This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Mesnil, M. Articles by Yamasaki, H. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Mesnil, M. Articles by Yamasaki, H.

Bystander Effect in Herpes Simplex Virus-Thymidine Kinase/Ganciclovir Cancer Gene Therapy: Role of Gap-junctional Intercellular Communication¹

Unit of Multistage Carcinogenesis, IARC, F-69372, Lyon cedex 08, France

	ABSTRACT

Top ABSTRACT Introduction The Molecular Mechanisms of... The HSV-tk/GCV Bystander Effect GJIC as a Major... In Vitro GJIC-mediated Bystander... In Vivo GJIC-mediated Bystander... Increasing the GJIC Bystander... Prediction of Bystander Effect... Biochemical Induction of GJIC... Intratumoral Cx Gene Transfer Cxs Not Only Mediate... Conclusions and Perspectives REFERENCES

 
Antitumor suicide gene therapy is one of the emerging strategies against cancer. It consists of the introduction into cancer cells of a gene capable of converting a nontoxic prodrug into a cytotoxic drug. Because this therapeutic gene cannot be easily introduced into the whole cell population of a tumor, the successful eradication of tumors depends on a phenomenon called the "bystander effect," by which the introduced gene can affect even cells in which it is not itself present. From a therapeutic point of view, it may be crucial to enhance this phenomenon through various means to achieve tumor eradication. One such suicide gene, the thymidine kinase gene from the herpes simplex virus, in combination with the prodrug ganciclovir, has been extensively and successfully used in some animal models exhibiting a strong bystander effect. Among the mechanisms involved in this phenomenon, gap junctional intercellular communication (GJIC) is directly involved in the transfer of the toxic metabolites of ganciclovir, which pass directly from herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase-expressing cells to surrounding cells that do not express it. Because GJIC appears to be a mediator of the bystander effect both in vitro and in vivo, here we review possible molecular strategies for enhancing the extent of tumor cell death by increasing the intratumoral GJIC capacity.

	Introduction

Top ABSTRACT Introduction The Molecular Mechanisms of... The HSV-tk/GCV Bystander Effect GJIC as a Major... In Vitro GJIC-mediated Bystander... In Vivo GJIC-mediated Bystander... Increasing the GJIC Bystander... Prediction of Bystander Effect... Biochemical Induction of GJIC... Intratumoral Cx Gene Transfer Cxs Not Only Mediate... Conclusions and Perspectives REFERENCES

 
Despite clear progress, conventional radiotherapeutic and chemotherapeutic treatments against cancer still place a burden on patients; their systemic administration can even lead to the appearance of secondary cancers (1 , 2) . Local strategies and better targeted weapons to destroy only tumor cells without affecting neighboring tissues can be developed using knowledge of carcinogenic processes. Some such emerging strategies make use of pharmaceutical drugs designed to block molecular pathways that are activated in cancer cells (3) , the steps of carcinogenesis that make cancer cells invasive (4) , or angiogenesis (5 , 6) . Strategies aimed at suppressing the expression of an oncogene or restoring the function of a defective tumor suppressor gene have already been studied experimentally, with the transfer of therapeutic genes into cancer cells to correct their genetic errors (7 , 8) . However, this kind of gene therapy can target one of several genes responsible for the malignant phenotype. Because no single gene has been shown to be altered in all human tumors, approaches to gene therapy that can operate independently of the genetic background of the cancer cells are therefore required. Such alternative gene therapies must focus on the eradication of the tumor cells. In particular, local and intratumoral chemotherapy can be achieved through gene therapy by inserting genes conferring drug sensitivity into the tumor cells, thus avoiding the systemic toxicity that occurs during conventional chemotherapeutic treatments. One such strategy involves "suicide gene therapy," in which a gene coding for an enzyme that converts a nontoxic prodrug into a lethal compound is inserted into the tumor cells. Thus far, the most successful enzyme/prodrug combination tested in vitro and in animal models is HSV-tk,⁴ which has a high affinity for the prodrug GCV (9, 10, 11, 12) . This is an attractive approach because it targets the cell division process that is a characteristic of all tumor cells (13 , 14) .

To accomplish complete killing of a tumor, it was initially thought that the suicide gene HSV-tk would have to enter each individual cell. Given the low efficiency of current methods of gene delivery, this was not a realistic prospect. Fortunately, the HSV-tk/GCV strategy results in the death not only of the recipient (HSV-tk⁺) tumor cells but also of surrounding nonrecipient (HSV-tk^-) tumor cells. This phenomenon is called the "bystander effect," and it compensates for the low efficacy of vectors (viral or liposomal) in transferring genes into the tumor cells (15) . Because gene transfer will probably remain a limiting factor for suicide gene therapy, it is crucial to induce a potent bystander effect. One approach is to enhance the local transfer of toxic metabolites from the transduced cells to the surrounding untransduced ones. A promising strategy is mediation of this transfer through GJIC. Propagation of toxic metabolites through GJIC was first observed 30 years ago (16) , and we have shown its possible use in cancer therapy using an in vitro model (17) .

Here we review recent progress made in the use of GJIC to enhance the bystander effect during cancer gene therapy mediated by the HSV-tk/GCV strategy.

	The Molecular Mechanisms of the HSV-tk/GCV Therapy

Top ABSTRACT Introduction The Molecular Mechanisms of... The HSV-tk/GCV Bystander Effect GJIC as a Major... In Vitro GJIC-mediated Bystander... In Vivo GJIC-mediated Bystander... Increasing the GJIC Bystander... Prediction of Bystander Effect... Biochemical Induction of GJIC... Intratumoral Cx Gene Transfer Cxs Not Only Mediate... Conclusions and Perspectives REFERENCES

 
HSV-tk (18) has a high affinity for acyclic analogues of deoxyguanosine such as ACV and GCV; this affinity may explain the antiherpetic and anticytomegalovirus activities of these drugs (19, 20, 21) . The growth of cells infected with attenuated herpes simplex virus is inhibited by exposure to ACV or GCV, an action mediated by the HSV-tk gene of the viral genome (22, 23, 24) . GCV is a better inhibitor of the growth of cells transfected with the HSV-tk gene than ACV, and, in particular, it is 10-fold more potent than ACV as an inhibitor of the growth of HSV-tk gene-transfected tumor cells (25) .

The cytotoxic effect of guanosine analogues on cells expressing HSV-tk was demonstrated two decades ago (22) . Its application to cancer therapy was first tested by transfecting BALB/c murine sarcoma cell lines with the HSV-tk gene. GCV treatment was sufficient to induce complete regression of palpable tumors that formed after injection of the transfected cells into mice (26) . The effect of GCV treatment was specific and did not induce resorption of HSV-tk^- tumors. After similar GCV treatment, this strategy also led to the resorption of palpable tumors after s.c. injection of murine K2 sarcoma or Ly18 lymphoma cells transduced with retroviral vectors bearing the HSV-tk gene (9) . Similar results were obtained with rat C6 glioma cells that were transduced with the HSV-tk gene before injection into nude mice (27) .

The cytotoxic effect of GCV results from its incorporation into DNA by a process involving several steps, starting with its phosphorylation to form a monophosphate (ganciclovir monophosphate). Because its affinity for eukaryotic thymidine kinases is 1000 times lower, GCV is essentially phosphorylated only by the viral enzyme HSV-tk (23 , 28) . The ultimate product of further phosphorylation by cellular kinases, GCV-triphosphate, competitively inhibits incorporation of the endogenous DNA precursor dGTP into DNA (29, 30, 31) . Moreover, the GCV-terminated strands of DNA are poor substrates for DNA chain elongation (29) , therefore the elongation of DNA strands is prevented (30 , 32 , 33) , leading to cell death. Apart from a few possible exceptions with certain cell types (34) , the death is apoptotic and is probably independent of the p53 pathway (35, 36, 37) . Indeed, tumor cell lines exhibiting mutated p53 are also sensitive to HSV-tk vectors, hence this therapeutic strategy can be applied irrespective of the p53 status of the tumors (38) .

Other mechanisms of HSV-tk/GCV cytotoxicity also appear to operate. Recent studies suggest that the high toxicity of GCV compared with that of other substrates of HSV-tk such as ACV or 1-ß-D-arabinofuranosylthymine is due not only to GCV triphosphate but also to the incorporation of GCV monophosphate into the whole genome (39) . Moreover, independent of cell replication, some toxicity of GCV to quiescent cells expressing HSV-tk, such as thyrocytes and hepatocytes, has been reported (37 , 40) . The mechanism underlying this phenomenon is not yet clearly understood but could be the consequence of inhibition of mitochondrial DNA polymerase (37) . However, replicating DNA is considered to be the major target in cancer cells for GCV activated by HSV-tk.

	The HSV-tk/GCV Bystander Effect

Top ABSTRACT Introduction The Molecular Mechanisms of... The HSV-tk/GCV Bystander Effect GJIC as a Major... In Vitro GJIC-mediated Bystander... In Vivo GJIC-mediated Bystander... Increasing the GJIC Bystander... Prediction of Bystander Effect... Biochemical Induction of GJIC... Intratumoral Cx Gene Transfer Cxs Not Only Mediate... Conclusions and Perspectives REFERENCES

 
The first in vivo experiments showed that systemic GCV treatment can eradicate a tumor in which all cells express HSV-tk (9 , 26 , 27) . These experiments represented an ideal situation in the sense that all of the malignant cells injected into the animals expressed the suicide gene. However, in practical therapeutic approaches, only some of the tumor cells can be reached in situ with a transgene.

One way to overcome the limited transfer of the suicide gene into the tumor cells is to continuously produce in situ retroviral particles carrying the HSV-tk gene. Such an approach, which is closer to possible therapeutic applications, was tested by coinjecting fibrosarcoma cells and 3T3 fibroblasts producing retroviral vectors carrying the neomycin resistance (NeoR) gene (10) . Analysis of the tumors in vitro demonstrated that the NeoR gene was transferred to some (9%) of the tumor cells, which thus became resistant to neomycin treatment (10) . The same strategy was used, replacing the NeoR gene with the HSV-tk gene. Surprisingly, although the suicide gene transfer to the tumor cells was again much less than 100%, the tumors rapidly regressed in most of the animals. The growth of s.c. injected tumor cells of which 50% or even only 10% expressed HSV-tk could be prevented by i.p. injections of GCV (10) . This observation meant that, contrary to the original expectation, in situ transfer of the HSV-tk gene into a tumor could lead to its regression, even if the suicide gene was not introduced into all of the tumor cells. It also suggested the possibility of eliminating an established tumor by in situ injection of a HSV-tk producer cell line. This was indeed observed in Fischer 344 rats carrying a 9L glioma previously implanted in a cerebral hemisphere. Five days later, cells producing the HSV-tk retroviral vector were injected intratumorally by stereotactic guidance. Subsequent i.p. administrations of GCV induced complete tumor regression in nearly all animals (10) . When the ß-galactosidase gene was used as a transduction marker, in situ observation of the tumors showed that the extent of transduction of the gene into the glioma cells varied greatly (10–70%). This implies that cells that did not express the HSV-tk gene became sensitive to GCV treatment even if 30–90% of the tumor cells lacked the suicide gene (41) . This phenomenon was not specific to this cell line because the transfer of sensitivity to GCV from cells infected with a retrovirus bearing the HSV-tk gene to neighboring "naive" cells has also been observed both in vitro and in vivo with rat C6 glioma cells (42) .

	GJIC as a Major Mechanism of the Bystander Effect

Top ABSTRACT Introduction The Molecular Mechanisms of... The HSV-tk/GCV Bystander Effect GJIC as a Major... In Vitro GJIC-mediated Bystander... In Vivo GJIC-mediated Bystander... Increasing the GJIC Bystander... Prediction of Bystander Effect... Biochemical Induction of GJIC... Intratumoral Cx Gene Transfer Cxs Not Only Mediate... Conclusions and Perspectives REFERENCES

 
All of the in vivo studies described above have demonstrated propagation of sensitivity to GCV from cells expressing HSV-tk to nearby tumor cells that do not express it. Such a bystander tumor-killing phenomenon (10) has been termed the "bystander effect" (43) .

The involvement of GJs in the bystander effect was suggested (44 , 45) because of the analogy between this phenomenon and the metabolic cooperation assay that was described three decades ago (16) . This was an assay to estimate the extent of the GJIC capacity of cells in culture by mixing cells deficient in HGPRT (HGPRT^- cells), which are unable to metabolize hypoxanthine, with normal cells (46) . The transfer of the toxic metabolite from HGPRT⁺ cells to HGPRT^- cells was proven to be mediated by GJs (47) , and the extent of toxicity ("kiss of death") in the coculture reflected the capacity of the cells to communicate through GJs. The analogy between this kiss of death phenomenon and the bystander effect was clear to Moolten (26) , who made the first observation of this effect in vitro, which was "presumed to reflect transfer of GCV-P by metabolic cooperation between HSV-tk positive and HSV-tk negative cells" (Ref. 26 ; see Fig. 1 ).

View larger version (36K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Fig. 1. In a tumor cell population, only a few cells can be reached by vectors carrying the HSV-tk gene. When those cells do express the tk gene (red nucleus), they become sensitive to GCV, which diffuses through the cell membrane. The HSV-tk+ cells are killed by the GCV-P they produce. A, because the GCV-P molecules cannot pass through the cell membrane, theoretically, only the HSV-tk+ cells (red cells) should be killed by GCV treatment. B, a direct diffusion from cytoplasm to cytoplasm of GCV-P could induce a bystander effect sufficient to eradicate a tumor cell population, even if only a few cells are HSV-tk+.

View larger version (107K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Fig. 2. Bystander effect in cancer gene therapy due to GJIC. Toxic GCV-P molecules can pass from a cell expressing the HSV-tk (tk+) gene to neighboring HSV-tk- tumor cells. A, the toxic GCV-P molecules (red arrows) pass from HSV-tk+ cells to HSV-tk- cells through the GJs. B, in HeLa cells, the bystander killing effect is observed only when cells expressing the HSV-tk gene communicate (as shown by the dye transfer assay on the left) through GJs. Cells expressing HSV-tk were mixed with their HSV-tk- counterparts at a 1:1 ratio. Similar results were obtained when only 10% of the cells were HSV-tk+.

	In Vitro GJIC-mediated Bystander Effect

Top ABSTRACT Introduction The Molecular Mechanisms of... The HSV-tk/GCV Bystander Effect GJIC as a Major... In Vitro GJIC-mediated Bystander... In Vivo GJIC-mediated Bystander... Increasing the GJIC Bystander... Prediction of Bystander Effect... Biochemical Induction of GJIC... Intratumoral Cx Gene Transfer Cxs Not Only Mediate... Conclusions and Perspectives REFERENCES

 
The first in vitro study to exploit GJIC to spread a cancer therapeutic effect was conducted in our laboratory over a decade ago (17) . This study demonstrated that diffusion of cytotoxic agents via GJIC can improve chemotherapy efficiency. Because of the lack of GJIC between normal and transformed cells, the killing was selective, and only the transformed cells were eliminated (17) . We later demonstrated that GJs can also mediate a bystander effect in cancer gene therapy in vitro by using HeLa cells, which exhibit very poor GJIC capacity (Fig. 2B ). When HeLa cells were transfected with an expression vector carrying the HSV-tk gene (HSV-tk⁺ cells), they became highly sensitive to GCV. If these cells were mixed with untransfected HeLa cells (1:1 ratio), GCV failed to eliminate the whole cell population. However, the outcome was quite different when we used HeLa cells that were able to communicate through GJs as a result of transfection of a gene coding for a common Cx, Cx43. Under these conditions, not only the HSV- tk⁺ cells but also the HSV-tk^- cells were killed by GCV, even if the culture contained only 10% HSV-tk⁺ cells (Fig. 2B ). This bystander effect, by which the toxicity of GCV was transmitted to the remaining 90% of the culture, was clearly mediated by GJs because it was inhibited either by a lack of contact between the two cell types or by treating the cells with a long-term inhibitor of GJIC (55) . These findings are supported by those from other laboratories reporting that the level of GJIC is predictive of (or correlated with) the extent of the bystander effect in vitro, whatever the origin of the cancer cell lines (Refs. 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 ; see Table 1 ). Indeed, it has been shown that cell lines exhibiting the bystander effect in vitro are able to transfer radiolabeled GCV between them if they do express Cxs (67) . The type of Cx expressed (by transfection or otherwise) does not appear to be crucial for the bystander effect because similar results were obtained with HeLa cells expressing various Cxs such as Cx43 or Cx26 (55 , 68) and in a mouse neuroblastoma cell line expressing Cx37 (Ref. 69 ; see Table 2 ).

	In Vivo GJIC-mediated Bystander Effect

Top ABSTRACT Introduction The Molecular Mechanisms of... The HSV-tk/GCV Bystander Effect GJIC as a Major... In Vitro GJIC-mediated Bystander... In Vivo GJIC-mediated Bystander... Increasing the GJIC Bystander... Prediction of Bystander Effect... Biochemical Induction of GJIC... Intratumoral Cx Gene Transfer Cxs Not Only Mediate... Conclusions and Perspectives REFERENCES

 
The bystander effect mediated by GJs that we reported in vitro has also been observed in vivo. The major conclusion from these in vivo studies is the same as that from the in vitro studies: that GJIC, as a mediator of the bystander effect, can compensate for a low number of HSV-tk⁺ cells in propagating the killing effect of GCV in an induced tumor. For instance, transfection of the Cx37 gene reduced the weight of tumors induced by mouse neuroblastoma cells by up to 60% when 50% of the cells expressed the HSV-tk gene (69) . Expression of the Cx43 gene in rat C6 glioma cells induced a similar phenomenon in nude mice, even when only 5% of the injected cells were HSV-tk⁺ cells (64) . However, the tumor-suppressive role of endogenous Cx43, which is expressed in parental nontransfected C6 glioma cells, may have interfered with the observed bystander effect (73) . Moreover, in the above-mentioned studies, the mice were killed soon after the end of GCV treatment, preventing an estimation of the duration of the bystander effect mediated by Cxs in down-regulating or preventing the growth of the remaining part of the tumors.

We found that the growth of 10⁶ injected HeLa cells, which are highly tumorigenic, was prevented by 10% HSV-tk⁺ cells only if the cells expressed Cx43. These results indicate that Cx43 expression can efficiently induce the bystander effect such that the growth of tumors is inhibited even when 90% of the injected cells are resistant to GCV, reproducing in vivo what we observed in vitro. Even when GCV was administered when the tumors were already palpable, tumor growth was reduced by 66% or 77% (for mixtures containing 10% or 50% HSV-tk⁺ cells, respectively) compared with the growth of tumors induced by communicating but HSV-tk^- cells (65) . The GJ-dependent bystander effect was so efficient that some of the mice were still alive more than 2 months after the GCV treatment. In contrast, with Cx43^- HeLa cells, GCV decreased the size of the tumors only in the same proportion as the percentage of HSV-tk⁺ cells present in the original mixtures.

	Increasing the GJIC Bystander Effect

Top ABSTRACT Introduction The Molecular Mechanisms of... The HSV-tk/GCV Bystander Effect GJIC as a Major... In Vitro GJIC-mediated Bystander... In Vivo GJIC-mediated Bystander... Increasing the GJIC Bystander... Prediction of Bystander Effect... Biochemical Induction of GJIC... Intratumoral Cx Gene Transfer Cxs Not Only Mediate... Conclusions and Perspectives REFERENCES

 
All of the data we have presented thus far show that GJIC mediates a strong bystander effect. Moreover, in most cases, there is a correlation between a lack of GJIC capacity and the absence of a bystander effect (Table 1) . When GJIC is present, the intercellular transfer of GCV occurs within a few hours (58) . This rapid intercellular spread of the toxic metabolites within a tumor mass helps to increase the efficiency of a suicide gene transferred into a tumor and points to applications of GJIC in therapy of localized cancers (67) . The extent of GJIC in tumors then becomes a decisive factor for the bystander efficacy. Unfortunately, most of the cancer cell lines we have tested exhibit such a low GJIC capacity that we considered this to be a phenotypic characteristic of cancer cells (Ref. 74 ; see Table 3 ). Such a lack of GJIC would decrease the bystander effect and thus prevent an efficient eradication of the tumors. In a few cases, we have indeed observed that cancer cells that did not exhibit a satisfactory bystander effect in vivo were GJIC-deficient in vitro. This was the case for GJIC-deficient mammary tumor cells obtained from neu transgenic mice; when the HSV-tk gene was transduced into 10% of the tumor cells, the bystander effect was insufficient to allow the eradication of the tumors by GCV (66) . Similarly, with colon cancer cells injected i.p. into rats, the bystander effect was so low because of their poor GJIC capacity that 75% of the injected cells had to contain the transduced HSV-tk gene before any curative effect of GCV treatment was seen (63) . The low expression of Cx43 was also related to the limited bystander effect observed in vivo for human medulloblastoma cells (81) . It is therefore imperative to screen tumors for their GJIC and/or induce GJIC to obtain successful gene therapy with the help of the bystander effect.

	Prediction of Bystander Effect by Screening GJIC-proficient Human Tumors

Top ABSTRACT Introduction The Molecular Mechanisms of... The HSV-tk/GCV Bystander Effect GJIC as a Major... In Vitro GJIC-mediated Bystander... In Vivo GJIC-mediated Bystander... Increasing the GJIC Bystander... Prediction of Bystander Effect... Biochemical Induction of GJIC... Intratumoral Cx Gene Transfer Cxs Not Only Mediate... Conclusions and Perspectives REFERENCES

	Biochemical Induction of GJIC in Tumors

Top ABSTRACT Introduction The Molecular Mechanisms of... The HSV-tk/GCV Bystander Effect GJIC as a Major... In Vitro GJIC-mediated Bystander... In Vivo GJIC-mediated Bystander... Increasing the GJIC Bystander... Prediction of Bystander Effect... Biochemical Induction of GJIC... Intratumoral Cx Gene Transfer Cxs Not Only Mediate... Conclusions and Perspectives REFERENCES

 
The HSV-tk/GCV strategy may still be applicable to GJIC-deficient tumors, if one can increase the GJIC capacity in situ, e.g., by specific chemical treatments (93) . cAMP (94 , 95) , retinoic acids (96 , 97) , carotenoids (98) , glucocorticoids (96 , 99) , and flavanoids (100) have such an effect in vitro. This effect may be cell type specific, as with carotenoids, which increase the dye coupling of human dermal fibroblasts but not of human keratinocytes (98) . It may also be Cx type specific; for example, glucocorticoids (dexamethasone and hydrocortisone) enhance the GJIC capacity of primary rat hepatocytes by increasing the expression of Cx32 but not Cx43 (99) .

Some evidence already suggests that a chemically induced increase of GJIC (or Cx expression) can lead to an enhanced bystander effect. This has been observed both in vitro and in vivo by treating tumor cell lines with retinoids, apigenin, or lovastatin (101 , 102) . Similarly, treatment of human breast adenocarcinoma cells with cAMP significantly decreased the percentage of HSV-tk-transduced cells necessary for a 50% bystander effect (103) . Likewise, doubling the GJIC of Cx43-transfected HeLa cells by cAMP treatment also resulted in doubling of the bystander effect.⁵ This type of biochemical increase of GJIC needs to be further studied in vitro and in vivo to determine whether it is a Cx- and/or cell type-specific phenomenon (Table 4) . However, the present evidence indicates that a basal GJIC mediated by Cx43 will be increased by treatment with cAMP or retinoids (Table 4) .

Even if we were able to target the expression of a specific Cx, the overall effect, as with many other genes, would depend greatly on the methylation status of the promoter region. Silencing of Cx gene expression due to hypermethylation has been observed for the Cx26,⁶ Cx43, and Cx32 genes (129) . Silencing of Cx gene expression by hypermethylation could explain why only a few cases of induction of Cx expression and function by biochemical treatments have been reported.

Another critical aspect is whether the newly induced Cx functions normally in a tumor. Cx proteins have to migrate through the cytoplasm to be inserted into the cell membrane as connexons, which must then dock efficiently with the connexons of adjacent cells to make intercellular channels that link the cytoplasms. In some cells, this mechanism may not function because we have observed accumulation of Cxs in the cytoplasm (79 , 92 , 130) . Such Cx transport and docking is mediated by cell-to-cell recognition molecules such as E-cadherin (130 , 131) . Indeed, prevention of cell-to-cell recognition mediated by cadherins seems to be sufficient to prevent GJIC (132) . The loss of GJIC caused by appropriate treatments was also associated with loss of cadherin function (133 , 134) . More recent studies suggest that the COOH-terminal domain of Cx43 binds to the zona occludens-1 protein, a component of tight junctions (135) . It is possible that zona occludens-1 anchors Cx43 at the cytoplasmic membrane or vice versa, a phenomenon that may lead to the polarized colocalization of Cx43 and tight junctions in some cells such as thyrocytes (136) . Other molecular mechanisms responsible for the induction of Cx function may include increased stability of the mRNA and phosphorylation of the protein (95) .

Usually, a few hours are necessary to induce the expression of Cx genes; because of the rapid metabolism of GCV in HSV-tk-expressing cells, Cx-enhancing treatment would have to be performed before the initiation of the suicide therapy or, at the latest, at the beginning of the GCV treatment, as was done with apigenin or lovastatin injected i.p. (102) . Another aspect to consider is the possible modulation of HSV-tk activity by the pharmacological treatment used for the GJIC induction. Although forskolin inhibited the activity of HSV-tk in murine C3H10T fibroblasts (60) , the induction of GJIC and of the bystander effect by cAMP in a murine mammary carcinoma cell line did not affect HSV-tk activity (103) . This inconsistency may be due to the use of different cell types but needs to be considered when attempting to apply the GJIC-based bystander effect.

	Intratumoral Cx Gene Transfer

Top ABSTRACT Introduction The Molecular Mechanisms of... The HSV-tk/GCV Bystander Effect GJIC as a Major... In Vitro GJIC-mediated Bystander... In Vivo GJIC-mediated Bystander... Increasing the GJIC Bystander... Prediction of Bystander Effect... Biochemical Induction of GJIC... Intratumoral Cx Gene Transfer Cxs Not Only Mediate... Conclusions and Perspectives REFERENCES

 
A more direct approach to local induction of GJIC would be to transfer a Cx gene into the tumor cells. As for the HSV-tk gene, transfer efficacy would be a limiting factor, as has been observed in a test in vivo (137) . We have recently observed that the bystander effect is more efficient when a HeLa cell population consists of cells carrying HSV-tk or a Cx gene alone than when each cell contains a vector carrying both genes (bigenic vector). The bigenic vector induced a weak bystander effect. Our preliminary results suggest that this could be a consequence of induced GJIC in the non-Cx-expressing cells simply through contact with cells freshly transfected with a Cx gene by an unknown mechanism.⁷ As discussed earlier for the biochemical treatments, the success of this strategy is dependent on the operation of mechanisms necessary for the function of the newly synthesized Cxs. These mechanisms would need to be ready to function in the recipient cells, and fortunately, in most reported cases, the introduction of a Cx gene in a cell has been shown to restore GJs (Refs. 138, 139, 140, 141 ; see Table 2 ).

Posttranslational modification of Cxs may, in some cases, decrease their ability to function for GJIC. One possible way to avoid this is to create a gene for an artificial Cx that will efficiently form GJs but will not be vulnerable to endogenous modification. Candidate gene constructs include a modified Cx26 gene, which already has a short COOH-terminal, and innexin gene, both of which are functional homologues of Cxs that are specific to invertebrates (142 , 143) and therefore may not be liable to modification in mammalian cells.

	Cxs Not Only Mediate the Bystander Effect But Are Also Tumor Suppressors

Top ABSTRACT Introduction The Molecular Mechanisms of... The HSV-tk/GCV Bystander Effect GJIC as a Major... In Vitro GJIC-mediated Bystander... In Vivo GJIC-mediated Bystander... Increasing the GJIC Bystander... Prediction of Bystander Effect... Biochemical Induction of GJIC... Intratumoral Cx Gene Transfer Cxs Not Only Mediate... Conclusions and Perspectives REFERENCES

 
Most communication-defective cancer cells lose their tumorigenic capacity or exhibit down-regulated growth once they are transfected with the appropriate Cx genes. This has been observed with cell lines of many different origins, such as rat hepatoma, murine fibroblasts (chemically transformed C3H10T1/2 cells), HeLa cells, and rat glioma (C6 cells), human breast carcinoma, and rhabdomyosarcoma (138, 139, 140 , 144, 145, 146) . Interestingly, the tumor-suppressive effect is sometimes dependent on the Cx type (144) but is not necessarily dependent on the induction of GJIC (147 , 148) .

A priori, the induction of Cx expression in tumor cells could lead to two beneficial effects on tumor control: (a) bystander effect mediation; and (b) tumor suppression. However, a strong tumor-suppressive effect resulting from the induction of Cx expression might actually prevent efficient DNA incorporation of GCV-derived nucleotides by slowing down the cell cycle. The results from our studies in vitro suggest that these two phenomena are not entirely antagonistic because we have shown that Cx26, a tumor suppressor in HeLa cells, can mediate a satisfactory bystander effect in vitro (68) . However, such antagonism may need to be considered in relation to GCV killing efficacy in the case of a strong in situ induction of Cx expression.

This is also an important issue for the pharmaceutical manipulation of GJs. Some chemical compounds known to induce GJIC may act as growth regulators. For instance, apigenin induces not only GJIC but also G₁ cell cycle arrest (149) . Such activity could limit the efficacy of GCV incorporation into DNA, although a recent in vivo study suggests that this is not the case (102) .

	Conclusions and Perspectives

Top ABSTRACT Introduction The Molecular Mechanisms of... The HSV-tk/GCV Bystander Effect GJIC as a Major... In Vitro GJIC-mediated Bystander... In Vivo GJIC-mediated Bystander... Increasing the GJIC Bystander... Prediction of Bystander Effect... Biochemical Induction of GJIC... Intratumoral Cx Gene Transfer Cxs Not Only Mediate... Conclusions and Perspectives REFERENCES

 
GJIC increases the extent of the bystander effect observed with HSV-tk/GCV gene therapy both in vitro and in vivo. This anticancer strategy may therefore be best adapted to treatment of tumors in which the cells have a significant basal level of GJIC. GJIC cannot easily be measured in situ, but a predictive estimation can be made by screening tumors for the presence of GJs correctly localized at cell-to-cell contact areas.

Tumors that may be suitable targets for HSV-tk/GCV therapy can be chosen according to a few characteristics (Fig. 3 ). They must be accessible for the intratumoral injections of vectors carrying the HSV-tk gene. Their cellular structure should be homogeneous, with cells firmly in contact with each other. Depending on the Cx types expressed, it should be possible to increase the basal level of GJIC by appropriate treatments. We believe that this kind of therapy could be extended in the future to GJ-deficient tumors by artificially enhancing the in situ communication capacity of the tumor cells through appropriate chemical treatments, once the promoter regions have been clearly identified. Artificial induction of GJIC by direct transfer of Cx genes may be inefficient but should be further studied in view of the surprising bystander effect that was induced through this strategy in vitro.

View larger version (22K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Fig. 3. Proposed strategy for GJ-based increase in the efficacy of HSV-tk/GCV anticancer gene therapy.

Cxs themselves not only mediate the bystander effect but also have a separate tumor-suppressive action (151) . Thus, we have proposed that Cxs have a dual effect on tumor control (68) . Whereas it is clear that Cx genes suppress the growth of many tumor cells, there is increasing evidence to suggest that increased Cx gene expression at later stages of tumor development may facilitate metastasis (152) . Therefore, for tumor control, it may be prudent to use Cx genes together with therapeutic suicide genes.

Moreover, the Cxs may work synergistically with other mechanisms that may be involved in the bystander effect. For instance, the Cxs may help to amplify the disruption of angiogenesis that is observed in vivo. Indeed, transduction experiments carried out in situ with cells producing retroviral particles bearing a ß-galactosidase gene in a 9L glioma have shown that some blood vessel endothelial cells were infected with the viruses and expressed the gene (41) . Cells located within or adjacent to a tumor are the most mitotically active endothelial cells responding to angiogenesis factors released by the tumor, and they should be sensitive to GCV if they express the HSV-tk gene. In rats, a decrease in tumor vasculature has been observed after the initiation of GCV therapy in HSV-tk-transduced tumors (153) . The disruption of angiogenesis was accompanied by diffuse necrotic changes associated with intratumoral hemorrhage (153) . Therefore, the elimination of these transduced endothelial cells with GCV may result in ischemia of the tumor mass (41 , 153) . Because the endothelial cells are GJIC proficient and express particular types of Cxs [Cx37, Cx43, and Cx40 (154) ], they are potential targets for a "vascular" bystander effect that should contribute to tumor eradication.

Another consequence of the induction of the bystander effect by GJs may be the increased inflammatory infiltrations that have been observed in a range of target organs of both rats and mice (155, 156, 157, 158, 159) . This antitumor response, leading to centralized hemorrhagic tumor necrosis, follows the killing of neoplastic cells as a result of treatment with GCV (160) .

This immune response is probably one of the mechanisms involved in the bystander effect because the bystander effect is usually inefficient in athymic nude mice, being only a transitory phenomenon if no more than 50% of the injected cells express HSV-tk and are thus sensitive to GCV (161) . In contrast to athymic mice, total tumor regression can be obtained with normal mice even if only 10–20% of the cells express HSV-tk (162) . In addition, the more tumor cells killed by HSV-tk/GCV, the better the immune response should become. Therefore, the induction of the bystander effect by GJs should in turn lead to an increase in the immune response.

The local involvement of the immune system in the bystander effect raises the possibility that distant- and long-term systemic antitumor responses may also be induced. It has been reported that the growth of untreated tumors (tumors with no cells expressing HSV-tk) in one flank of a mouse can decrease when tumors with cells expressing HSV-tk are treated on the other flank (163 , 164) . This distant bystander effect seems to be efficient enough to prevent the growth of colonies of both HSV-tk⁺ and HSV-tk^- rat colon cancer cells in the whole peritoneal cavity of rats. These results suggest that such local suicide gene therapy could be used as a kind of cancer immunotherapy because it may have an effect not only against the HSV-tk-expressing tumors but also against distant tumors that do not express the transgene and are disseminated in the same organ (155 , 165 , 166) . This distant bystander effect suggests that a local HSV-tk/GCV gene therapy may also prevent the growth of disseminated tumors and possibly metastases (167) .

In conclusion, we consider that a strongly induced local bystander effect mediated by GJs, by enhancing the death of the cells in the primary tumor and, in turn, enhancing the local inflammation process, should increase the systemic immune response that may also act efficiently against metastases.

	ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

 
We thank Dr. John Cheney for editing the manuscript and Chantal Déchaux for secretarial help.

	FOOTNOTES

 
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

¹ Supported by United States National Cancer Institute Grant R01-CA-40534, Association for International Cancer Research Grant No. 96-27, and the Association pour la Recherche sur le Cancer.

² Present address: Department of Neuropharmacology, INSERM U114, Collège de France, 11 place M. Berthelot, F-75231, Paris cedex 05, France.

³ To whom requests for reprints should be addressed. Present address: Faculty of Sciences, Kwansei Gakuin University, 1-1-155 Uegahara, Nishinomiya, Hyogo 662, Japan.

⁴ The abbreviations used are: HSV-tk, herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase; cAMP, cyclic AMP; Cx, connexin; GCV, ganciclovir; GJIC, gap junctional intercellular communication; GJ, gap junction; HGPRT, hypoxanthine guanine phosphoribosyltransferase; ACV, acyclovir; GCV-P, phosphorylated GCV.

⁵ M. Mesnil, unpublished data.

⁶ R. Singal, Z. J. Tu, J. M. vanWert, G. D. Ginder, and D. T. Kiang, personal communication.

⁷ T. Tanaka, H. Yamasaki, and M. Mesnil, unpublished data.

Received 12/23/99. Accepted 5/31/00.

	REFERENCES

Top ABSTRACT Introduction The Molecular Mechanisms of... The HSV-tk/GCV Bystander Effect GJIC as a Major... In Vitro GJIC-mediated Bystander... In Vivo GJIC-mediated Bystander... Increasing the GJIC Bystander... Prediction of Bystander Effect... Biochemical Induction of GJIC... Intratumoral Cx Gene Transfer Cxs Not Only Mediate... Conclusions and Perspectives REFERENCES

 

1. Kaldor J. M., Day N. E., Pettersson F., Clarke E. A., Pedersen D., Mehnest W., Bell J., Host H., Prior P., Kargalainen S., Neal F., Koch M., Band P., Choi W., Kirn V. P., Arslan A., Zarén B., Belch A. R., Storm H., Kittelmann B., Fraser P., Stovall M. Leukemia following chemotherapy for ovarian cancer. N. Engl. J. Med., 322: 1-6, 1990.[Abstract]
2. Relling M. V., Rubnitz J. E., Rivera G. K., Boyett J. M., Hancock M. L., Felix C. A., Kun L. E., Walter A. W., Evans W. E., Pui C. H. High incidence of secondary brain tumours after radiotherapy and antimetabolites. Lancet, 354: 34-39, 1999.[Medline]
3. Sebolt-Leopold J. S., Dudley D. T., Herrera R., Van Becelaere K., Wiland A., Gowan R. C., Tecle H., Barrett S. D., Bridges A., Przybranowski S., Leopold W. R., Saltiel A. R. Blockade of the MAP kinase pathway suppresses growth of colon tumors in vivo. Nat. Med., 5: 810-816, 1999.[Medline]
4. Finkel E. Potential target found for antimetastasis drugs. Science (Washington DC), 285: 33-34, 1999.[Free Full Text]
5. Sledge G. J., Gordon M. Therapeutic implications of angiogenesis inhibition. Semin. Oncol., 26: 59-65, 1998.
6. Nelson N. J. Inhibitors of angiogenesis enter Phase III testing. J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 90: 960-963, 1998.[Free Full Text]
7. Roth J. A. Gene replacement strategies for lung cancer. Curr. Opin. Oncol., 10: 127-132, 1998.[Medline]
8. McCormick F. Cancer therapy based on p53. Cancer J. Sci. Am., 5: 139-144, 1999.[Medline]
9. Moolten F. L., Wells J. M. Curability of tumors bearing herpes thymidine kinase genes transferred by retroviral vectors. J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 82: 297-300, 1990.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
10. Culver K. W., Ram Z., Wallbridge S., Ishii H., Oldfield E. H., Blaese R. M. In vivo gene transfer with retroviral vector-producer cells for treatment of experimental brain tumors. Science (Washington DC), 256: 1550-1552, 1992.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
11. Vile R. G., Hart I. R. Use of tissue-specific expression of the herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase gene to inhibit growth of established murine melanomas following direct intratumoral injection of DNA. Cancer Res., 53: 3860-3864, 1993.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
12. Shewach D. S., Zerbe L. K., Hughes T. L., Roessler B. J., Breakefield X. O., Davidson B. L. Enhanced cytotoxicity of antiviral drugs mediated by adenovirus directed transfer of the herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase gene in rat glioma cells. Cancer Gene Ther., 1: 107-112, 1994.[Medline]
13. Moolten F. L. Drug sensitivity ("suicide") genes for selective cancer therapy. Cancer Gene Ther., 1: 279-287, 1994.[Medline]
14. Miller A. D. Human gene therapy comes of age. Nature (Lond.), 357: 455-460, 1992.[Medline]
15. Pope I. M., Poston G. J., Kinsella A. R. The role of the bystander effect in suicide gene therapy. Eur. J. Cancer, 33: 1005-1016, 1997.
16. Subak-Sharpe H., Burk R. R., Pitts J. D. Metabolic co-operation between biochemically marked mammalian cells in tissue culture. J. Cell Sci., 4: 353-367, 1969.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
17. Yamasaki H., Katoh F. Novel method for selective killing of transformed rodent cells through intercellular communication, with possible therapeutic applications. Cancer Res., 48: 3203-3207, 1988.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
18. Wagner M. J., Sharp J. A., Summers W. C. Nucleotide sequence of the thymidine kinase gene of herpes simplex virus type 1. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 78: 1441-1445, 1981.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
19. Biron K. K., Stanat S. C., Sorrell J. B., Fyfe J. A., Keller P. M., Lambe C. U., Nelson D. J. Metabolic activation of the nucleoside analog 9-[(2-hydroxy-1-(hydroxy methyl)ethoxy)methyl]guanine in human diploid fibroblasts infected with human cytomegalovirus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 82: 2473-2477, 1985.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
20. Field A. K., Davies M. E., DeWitt C., Perry H. C., Liou R., Germershausen J., Karkas J. D., Ashton W. T., Johnston D. B., Tolman R. 9-[(2-Hydroxy-1-(hydroxy methyl)ethoxy)methyl]guanine: a selective inhibitor of herpes group virus replication. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 80: 4139-4143, 1983.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
21. Martin J. C., Dvorak C. A., Smee D. F., Matthews T. R., Verheyden J. P. 9-[(1,3-Dihydroxy-2-propoxy)-methyl]guanine: a new potent and selective antiherpes agent. J. Med. Chem., 26: 759-761, 1983.[Medline]
22. Nishiyama Y., Rapp F. Anticellular effects of 9-(2-hydroxy-ethoxymethyl)guanine against herpes simplex virus-transformed cells. J. Gen. Virol., 45: 227-230, 1979.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
23. Oliver S., Bubley G., Crumpacker C. Inhibition of HSV-transformed murine cells by nucleoside analogs, 2'-NDG and 2'-nor-cGMP: mechanisms of inhibition and reversal by exogenous nucleosides. Virology, 145: 84-93, 1985.[Medline]
24. St. Clair M. H., Lambe C. U., Furman P. A. Inhibition by ganciclovir of cell growth and DNA synthesis of cells biochemically transformed with herpesvirus genetic information. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., 31: 844-849, 1987.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
25. Balzarini J., Bohman C., De Clercq E. Differential mechanism of cytostatic effect of (E)-5-(2-bromovinyl)-2'-deoxyuridine, 9-(1,3-dihydroxy-2-propoxymethyl)guanine, and other antiherpetic drugs on tumor cells transfected by the thymidine kinase gene of herpes simplex virus type 1 or type 2. J. Biol. Chem., 268: 6332-6337, 1993.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
26. Moolten F. L. Tumor chemosensitivity conferred by inserted herpes thymidine kinase genes: paradigm for a prospective cancer control strategy. Cancer Res., 46: 5276-5281, 1986.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
27. Ezzeddine Z. D., Martuza R. L., Platika D., Short M. P., Malick A., Choi B., Breakefield X. O. Selective killing of glioma cells in culture and in vivo by retrovirus transfer of the herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase gene. New Biol., 3: 608-614, 1991.[Medline]
28. Keller P. M., Fyfe J. A., Beauchamp L., Spector T. Enzymatic phosphorylation of acyclic nucleoside analogs and correlations with antiherpetic activities. Biochem. Pharmacol., 30: 3071-3077, 1981.[Medline]
29. Frank K. B., Chiou J. F., Cheng Y. C. Interaction of herpes simplex virus-induced DNA polymerase with 9-(1,3-dihydroxy-2-propoxymethyl)guanine triphosphate. J. Biol. Chem., 259: 1566-1569, 1984.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
30. Mar E. C., Chiou J. F., Cheng Y. C., Huang E. S. Inhibition of cellular DNA polymerase and human cytomegalovirus-induced DNA polymerase by the triphosphates of 9-(2-hydroxyethoxymethyl)guanine and 9-(1,3-dihydroxy-2-propoxymethyl)guanine. J. Virol., 53: 776-780, 1985.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
31. Matthews T., Boehme R. Antiviral activity and mechanism of action of ganciclovir. Rev. Infect. Dis., 10(Suppl.3): S490-S494, 1988.
32. Cheng Y., Grill S. P., Dutschman G. E., Nakayama K., Bastow K. F. Metabolism of 9-(1,3-dihydroxy-2-propoxymethyl)guanine, a new anti-herpes virus compound, in Herpes simplex virus-infected cells. J. Biol. Chem., 258: 12460-12464, 1983.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
33. Smee D. F., Boehme R., Chernow M., Binko B. P., Matthews T. R. Intracellular metabolism and enzymatic phosphorylation of 9-(1,3-dihydroxy-2-propoxymethyl)guanine and acyclovir in herpes simplex virus infected and uninfected cells. Biochem. Pharmacol., 34: 1049-1056, 1985.[Medline]
34. Kaneko Y., Tsukamoto A. Gene therapy of hepatoma: bystander effects and non-apoptotic cell death induced by thymidine kinase and ganciclovir. Cancer Lett., 96: 105-110, 1995.[Medline]
35. Freeman S. M., Abboud C. N., Whartenby K. A., Packman C. H., Koeplin D. S., Moolten F. L., Abraham G. N. The bystander effect: tumor regression when a fraction of the tumor mass is genetically modified. Cancer Res., 53: 5274-5283, 1993.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
36. Hamel W., Magnelli L., Chiarugi V. P., Israel M. A. Herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase/ganciclovir-mediated apoptotic death of bystander cells. Cancer Res., 56: 2697-2702, 1996.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
37. Wallace H., MacLaren K., Al-Shawi R., Bishop J. O. Ganciclovir-induced ablation of non-proliferating thyrocytes expressing herpes thymidine kinase occurs by p53-independent apoptosis. Oncogene, 13: 55-61, 1996.[Medline]
38. Yoon S. S., Carroll N. M., Chiocca E. A., Tanabe K. K. Influence of p53 on herpes simplex virus type-1 vectors for cancer gene therapy. J. Gastrointest. Surg., 3: 34-48, 1999.[Medline]
39. Rubsam L. R., Davidson B. L., Shewach D. S. Superior cytotoxicity with ganciclovir compared with acyclovir and 1-ß-D-arabinofuranosylthymine in herpes simplex virus-thymidine kinase-expressing cells: a novel paradigm for cell killing. Cancer Res., 58: 3873-3882, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
40. van der Eb M. M., Cramer S. J., Vergouwe Y., Schagen F. H., van Krieken J. H., van der Eb A. J., Rinkes I. H., van de Velde C. J., Hoeben R. C. Severe hepatic dysfunction after adenovirus-mediated transfer of the herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase gene and ganciclovir administration. Gene Ther., 5: 451-458, 1998.[Medline]
41. Ram Z., Culver K. W., Walbridge S., Blaese R. M., Oldfield E. H. In situ retroviral-mediated gene transfer for the treatment of brain tumors in rats. Cancer Res., 53: 83-88, 1993.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
42. Takamiya Y., Short M. P., Ezzeddine Z. D., Moolten F. L., Breakefield X. O., Martuza R. L. Gene therapy of malignant brain tumors: a rat glioma line bearing the herpes simplex virus type 1-thymidine kinase gene and wild type retrovirus kills other tumor cells. J. Neurosci. Res., 33: 493-503, 1992.[Medline]
43. Kolberg R. Gene therapists test puzzling "bystander effect. " J. Natl. Inst. Health Res., 4: 68-74, 1992.
44. Goldberg G. S., Bertram J. S. In situ retroviral-mediated gene transfer for the treatment of brain tumors in rats. Cancer Res., 54: 3947-3948, 1994.[Free Full Text]
45. Pitts J. D. Cancer gene therapy: a bystander effect using the gap junctional pathway. Mol. Carcinog., 11: 127-130, 1994.[Medline]
46. Hooper M. L., Subak-Sharpe J. H. Metabolic cooperation between cells. Int. Rev. Cytol., 69: 45-104, 1981.[Medline]
47. Cox R. P., Krauss M. R., Balis M. E., Dancis J. Evidence for transfer of enzyme product as the basis of metabolic cooperation between tissue culture fibroblasts of Lesch-Nyhan disease and normal cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 67: 1573-1579, 1970.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
48. Bi W. L., Parysek L. M., Warnick R., Stambrook P. J. In vitro evidence that metabolic cooperation is responsible for the bystander effect observed with HSV-tk retroviral gene therapy. Hum. Gene Ther., 4: 725-731, 1993.[Medline]
49. Gilula N. B., Reeves D. R., Steinbach A. Metabolic coupling, ionic coupling and cell contacts. Nature (Lond.), 235: 262-265, 1972.[Medline]
50. Kumar N. M., Gilula N. B. The gap junction communication channel. Cell, 84: 381-388, 1996.[Medline]
51. Simpson I., Rose B., Loewenstein W. R. Size limit of molecules permeating the junctional membrane channels. Science (Washington DC), 195: 294-296, 1977.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
52. Saez J. C., Connor J. A., Spray D. C., Bennett M. W. L. Hepatocyte gap junctions are permeable to the second messenger, inositol 1,4,5-triphosphate, and to calcium ions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 86: 2708-2712, 1989.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
53. Goldberg G. S., Lampe P. D., Sheedy D., Stewart C. C., Nicholson B. J., Naus C. C. Direct isolation and analysis of endogenous transjunctional ADP from Cx43-transfected C6 glioma cells. Exp. Cell Res., 239: 82-91, 1998.[Medline]
54. Miller F. R., McEachern D., Miller B. E. Efficiency of communication between tumour cells in collagen gel cultures. Br. J. Cancer, 62: 360-363, 1990.[Medline]
55. Mesnil M., Piccoli C., Tiraby G., Willecke K., Yamasaki H. Bystander killing of cancer cells by herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase gene is mediated by connexins. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 93: 1831-1835, 1996.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
56. Fick J., Barker F. G.,, II,, Dazin P., Westphale E. M., Beyer E. C., Israel M. A. The extent of heterocellular communication mediated by gap junctions is predictive of bystander tumor cytotoxicity in vitro. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 92: 11071-11075, 1995.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
57. Elshami A. A., Albeda S. M., Kaiser L. R., Amin K., Fishman G., Spray D. C., Kucharczuk J. C., Zhang H. B., Saavedra A. Gap junctions play a role in the "bystander effect" of the herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase/ganciclovir system in vitro. Gene Ther., 3: 85-92, 1996.[Medline]
58. Denning C., Pitts J. D. Bystander effects of different enzyme-prodrug systems for cancer gene therapy depend on different pathways for intercellular transfer of toxic metabolites, a factor that will govern clinical choice of appropriate regimes. Hum. Gene Ther., 8: 1825-1835, 1997.[Medline]
59. Yang L., Chiang Y., Lenz H-J., Danenberg K. D., Spears C. P., Gordon E. M., Anderson W. F., Parekh D. Intercellular communication mediates the bystander effect during herpes simplex thymidine kinase/ganciclovir-based gene therapy of human gastrointestinal tumor cells. Hum. Gene Ther., 9: 719-728, 1998.[Medline]
60. Touraine R. L., Ishii-Morita H., Ramsey W. J., Blaese R. M. The bystander effect in the HSV-tk/ganciclovir system and its relationship to gap junctional communication. Gene Ther., 5: 1705-1711, 1998.[Medline]
61. Princen F., Robe P., Lechanteur C., Mesnil M., Rigo J-M., Gielen J., Merville M-P., Bours V. A cell type-specific and gap-junction-independent mechanism for the herpes simplex virus-1 thymidine kinase gene/ganciclovir-mediated bystander effect. Clin. Cancer Res., 5: 3639-3644, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
62. McMasters R. A., Saylors R. L., Jones K. E., Hendrix M. E., Moyer M. P., Drake R. R. Lack of bystander killing in herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase-transduced colon cell lines due to deficient connexin43 gap junction formation. Hum. Gene Ther., 9: 2253-2261, 1998.[Medline]
63. Coll J-L., Mesnil M., Lefebvre M. F., Lancon A., Favrot M. C. Long-term survival of immunocompetent rats with intraperitoneal colon carcinoma tumors using herpes simplex thymidine kinase/ganciclovir and IL-2 treatments. Gene Ther., 4: 1160-1166, 1997.[Medline]
64. Dilber M. S., Abedi M. R., Christensson B., Bjorkstrand B., Kidder G. M., Naus C. C. G., Gahrton G., Smith C. I. Gap junctions promote the bystander effect of herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase in vivo. Cancer Res., 57: 1523-1528, 1997.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
65. Duflot-Dancer A., Piccoli C., Rolland A., Yamasaki H., Mesnil M. Long-term connexin-mediated bystander effect in highly tumorigenic human cells in vivo in herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase/ganciclovir gene therapy. Gene Ther., 5: 1372-1378, 1998.[Medline]
66. Sacco M. G., Benedetti S., Duflot-Dancer A., Mesnil M., Bagnasco L., Strina D., Fasolo V., Villa A., Macchi P., Faranda S., Vezzoni P., Finocchiaro G. Partial regression, yet incomplete eradication of mammary tumors in transgenic mice by retrovirally mediated HSVtk transfer "in vivo. " Gene Ther., 3: 1151-1156, 1996.[Medline]
67. Ishii-Morita H., Agbaria R., Mullen C. A., Hirano H., Koeplin D. A., Ram Z., Oldfield E. H., Johns D. G., Blaese R. M. Mechanism of "bystander effect" killing in the herpes simplex thymidine kinase gene therapy model of cancer treatment. Gene Ther., 4: 244-251, 1997.[Medline]
68. Mesnil M., Piccoli C., Yamasaki H. A tumor suppressor gene, Cx26, also mediates the bystander effect in HeLa cells. Cancer Res., 57: 2929-2932, 1997.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
69. Vrionis F. D., Spray D. C., Cherington V., Waltzman M., Qi P., Wu J. The bystander effect exerted by tumor cells expressing the herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase (HSVtk) gene is dependent on connexin expression and cell communication via gap junctions. Gene Ther., 4: 577-585, 1997.[Medline]
70. Ghoumari A. M., Mouawad R., Zerrouqi A., Nizard C., Provost N., Khayat D., Naus C. C. G., Soubrane C. Actions of HSVtk and connexin43 gene delivery on gap junctional communication and drug sensitization in hepatocellular carcinoma. Gene Ther., 5: 1114-1121, 1998.[Medline]
71. Imaizumi K., Hasegawa Y., Kawabe T., Emi N., Saito H., Naruse K., Shimokata K. Bystander tumoricidal effect and gap junctional communication in lung cancer cell lines. Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol., 18: 205-212, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
72. Bai S., Du L., Liu W., Whittle I. R., He L. Tentative novel mechanism of the bystander effect in glioma gene therapy with HSV-tk/GCV system. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun., 259: 455-459, 1999.[Medline]
73. Naus C. C. G., Elisevich K., Zhu D., Belliveau D. J., Del Maestro R. F. In vivo growth of C6 glioma cells transfected with connexin 43 cDNA. Cancer Res., 52: 4208-4213, 1992.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
74. Yamasaki H., Naus C. C. G. Role of connexin genes in growth control. Carcinogenesis (Lond.), 17: 1199-1213, 1996.[Free Full Text]
75. Mesnil M., Ridout D., Kumar N. M., Gilula N. B. Non-communicating human and murine carcinoma cells produce gap junction mRNA. Carcinogenesis (Lond.), 15: 1541-1547, 1994.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
76. Fitzgerald D. J., Fusenig N. E., Boukamp P., Piccoli C., Mesnil M., Yamasaki H. Expression and function of connexin in normal and transformed keratinocytes in culture. Carcinogenesis (Lond.), 15: 1859-1865, 1994.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
77. Loewenstein W. R., Kanno Y. Intercellular communication and the control of tissue growth: lack of communication between cancer cells. Nature (Lond.), 209: 1248-1249, 1966.[Medline]
78. Grossman H. B., Liebert M., Lee I. W., Lee S. W. Decreased connexin expression and intercellular communication in human bladder cancer cells. Cancer Res., 54: 3062-3065, 1994.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
79. Krutovskikh V. A., Mazzoleni G., Mironov N., Omori Y., Aguelon A-M., Mesnil M., Berger F., Partensky C., Yamasaki H. Altered homologous and heterologous gap-junctional intercellular communication in primary human liver tumors associated with aberrant protein localisation but not gene mutation of connexin 32. Int. J. Cancer, 56: 87-94, 1994.[Medline]
80. Kanno Y., Matsui Y. Cellular uncoupling in cancerous stomach epithelium. Nature (Lond.), 218: 775-776, 1968.[Medline]
81. Roselen A., Frascella E., di Francesco C., Todesco A., Petrone M., Mehtali M., Zacchello F., Zanesco L., Scarpa M. In vitro and in vivo antitumor effects of retrovirus-mediated herpes simplex thymidine kinase gene-transfer in human medulloblastoma. Gene Ther., 5: 113-120, 1998.[Medline]
82. Krutovskikh V. A., Yamasaki H. Ex-vivo dye transfer assay as an approach to study gap junctional intercellular communication disorders in hepatocarcinogenesis Kanna Y. Kataoka K. Shiba Y. Shiba Y. Shimasu T. eds. . Intercellular Communication through Gap Junctions, : 93-97, Elsevier Amsterdam 1995.
83. Wilgenbus K. K., Kirkpatrick C. J., Knuechel R., Willecke K., Traub O. Expression of Cx26, Cx32 and Cx43 gap junction proteins in normal and neoplastic human tissues. Int. J. Cancer, 51: 522-529, 1992.[Medline]
84. Jamieson S., Going J. J., D’Arcy R., George W. D. Expression of gap junction proteins connexin 26 and connexin 43 in normal human breast and in breast tumours. J. Pathol., 184: 37-43, 1998.[Medline]
85. Pozzi A., Risek B., Kiang D. T., Gilula N. B., Kumar N. M. Analysis of multiple gap junction gene products in the rodent and human mammary gland. Exp. Cell Res., 220: 212-219, 1995.[Medline]
86. Monaghan P., Moss D. Connexin expression and gap junctions in the mammary gland. Cell Biol. Int., 20: 121-125, 1996.[Medline]
87. Laird D. W., Fistouris P., Batist G., Alpert L., Huynh H. T., Carystinos G. D., Alaoui-Jamali M. A. Deficiency of connexin43 gap junctions is an independent marker for breast tumors. Cancer Res., 15: 4104-4110, 1999.
88. Tsai H., Werber J., Davia M. O., Edelman M., Tanaka K. E., Melman A., Christ G. J., Geliebter J. Reduced connexin 43 expression in high grade, human prostatic adenocarcinoma cells. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun., 227: 64-69, 1996.[Medline]
89. Hanna E. A., Umhauer S., Roshong S. L., Piechocki M. P., Fernstrom M. J., Fanning J. D., Ruch R. J. Gap junctional intercellular communication and connexin43 expression in human ovarian surface epithelial cells and ovarian carcinomas in vivo and in vitro. Carcinogenesis (Lond.), 20: 1369-1373, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
90. Estin D., Li M., Spray D. C., Wu J. K. Connexins are expressed in primary brain tumors and enhance the bystander effect in gene therapy. Neurosurgery (Baltimore), 44: 361-368, 1999.[Medline]
91. Shinoura N., Chen L., Wani M. A., Kim Y. G., Larson J. J., Warnick R. E., Simon M., Menon A. G., Bi W. L., Stambrook P. J. Protein and messenger RNA expression of connexin43 in astrocytomas: implications in brain tumor gene therapy. J. Neurosurg., 84: 839-845, 1996.[Medline]
92. Krutovskikh V., Mesnil M., Mazzoleni G., Yamasaki H. Inhibition of rat liver gap junctional intercellular communication by tumor-promoting agents in vivo: association with aberrant localization of connexin proteins. Lab. Invest., 72: 571-577, 1995.[Medline]
93. Trosko J. E., Madhukar B. V., Chang C. C. Endogenous and exogenous modulation of gap junctional intercellular communication: toxicological and pharmacological implications. Life Sci., 53: 1-19, 1993.[Medline]
94. Enomoto T., Martel N., Kanno Y., Yamasaki H. Inhibition of cell-cell communication between BALB/c 3T3 cells by tumor promoters and protection by cAMP. J. Cell. Physiol., 121: 323-333, 1984.[Medline]
95. Mehta P. P., Yamamoto M., Rose B. Transcription of the gene for the gap junctional channel protein connexin 43 and expression of functional cell-to-cell channels are regulated by cAMP. Mol. Biol. Cell, 3: 839-850, 1992.[Abstract]
96. Yamasaki H., Katoh F. Further evidence for the involvement of gap-junctional intercellular communication in induction and maintenance of transformed foci in BALB/c 3T3 cells. Cancer Res., 48: 3490-3495, 1988.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
97. Hossain M. Z., Bertram J. S. Retinoids suppress proliferation, induce cell spreading, and up-regulate connexin43 expression only in postconfluent 10T1/2 cells: implications for the role of gap junctional communication. Cell Growth Differ., 5: 1253-1261, 1994.[Abstract]
98. Zhang L. X., Acevedo P., Guo H., Bertram J. S. Upregulation of gap junctional communication and connexin43 gene expression by carotenoids in human dermal fibroblasts but not in human keratinocytes. Mol. Carcinog., 12: 50-58, 1995.[Medline]
99. Ren P., de Feijter A. W., Paul D. L., Ruch R. J. Enhancement of liver cell gap junction protein expression by glucocorticoids. Carcinogenesis (Lond.), 15: 1807-1813, 1994.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
100. Chaumontet C., Bex V., Gaillard-Sanchez I., Seillan-Heberden C., Suschete M., Martel P. Apigenin and tengeretin enhance gap junctional intercellular communication in rat liver epithelial cells. Carcinogenesis (Lond.), 15: 2325-2330, 1994.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
101. Park J. Y., Elshami A. A., Amin K., Rizk N., Kaiser L. R., Albelda S. M. Retinoids augment the bystander effect in vitro and in vivo in herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase/ganciclovir-mediated gene therapy. Gene Ther., 4: 909-917, 1997.[Medline]
102. Touraine R. L., Vahanian V., Ramsey W. J., Blaese R. M. Enhancement of the herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase/ganciclovir bystander effect and its antitumor efficacy in vivo by pharmacologic manipulation of gap junctions. Hum. Gene Ther., 9: 2385-2391, 1998.[Medline]
103. Carystinos G. D., Katabi M. M., Laird D. W., Galipeau J., Chan H., Alaoui-Jamali M. A., Batist G. Cyclic-AMP induction of gap junctional intercellular communication increases bystander effect in suicide gene therapy. Clin. Cancer Res., 5: 61-68, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
104. Kunishige I., Samejima Y., Moriyama A., Saji F., Murata Y. cAMP stimulates the bystander effect in suicide gene therapy of human choriocarcinoma. Anticancer Res., 18: 3411-3419, 1998.[Medline]
105. Munari-Silem Y., Audebet C., Rousset B. Hormonal control of cell to cell communication: regulation by thyrotropin of the gap junction-mediated dye transfer between thyroid cells. Endocrinology, 128: 3299-3309, 1991.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
106. Atkinson M. M., Lampe P. D., Lin H. H., Kollander R., Li X. R., Kiang D. T. Cyclic AMP modifies the cellular distribution of connexin43 and induces a persistent increase in the junctional permeability of mouse mammary tumor cells. J. Cell Sci., 108: 3079-3090, 1995.[Abstract]
107. Ghosh P., Singh U. N. Intercellular communication in rapidly proliferating and differentiated C6 glioma cells in culture. Cell Biol. Int., 21: 551-557, 1997.[Medline]
108. Darrow B. J., Fast V. G., Kleber A. G., Beyer E. C., Saffitz J. E. Functional and structural assessment of intercellular communication. Increased conduction velocity and enhanced connexin expression in dibutyryl cAMP-treated cultured cardiac myocytes. Circ. Res., 79: 174-183, 1996.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
109. Banoub R. W., Fernstrom M., Malkinson A. M., Ruch R. J. Enhancement of gap junctional intercellular communication by dibutyryl cyclic AMP in lung epithelial cells. Anticancer Res., 16: 3715-3719, 1996.[Medline]
110. Mehta P. P., Lokeshwar B. L., Schiller P. C., Bendix M. V., Ostenson R. C., Howard G. A., Roos B. A. Gap-junctional communication in normal and neoplastic prostate epithelial cells and its regulation by cAMP. Mol. Carcinog., 15: 18-32, 1996.[Medline]
111. Kwiatkowski A. P., Baker T. K., Klaunig J. E. Comparison of glucocorticoid-mediated changes in the expression and function of rat hepatocyte gap junctional proteins. Carcinogenesis (Lond.), 15: 1753-1757, 1994.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
112. Swarovsky B., Steinhilber W., Scheele G. A., Kern H. F. Coupled induction of exocrine proteins and intracellular compartments involved in the secretory pathway in AR4-2J cells by glucocorticoids. Eur. J. Cell Biol., 47: 101-111, 1988.[Medline]
113. Kojima T., Mitaka T., Shibata Y., Mochizuki Y. Induction and regulation of connexin26 by glucagon in primary cultures of adult rat hepatocytes. J. Cell Sci., 108: 2771-2780, 1995.[Abstract]
114. Watanabe J., Nomata K., Noguchi M., Satoh H., Kanda S., Katetake H., Saito Y. All-trans retinoic acid enhances gap junctional intercellular communication among renal epithelial cells in vitro treated with renal carcinogens. Eur. J. Cancer, 35: 1003-1008, 1999.
115. Bex V., Mercier T., Chaumontet C., Gaillard-Sanchez I., Flechon B., Mazet F., Traub O., Martel P. Retinoic acid enhances connexin43 expression at the post-transcriptional level in rat liver epithelial cells. Cell Biochem. Funct., 13: 69-77, 1995.[Medline]
116. Risek B., Pozzi A., Gilula N. B. Modulation of gap junction expression during transient hyperplasia of rat epidermis. J. Cell Sci., 111: 1395-1404, 1998.[Abstract]
117. Clairmont A., Sies H. Evidence for a posttranscriptional effect of retinoic acid on connexin43 gene expression via the 3'-untranslated region. FEBS Lett., 419: 268-270, 1997.[Medline]
118. Hossain M. Z., Wilkens L. R., Mehta P. P., Loewenstein W., Bertram J. S. Enhancement of gap junctional communication by retinoids correlates with their ability to inhibit neoplastic transformation. Carcinogenesis (Lond.), 10: 1743-1748, 1989.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
119. Mehta P. P., Bertram J. S., Loewenstein W. R. The actions of retinoids on cellular growth correlate with their actions on gap junctional communication. J. Cell Biol., 108: 1053-1065, 1989.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
120. Stahl W., Sies H. The role of carotenoids and retinoids in gap junctional communication. Int. J. Vitam. Nutr. Res., 68: 354-359, 1998.[Medline]
121. Zhang L. X., Cooney R. V., Bertram J. S. Carotenoids enhance gap junctional communication and inhibit lipid peroxidation in C3H/10T1/2 cells: relationship to their cancer chemopreventive action. Carcinogenesis (Lond.), 12: 2109-2114, 1991.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
122. Chaumontet C., Suschetet M., Honikman-Leban E., Krutovskikh V. A., Berges R., Le Bon A. M., Heberden C., Shabin M. M., Yamasaki H., Martel P. Lack of tumor-promoting effects of flavanoids: studies on rat liver preneoplastic foci and on in vivo and in vitro gap junctional intercellular communication. Nutr. Cancer, 26: 251-263, 1996.[Medline]
123. Miller T., Dahl G., Werner R. Structure of a gap junction gene: rat connexin-32. Biosci. Rep., 8: 455-464, 1988.[Medline]
124. Hennemann H., Koozjek G. G., Dahl E., Nicholson B., Willecke K. Molecular cloning of mouse connexins-26 and -32: similar genomic organization but distinct promoter sequences of two gap junction genes. Eur. J. Cell Biol., 58: 81-89, 1992.[Medline]
125. Saez, J. C., Gregory, W. A., Watanabe, T., Dermietzel, R., Herzberg, E. L., Reid, L., Bennett, M. V. L., and Spray, D. C. cAMP delays disappearance of gap junctions between pairs of rat hepatocytes in primary culture. Am. J. Physiol., 257: C1-C11, 1989.
126. Risek B., Gilula N. B. Spatiotemporal expression of three gap junction gene products involved in fetomaternal communication during rat pregnancy. Development (Camb.), 113: 165-181, 1991.[Abstract]
127. Risek B., Klier F. G., Gilula N. B. Multiple gap junction gene products are utilized during rat hair and skin development. Development (Camb.), 116: 639-651, 1992.[Abstract]
128. Bruzzone R., White T. W., Paul D. L. Connections with connexins: the molecular basis of direct intercellular signalling. Eur. J. Biochem., 238: 1-27, 1996.[Medline]
129. Piechocki M. P., Burk R. D., Ruch R. J. Regulation of connexin32 and connexin43 gene expression by DNA methylation in rat liver cells. Carcinogenesis (Lond.), 20: 401-406, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
130. Jongen W. M. F., Fitzgerald D. J., Asamoto M., Piccoli C., Slaga T. J., Gros D., Takeichi M., Yamasaki H. Regulation of connexin 43-mediated gap junctional intercellular communication by Ca²⁺ in mouse epidermal cells is controlled by E-cadherin. J. Cell Biol., 114: 545-555, 1991.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
131. Mège R-M., Matsuzaki F., Gallin W. J., Godberg J. L., Cunningham B. A., Edelman G. Construction of epithelioid sheets by transfection of mouse sarcoma cells with cDNAs for chicken cell adhesion molecules. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 85: 7274-7278, 1988.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
132. Frenzel E. M., Johnson R. G. Gap junction formation between cultured embryonic lens cells is inhibited by antibody to N-cadherin. Dev. Biol., 179: 1-16, 1996.[Medline]
133. Jansen L., Mesnil M., Koeman J., Jongen W. M. F. Tumor promoters induce inhibition of gap junctional intercellular communication in mouse epidermal cells by affecting the localization of connexin43 and E-cadherin. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 1: 185-192, 1996.
134. Jansen L., Mesnil M., Jongen W. M. F. Inhibition of gap junctional intercellular communication and delocalization of the cell adhesion molecule E-cadherin by tumor promoters. Carcinogenesis (Lond.), 17: 1527-1531, 1996.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
135. Giepmans B. N. G., Moolenaar W. H. The gap junction protein connexin43 interacts with the second PDZ domain of the zona occludens-1 protein. Curr. Biol., 8: 931-934, 1998.[Medline]
136. Guerrier A., Fonlupt P., Morand I., Rabilloud R., Audebet C., Krutovskikh V., Gros D., Rousset B., Munari-Silem Y. Gap junctions and cell polarity: connexin32 and connexin43 expressed in polarized thyroid epithelial cells assemble into separate gap junctions, which are located in distinct regions of the lateral plasma membrane domain. J. Cell Sci., 108: 2609-2617, 1995.[Abstract]
137. Cirenei N., Colombo B. M., Mesnil M., Benedetti S., Yamasaki H., Finocchiaro G. In vitro and in vivo effects of retrovirus-mediated transfer of the connexin 43 gene in malignant gliomas: consequences for HSVtk/GCV anticancer gene therapy. Gene Ther., 5: 1221-1226, 1998.[Medline]
138. Eghbali B., Kessler J. A., Reid L. M., Roy C., Spray D. C. Involvement of gap junctions in tumorigenesis: transfection of tumor cells with connexin 32 cDNA retards growth in vivo. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 88: 10701-10705, 1991.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
139. Zhu D., Caveney S., Kidder G. M., Naus C. C. G. Transfection of C6 glioma cells with connexin 43 cDNA: analysis of expression, intercellular coupling, and cell proliferation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 88: 1883-1887, 1991.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
140. Rose B., Mehta P. P., Loewenstein W. R. Gap junction protein gene suppresses tumorigenicity. Carcinogenesis (Lond.), 14: 1073-1075, 1993.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
141. Elfgang C., Eckert R., Lichtenberg-Fraté H., Butterweck A., Traub O., Klein R. A., Hülser D., Willecke K. , Specific permeability and selective formation of gap junction channels in connexin-transfected HeLa cells. J. Cell Biol., 129: 805-817, 1995.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
142. Phelan P., Bacon J. P., Davies J. A., Stebbings L. A., Todman M. G., Avery L., Baines R. A., Barnes T. M., Ford C., Hekimi S., Lee R., Shaw J. E., Starich T. A., Curtin K. D., Sun Y. A., Wyman R. J. Innexins: a family of invertebrate gap-junction proteins. Trends Genet., 14: 348-349, 1998.[Medline]
143. Landesman Y., White T. W., Starich T. A., Shaw J. E., Goodenough D. A., Paul D. L. Innexin-3 forms connexin-like intercellular channels. J. Cell Sci., 112: 2391-2396, 1999.[Abstract]
144. Mesnil M., Krutovskikh V., Piccoli C., Elfgang C., Traub O., Willecke K., Yamasaki H. Negative growth control of HeLa cells by connexin genes: connexin species specificity. Cancer Res., 55: 629-639, 1995.
145. Hirschi K. K., Xu C., Tsukamoto T., Sager R. Gap junction genes Cx26 and Cx43 individually suppress the cancer phenotype of human mammary carcinoma cells and restore differential potential. Cell Growth Differ., 7: 861-870, 1996.[Abstract]
146. Proulx A. A., Lin Z-X., Naus C. C. G. Transfection of rhabdomyosarcoma cells with connexin43 induced myogenic differentiation. Cell Growth Differ., 8: 533-540, 1997.[Abstract]
147. Duflot-Dancer A., Mesnil M., Yamasaki H. Dominant-negative abrogation of connexin-mediated cell growth control by mutant connexin genes. Oncogene, 15: 2151-2158, 1997.[Medline]
148. Huang R. P., Fan Y., Hossain M. Z., Peng A., Zeng Z-L., Boynton A. L. Reversion of the neoplastic phenotype of human glioblastoma cells by connexin 43 (Cx43). Cancer Res., 58: 5089-5096, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
149. Lepley D. M., Pelling J. C. Induction of p21/WAF1 and G₁ cell-cycle arrest by the chemopreventive agent apigenin. Mol. Carcinog., 19: 74-82, 1997.[Medline]
150. Wygoda M. R., Wilson M. R., Davis M. A., Trosko J. E., Rehemtulla A., Lawrence T. S. Protection of herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase-transduced cells from ganciclovir-mediated cytotoxicity by bystander cells: the Good Samaritan effect. Cancer Res., 57: 1699-1703, 1997.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
151. Yamasaki H., Omori Y., Krutovskikh V., Zhu W., Mironov N., Yamakage K., Mesnil M. Connexins in tumor suppression and cancer therapy. Novartis Found. Symp., 219: 241-254, 1999.[Medline]
152. Graeber S. H. M., Hülser D. F. Connexin transfection induces invasive properties in HeLa cells. Exp. Cell Res., 243: 142-149, 1998.[Medline]
153. Ram Z., Walbridge S., Shawker T., Culver K. W., Blaese R. M., Oldfield E. H. The effect of thymidine kinase transduction and ganciclovir therapy on tumor vasculature and growth of 9L gliomas in rats. J. Neurosurg., 81: 256-260, 1994.[Medline]
154. Ko, Y. S., Yeh, H. I, Rothery, S., Dupont, E., Coppen, S. R., and Severs, N. J. Connexin make-up of endothelial gap junctions in the rat pulmonary artery as revealed by immunoconfocal microscopy and triple-label immunogold electron microscopy. J. Histochem. Cytochem., 47: 683–692, 1999.
155. Caruso M., Panis Y., Gagandeep S., Houssin D., Salzmann J. L., Klatzmann D. Regression of established macroscopic liver metastases after in situ transduction of a suicide gene. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 90: 7024-7028, 1993.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
156. Barba D., Hardin J., Sadelain M., Gage F. H. Development of anti-tumor immunity following thymidine kinase-mediated killing of experimental brain tumors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci USA, 91: 4348-4352, 1994.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
157. Freeman S. M., Whartenby K. A., Freeman J. L., Abboud C. N., Marrogi A. J. In situ use of suicide genes for cancer therapy. Semin. Oncol., 23: 31-45, 1996.[Medline]
158. Freeman S. M., Ramesh R., Marrogi A. J. Immune system in suicide-gene therapy. Lancet, 349: 2-3, 1997.[Medline]
159. Ramesh R., Marrogi A. J., Munshi A., Abboud C. N., Freeman S. M. In vivo analysis of the bystander effect: a cytokine cascade. Exp. Hematol., 24: 829-838, 1996.[Medline]
160. Vile R. G., Nelson J. A., Castleden S., Chong H., Hart I. R. Systemic gene therapy of murine melanoma using tissue specific expression of the HSV-tk gene involves an immune component. Cancer Res., 54: 6228-6234, 1994.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
161. Colombo B. M., Benedetti S., Ottolenghi S., Poli G., Pollo B., Mora M., Finocchiaro G. The "bystander effect": association of U-87 cell death with ganciclovir-mediated apoptosis of nearby cells and lack of effect in athymic mice. Hum. Gene Ther., 6: 763-772, 1995.[Medline]
162. Gagandeep S., Brew R., Green B., Christmas S. E., Klatzmann D., Poston G. J., Kinsella A. R. Prodrug-activated gene therapy: involvement of an immunological component in the "bystander effect. " Cancer Gene Ther., 3: 83-88, 1996.[Medline]
163. Wilson K. M., Stambrook P. J., Bi W. L., Pavelic Z. P., Pavelic L., Gluckman J. L. HSV-tk gene therapy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Enhancement by the local and distant bystander effect. Arch. Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg., 122: 746-749, 1996.
164. Dilber M. S., Abedi M. R., Bjorkstrand B., Christensson B., Gahrton G., Xanthopoulos K. G., Smith C. I. Suicide gene therapy for plasma cell tumors. Blood, 15: 2192-2200, 1996.
165. Misawa T., Chiang M. H., Pandit L., Gordon E. M., Anderson W. F., Parekh D. Development of systemic immunologic responses against hepatic metastases during gene therapy for peritoneal carcinomatosis with retroviral HS-tk and ganciclovir. J. Gastrointest. Surg., 1: 527-533, 1997.[Medline]
166. Kianmanesh A. R., Perrin H., Panis Y., Fabre M., Nagy H. J., Houssin D., Klatzmann D. A. "Distant" bystander effect of suicide gene therapy: regression of nontransduced tumors together with a distant transduced tumor. Hum. Gene Ther., 8: 1807-1814, 1997.[Medline]
167. Wei M. X., Bougnoux P., Sacré-Salem B., Peyrat M-B., Lhuillery C., Salzmann J-L., Klatzmann D. Suicide gene therapy of chemically induced mammary tumors in rat: efficacy and distant bystander effect. Cancer Res., 58: 3529-3532, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				B. He, X. Tong, L. Wang, Q. Wang, H. Ye, B. Liu, X. Hong, L. Tao, and A. L. Harris Tramadol and Flurbiprofen Depress the Cytotoxicity of Cisplatin via Their Effects on Gap Junctions Clin. Cancer Res., September 15, 2009; 15(18): 5803 - 5810. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Candolfi, K. Yagiz, D. Foulad, G. E. Alzadeh, M. Tesarfreund, A.K.M. G. Muhammad, M. Puntel, K. M. Kroeger, C. Liu, S. Lee, et al. Release of HMGB1 in Response to Proapoptotic Glioma Killing Strategies: Efficacy and Neurotoxicity Clin. Cancer Res., July 1, 2009; 15(13): 4401 - 4414. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. M. E. Finocchiaro, M. D. Riveros, and G. C. Glikin Cytokine-enhanced vaccine and suicide gene therapy as adjuvant treatments of metastatic melanoma in a horse Vet Rec., February 28, 2009; 164(9): 278 - 279. [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. P. Kalva, A. Thabet, and S. Wicky Recent Advances in Transarterial Therapy of Primary and Secondary Liver Malignancies RadioGraphics, January 1, 2008; 28(1): 101 - 117. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W.-P. Deng, C.-C. Wu, C.-C. Lee, W. K. Yang, H.-E. Wang, R.-S. Liu, H.-J. Wei, J. G. Gelovani, J.-J. Hwang, D.-M. Yang, et al. Serial In Vivo Imaging of the Lung Metastases Model and Gene Therapy Using HSV1-tk and Ganciclovir J. Nucl. Med., May 1, 2006; 47(5): 877 - 884. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. G. Gentry, P. D. Boucher, and D. S. Shewach Hydroxyurea Induces Bystander Cytotoxicity in Cocultures of Herpes Simplex Virus Thymidine Kinase-Expressing and Nonexpressing HeLa Cells Incubated with Ganciclovir. Cancer Res., April 1, 2006; 66(7): 3845 - 3851. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. D. Boucher, M. M. Im, S. O. Freytag, and D. S. Shewach A novel mechanism of synergistic cytotoxicity with 5-fluorocytosine and ganciclovir in double suicide gene therapy. Cancer Res., March 15, 2006; 66(6): 3230 - 3237. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Shao, M. Folkard, B. D. Michael, and K. M. Prise Targeted cytoplasmic irradiation induces bystander responses PNAS, September 14, 2004; 101(37): 13495 - 13500. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Maemondo, Y. Saijo, K. Narumi, T. Kikuchi, K. Usui, R. Tazawa, K. Matsumoto, T. Nakamura, K. Sasaki, M. Takahashi, et al. Gene Therapy with Secretory Leukoprotease Inhibitor Promoter-Controlled Replication-Competent Adenovirus for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Cancer Res., July 1, 2004; 64(13): 4611 - 4620. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Thust, M.T. Tomicic, R. Grabner, C. Friedrichs, P. Wutzler, and B. Kaina Cytogenetic detection of a trans-species bystander effect: induction of sister chromatid exchanges in murine 3T3 cells by ganciclovir metabolized in HSV thymidine kinase gene-transfected Chinese hamster ovary cells Mutagenesis, January 1, 2004; 19(1): 27 - 33. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Chamoto, T. Tsuji, H. Funamoto, A. Kosaka, J. Matsuzaki, T. Sato, H. Abe, K. Fujio, K. Yamamoto, T. Kitamura, et al. Potentiation of Tumor Eradication by Adoptive Immunotherapy with T-cell Receptor Gene-Transduced T-Helper Type 1 Cells Cancer Res., January 1, 2004; 64(1): 386 - 390. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. I. Azzam, S. M. de Toledo, and J. B. Little Expression of CONNEXIN43 Is Highly Sensitive to Ionizing Radiation and Other Environmental Stresses Cancer Res., November 1, 2003; 63(21): 7128 - 7135. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J.-H. Yang, S. F. Basinger, R. L. Gross, and S. M. Wu Blue Light-Induced Generation of Reactive Oxygen Species in Photoreceptor Ellipsoids Requires Mitochondrial Electron Transport Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., March 1, 2003; 44(3): 1312 - 1319. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Adachi, J. Sampath, L.-b. Lan, D. Sun, P. Hargrove, R. Flatley, A. Tatum, M. Z. Edwards, M. Wezeman, L. Matherly, et al. Expression of MRP4 Confers Resistance to Ganciclovir and Compromises Bystander Cell Killing J. Biol. Chem., October 4, 2002; 277(41): 38998 - 39004. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L.-O. Klotz, P. Patak, N. Ale-Agha, D. P. Buchczyk, K. Abdelmohsen, P. A. Gerber, C. von Montfort, and H. Sies 2-Methyl-1,4-naphthoquinone, Vitamin K3, Decreases Gap-Junctional Intercellular Communication via Activation of the Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor/Extracellular Signal-regulated Kinase Cascade Cancer Res., September 1, 2002; 62(17): 4922 - 4928. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. R. Wilson, S. M. Pullen, A. Hogg, N. A. Helsby, K. O. Hicks, and W. A. Denny Quantitation of Bystander Effects in Nitroreductase Suicide Gene Therapy Using Three-Dimensional Cell Cultures Cancer Res., March 1, 2002; 62(5): 1425 - 1432. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. C. Luna, X. Chen, S. Wong, J. Tsui, N. Rucker, A. S. Lee, and C. J. Gomer Enhanced Photodynamic Therapy Efficacy with Inducible Suicide Gene Therapy Controlled by the grp Promoter Cancer Res., March 1, 2002; 62(5): 1458 - 1461. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. P. Piechocki, F. Lonardo, J. F. Ensley, T. Nguyen, H. Kim, and G. H. Yoo Anticancer Activity of Docetaxel in Murine Salivary Gland Carcinoma Clin. Cancer Res., March 1, 2002; 8(3): 870 - 877. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. L. Carroll, L. L. Nielsen, S. B. Pruett, and J. M. Mathis The Role of Natural Killer Cells in Adenovirus-mediated p53 Gene Therapy Mol. Cancer Ther., November 1, 2001; 1(1): 49 - 60. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. F. Brosnan, E. Scemes, and D. C. Spray Cytokine Regulation of Gap Junction Connectivity : An Open-and-Shut Case or Changing Partners at the Nexus? Am. J. Pathol., May 1, 2001; 158(5): 1565 - 1569. [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Ichikawa, W. P. Petros, S. M. Ludeman, J. Fangmeier, F. H. Hochberg, O. M. Colvin, and E. A. Chiocca Intraneoplastic Polymer-based Delivery of Cyclophosphamide for Intratumoral Bioconversion by a Replicating Oncolytic Viral Vector Cancer Res., February 1, 2001; 61(3): 864 - 868. [Abstract] [Full Text]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Mesnil, M. Articles by Yamasaki, H. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Mesnil, M. Articles by Yamasaki, H.