
then incubated with the identified combinations and single drugs alone
for 72 h by replacing 50% of the medium with treatment-containing
media. Following this, half of the culture media was replaced with
staining solutions at 2× of their final concentrations for 30
min at 37 °C in the dark. The final concentrations used were
1 μM, 5 μg/mL, and 2 μg/mL for Calcein AM (Abcam),
Hoechst 33342, and PI in 1× PBS, respectively. Next, spheroids
were washed with 1× PBS and fixed with 4% PFA for 30 min at RT.
After fixation, spheroids were washed with 1× PBS twice and the
triple-stained spheroids were imaged using a fluorescence microscope
(Zeiss Axio Vert.A1) to evaluate cellular viability.
## Zebrafish (ZF) Embryo Toxicity
Zebrafish (ZF) Embryo Toxicity The zebrafish embryo
toxicity study was conducted according to the guidelines for care
and use of Animal Biochemistry & Biotechnology Laboratory, Faculty
of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia
(UPM), which has been approved by the Institutional Animal Care and
Use Committee (IACUC) of UPM (UPM/IACUC/AUP No. R059/2018). Wild-type
zebrafish embryos were obtained from breeding facilities at Danio
Assay Laboratories Sdn.Bhd. (Universiti Putra Malaysia). Newly fertilized
eggs at less than 1 hpf were collected and washed with deionized water
and incubated at RT (28 ± 1 °C) in Danio-SprintM embryo
media containing 0.1% DMSO. Embryos were then transferred into 96-well
plates (one embryo/well) and exposed to concentration gradients of
compound(s) (1.56 to 100 mg/L) alone or in combination with 10 mg/L
Olaparib. Danio-SprintM embryo media were used as a control. Survival
and hatching rates were observed under a microscope attached with
a digital camera and imaged at 24, 48, 72, and 96 hpf. Morphological
changes in the development of ZF embryos after exposure to compounds
(pericardial edema, yolk sac edema, and spinal deformity) were also
observed. Four lethal endpoints were evaluated including coagulated
embryos, lack of somite formation, non-detachment of the tail, and
lack of heartbeat. All these characteristics were recorded every 24
hpf, except the heartbeat, which is visible after 48 hpf. The LC 50 values, known as the concentration of compound(s) that causes
death of 50% of zebrafish embryo/larvae, were determined by using
the GraphPad Prism software.
## Statistical Analysis
Statistical Analysis Statistical analysis of the data
was carried out using GraphPad Prism software in which the data obtained
was analyzed using Student’s t -test or one-way
analysis of variance (ANOVA). The differences between the groups were
considered significant when P values generated were
less than 0.05.