
[Cancer Research 60, 6075-6079, November 1, 2000]
© 2000 American Association for Cancer Research
Experimental Therapeutics |
Equilibrative-Sensitive Nucleoside Transporter and Its Role in Gemcitabine Sensitivity
David R. Rauchwerger,
Patricia S. Firby,
David W. Hedley and
Malcolm J. Moore1
Departments of Pharmacology [D. R. R., M. J. M.], Medical Biophysics [D. W. H.], and Medicine [D. W. H., M. J. M.], University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 1A8 Canada, and Division of Experimental Therapeutics, Ontario Cancer Institute, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2 M9 Canada [D. R. R., P. S. F., D. W. H., M. J. M.]
 |
ABSTRACT
|
|---|
Salvage of preformed nucleosides requires transport across the plasma
membrane by sodium-dependent (concentrative) and sodium-independent
(equilibrative) mechanisms. These transport systems are also the route
of cellular uptake for nucleoside analogues, including gemcitabine
(2',2'-difluorodeoxycytidine), a deoxycytidine analogue used in the
treatment of pancreatic cancer. To determine whether gemcitabine
cytotoxicity is influenced by the equilibrative-sensitive nucleoside
transporter (es-NT), basal levels of the es-NT were quantified in three
human pancreatic cancer cell lines (PANC-1, HS-766T, and PK-8) and one
human bladder cancer cell line (MGH-U1) by flow cytometric analysis,
and the results were compared with gemcitabine cytotoxicity assessed by
clonogenic assay. To determine whether the salvage pathway of DNA
synthesis can be up-regulated by inhibiting de novo DNA
synthesis, combination experiments were carried out using the
thymidylate synthase (TS) inhibitors 5-fluorouracil or raltitrexed with
gemcitabine in a concurrent and sequential fashion. No relationship
between basal es-NT and gemcitabine cytotoxicity was
demonstrated. For two pancreatic cell lines, sequence-dependent effects
of the combination of TS inhibitors and gemcitabine were seen with
maximum effect when the TS inhibitors preceded gemcitabine. This was
also associated with a significant increase in es-NT
levels caused by the TS inhibitors. Thus, modulation of the
es-NT by pretreatment with TS inhibitors may have the
potential to improve the therapeutic benefit of gemcitabine.
 |
INTRODUCTION
|
|---|
Adenocarcinoma of the pancreas is the fifth leading cause of
cancer-related deaths in North America, exceeded only by lung,
colorectal, prostate, and breast cancers (1)
. Surgery is
the only curative treatment currently available; however, >80% of
patients have unresectable disease at diagnosis. Chemotherapy and
radiation therapies most commonly play a palliative role in pancreatic
cancer care and have not shown a significant impact on 5-year survival
rates (2)
. At present, pancreatic cancer has the worst
5-year survival rate of any cancer; <5% of all pancreatic cancer
patients survive 5 years (1
, 2)
. In randomized trials,
gemcitabine was the first and only chemotherapeutic agent that has been
shown to have any meaningful impact on either survival or
disease-related symptoms in pancreatic adenocarcinoma (3)
.
Gemcitabine2
(Gemzar) is a cell cycle-dependent (S-phase-specific)
deoxycytidine analogue of the antimetabolite class. It must first be
transported into the cell and then be phosphorylated to its active,
triphosphate form. Transport of gemcitabine occurs via the NT, of which
there exist multiple forms (4)
. Once inside the cell,
numerous enzymatic reactions lead to the formation of gemcitabine
triphosphate. Incorporation of gemcitabine triphosphate into DNA is
most likely the major mechanism by which gemcitabine exerts its
cytotoxic actions
Cells can synthesize nucleotides either through de novo
synthesis or via reutilization of nucleotides and nucleobases derived
from either the intracellular turnover of nucleic acids and nucleotides
or from extracellular sources. In the latter case, known as the salvage
pathway, nucleosides and nucleobases must first be transported across
the cell membrane by specific transport proteins. Transport inhibitors,
such as dipyridamol and dilazep, can enhance the effectiveness of
various chemotherapeutic agents, including 5-FU and methotrexate, by
modulating either drug influx or efflux and by interfering with the
salvage pathways of DNA synthesis. The therapeutic effects of combining
a transport inhibitor with an inhibitor of de novo
nucleotide biosynthesis to develop a chemotherapy regimen in which both
the de novo and salvage pathways of DNA synthesis are
blocked has been widely explored (5, 6, 7)
. In addition to
the endogenous nucleosides, nucleoside analogues are also taken up into
the cell via these specific transport proteins (8, 9, 10)
.
Therefore, combining a nucleoside analogue with agents that
increase NT expression at the cell surface has the potential for
increased cell kill. 5-FU and raltitrexed, two antimetabolite de
novo DNA synthesis inhibitors, are two such agents (11
, 12)
.
Two carrier-mediated transport mechanisms for purine and pyrimidine
bases have been described. In mammalian cells, plasma membrane
transport occurs by both sodium-dependent (concentrative) and
sodium-independent (equilibrative) mechanisms (13
, 14)
.
Nucleoside transport also plays an important role in a variety of
physiological processes including vasoregulation, neurotransmission,
platelet aggregation, and lipolysis (15
, 16)
. There is
also growing evidence that nucleoside transport processes of
intracellular membranes play a role in the intracellular distribution
of nucleosides (17)
.
Sodium-dependent mechanisms of nucleoside transport are limited to
specialized cells such as intestinal and renal epithelia, choroid
plexus, liver, splenocytes, macrophages and leukemic cells
(17, 18, 19, 20, 21)
. These transporters generally mediate influx only
and act via active transport processes, depending on cellular ATP for
their function.
Sodium-independent, equilibrative nucleoside transport processes
mediate the facilitated diffusion of nucleosides across plasma
membranes and are widely distributed in different cell types
(22)
. They function bidirectionally in the transmembrane
flux of nucleosides in accordance with the concentration gradient.
Equilibrative NTs are classified into two subtypes, based on their
sensitivities to inhibition by NBMPR and dipyridamol. NBMPR-sensitive
(es) transporters bind NBMPR with high affinity, whereas
NBMPR insensitive (ei) transporters are unaffected, even by
micromolar concentrations of NBMPR. Both display broad substrate
specificity for purine and pyrimidine nucleosides. It has been shown
previously that depleting the endogenous intracellular nucleotide pools
using DNA synthesis inhibitors, such as 5-FU or raltitrexed, can
increase es-NT abundance at the cell surface (11
, 12)
.
The transport process is followed by phosphorylation of the nucleosides
by kinases. Computer and kinetic analyses have suggested that the
transport of nucleosides is rate-limiting at low (<1 µM)
concentrations of extracellular nucleosides (8
, 9)
. Once
transport becomes saturated, the kinases become the rate-limiting step
in nucleotide salvage. Nucleoside levels of this magnitude (1
µM) occur in human serum (23)
, indicating
that nucleoside transport (and cell surface NT abundance) may be an
important step in the utilization of nucleosides by cells for the
salvage pathway of DNA synthesis.
Gemcitabine has been shown to be a substrate for four of the NTs found
in humans (es, ei, cit, and cib; Ref.
21
). The major mediators of gemcitabine uptake, however,
are most probably the equilibrative NTs because human cit
and cib activity has only been demonstrated in kidney,
liver, intestinal epithelium, myeloid leukemic cell lines, freshly
isolated myeloblasts, and the CaCo-2 colon cancer cell line (18
, 20
, 24
, 25)
. In addition, Mackey et al.
(21)
demonstrated that NT activity was a prerequisite for
growth inhibition by gemcitabine in vitro.
Pressacco et al. (11)
and Cass
(12)
have shown previously that TS inhibition leads to
increased numbers of es transporters at the cell surface. In
this report, we chose to examine the relationship between gemcitabine
cytotoxicity and the es transporter, hypothesizing that with
increased es transporter, gemcitabine will show increased
cytotoxicity.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS
|
|---|
Chemicals.
Unless otherwise specified, all reagents were purchased from the Sigma
Chemical Company (Oakville, Ontario, Canada).
5-(SAENTA-x8)-Fluorescein and NBMPR were the
gifts of Dr. A. Paterson (University of Alberta, Edmonton,
Alberta, Canada) and Dr. J. Wiley (Sydney, Victoria, Australia).
Gemcitabine was a gift from Eli Lilly Pharmaceuticals (Indianapolis,
IN). Raltitrexed (Tomudex) was a gift from Zeneca Pharma (Mississauga,
Ontario, Canada). Trypsin was purchased from Fisher Scientific Canada
(Whitby, Ontario, Canada). All growth media were supplied by the media
department of the Ontario Cancer Institute (Toronto, Ontario, Canada).
Cell Culture.
PANC-1 and HS-766T cell lines were originally purchased from the
American Type Culture Collection (Rockville, MD). MGH-U1 cells were a
gift from Michigan General Hospital; Dr. M. Tsao (Ontario Cancer
Institute, Ontario, Toronto, Canada) provided PK-8 cells. All
cell lines were maintained as monolayer cultures, and growth medium was
supplemented with 0.1% streptomycin, 0.1% penicillin, and 10% FBS.
The human bladder cancer cell line MGH-U1 was cultured in
-MEM at
37°C in 5% CO2. The human pancreatic cancer
cell line PK-8 was cultured in RPMI 1640 supplemented with HEPES buffer
(10 mM) at 37°C in a 5% CO2
humidified atmosphere. PANC-1 and HS-766T were cultured in Dulbeccos
H21 Modified Eagles Medium and maintained at 37°C in 10%
CO2.
Drug Cytotoxicity.
Cell survival after drug exposure was assessed by the clonogenic assay.
Drugs were added to cells growing exponentially 24 h after plating
of 15 x 105 cells. Cells were
then incubated for 7 (MGH-U1), 10 (PANC-1, PK-8), or 14 days (HS-766T),
and the resulting colonies were then counted. For single-agent studies,
cells were exposed to drug for 24 h. The
IC50 and IC90 values were
estimated for each drug in all cell lines by plotting fractional
survival versus drug concentration. For combination studies,
cells were exposed to gemcitabine for 24 h just prior to, at the
same time as, or immediately after treatment with either 5-FU or
raltitrexed for 24 h.
5-(SAENTA-x8)-Fluorescein Binding Assay.
Binding of 5-(SAENTA-x8)-fluorescein was measured
by flow cytometry as described previously (26)
. Cells were
preincubated for 30 min at room temperature with or without 5
µM NBMPR in their appropriate growth medium and then with
the addition of an es site saturating concentration of
5-(SAENTA-x8)-fluorescein for an additional 15
min at room temperature. es specific binding of
5-(SAENTA-x8)-fluorescein was calculated from the
difference between mean fluorescence intensities obtained with
(representative of nonspecific binding) and without (representative of
total binding of probe) NBMPR. The cell-bound fluorescence output of
5-(SAENTA-x8)-fluorescein was converted into MESF using calibration
particles (rainbow calibration particles, RCP-305; Spherotech,
Libertyville, IL) with fluorescence intensities having known MESF
values. These MESF values correspond to the number of cell surface
es-NT sites/cell (26)
.
 |
RESULTS
|
|---|
Single-Agent Drug Cytotoxicity.
Clonogenic survival was determined in MGH-U1, PANC-1, HS-766T, and PK-8
cells exposed to gemcitabine, 5-FU, or raltitrexed for 24 h (Fig. 1)
. As determined by IC50 concentration,
sensitivity to gemcitabine was: MGH-U1 > HS-766T > PANC-1 >> PK-8; to 5-FU, it was:
PANC-1 > MGH-U1 > HS-766T > PK-8; and to raltitrexed, it was: PANC-1 > PK-8 > HS-766T > MGH-U1 (Table 1)
. In some cell lines, 1 log of cell kill could not be achieved for
certain drugs (i.e., gemcitabine in PK-8, 5-FU in MGH-U1 and
PANC-1, and raltitrexed in three of the cell lines used).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 1 IC50 values for gemcitabine, 5-FU, and raltitrexed in three
human pancreatic cancer and one human bladder cancer cell line
Cultures were exposed to graded concentrations of gemcitabine, 5-FU, or
raltitrexed for 24 h as described in "Materials and Methods."
Colonies were enumerated, and chemosensitivity was expressed as the
concentration of drug that inhibited colony formation by 50%
(IC50). Values were estimated from log concentration-response curves derived for each drug. Values in parentheses indicate
IC90 concentrations, where achieved (nM).
|
|
Combination Drug Exposures.
The effect of combining gemcitabine with either 5-FU or raltitrexed at
a range of concentrations was studied in MGH-U1, PANC-1, and HS-766T
cells. This was determined when cells were exposed concurrently or
sequentially, with each exposure lasting 24 h. Pretreatment of the
HS-766T cell line with either 5-FU or raltitrexed augmented the effects
of single-agent gemcitabine treatment, whereas concurrent treatment or
gemcitabine prior to the TS inhibitors did not (Figs. 2
and 3)
. In the PANC-1 cell line (Fig. 4)
, treatment with 5-FU prior to gemcitabine increased cytotoxicity over
that seen with gemcitabine alone. All other sequences of TS inhibition
and gemcitabine had no effect beyond that achieved by gemcitabine
alone. In the MGH-U1 cell line, no augmentation in cytotoxicity was
seen when either of the TS inhibitors was combined in any manner with
gemcitabine.

View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2. Clonogenic survival of HS-766T cells exposed to
gemcitabine and 5-FU either sequentially for 24 h each or
concurrently for 24 h as described in "Materials and Methods."
Results are expressed as the percentage of colony-forming efficiency
and are the means of at least three independent experiments.
Bars, SD.
|
|

View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3. Clonogenic survival of HS-766T cells exposed to
gemcitabine and raltitrexed either sequentially for 24 h each or
concurrently for 24 h as described in "Materials and Methods."
Results are expressed as the percentage of colony-forming efficiency
and are the means of at least three independent experiments.
Bars, SD.
|
|

View larger version (39K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4. Clonogenic survival of PANC-1 cells exposed to gemcitabine
and 5-FU either sequentially for 24 h each or concurrently for
24 h as described in "Materials and Methods." Results are
expressed as the percentage of colony-forming efficiency and are the
means of at least three independent experiments. Bars,
SD.
|
|
5-(SAENTA-x8)-Fluorescein Binding Assay.
Flow cytometric analysis was performed on all four cell lines to
quantitate basal cell surface levels of the es-NT. In every
case, there was found to be binding of the probe that was saturable and
reversible when exposed in conjunction with the es transport
inhibitor NBMPR (Fig. 5)
. An es-NT saturating concentration of
5-(SAENTA-x8)-fluorescein was defined as that concentration where no
further increase in cellassociated fluorescence occurred. This
point was where measurements of basal levels of es-NT were
taken. All measurements from the flow cytometric analysis were reported
as mean fluorescence intensities. These were converted into MESF from
calibration curves (linear, r2
> 0.99) derived from beads containing known numbers of
fluorescein molecules run through the flow cytometer prior to each
experiment. As 5-(SAENTA-x8)-fluorescein binds to the es-NT
on a 1:1 ratio, the MESF values for the specific binding of the probe
correspond to the number of cell surface es transport
sites/cell (26)
. The cellular quantity of these cell
surface es-NT (expressed as MESF) for the four cell lines
used was as follows: PANC-1 (14148) > PK-8 (4792)
MGH-U1 (4281) > HS-766T (1216).

View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5. Mean fluorescence intensity histograms of fluorescence
(log scale) versus time (s) for the three conditions
analyzed in the MGH-U1 (A), PANC-1 (B),
PK-8 (C), and HS-766T (D) cell lines.
Fluorescent bands from left to right in
each figure represent total binding (in the absence of NBMPR),
nonspecific binding (in the presence of NBMPR), and background
autofluorescence of the cells. The series of bands to the far left of
A represent the rainbow calibration particles.
|
|
Modulation of the es-NT.
After treatment of the MGH-U1, PANC-1, and HS-766T cell lines with
varying concentrations of gemcitabine, 5-FU, or raltitrexed, cells were
again analyzed for es-NT content (Table 2)
. Treatment of the PANC-1 cell line with 1 µM
gemcitabine and 30 µM 5-FU for 24 h showed
a significant (P < 0.05) increase in cell
surface es-NT content over basal levels. In addition,
treatment of the HS-766T pancreatic carcinoma cell line with 30 and 100
µM 5-FU and 100 and 1000
nM raltitrexed all resulted in a significant
(P < 0.05, t test) increase in
es-NT sites versus basal levels. All other drug
exposures for these three cell lines showed no statistically
significant difference in es-NT content compared with basal
levels.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 2 Factor increase over control in specific binding of
5-(SAENTA-x8)-fluorescein after treatment with either 5-FU,
raltitrexed, or gemcitabine
Cultures were exposed to the indicated concentrations of drug for
24 h before being stained with 5-(SAENTA-x8)-fluorescein.
Flow cytometric analysis was carried out on the samples, and the factor
increase in fluorescence over control was reported as described in
"Materials and Methods." Figures in boldface denote statistically
significant difference (P < 0.05,
t test) between treatment group and control.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION
|
|---|
TS inhibitors, such as 5-FU and raltitrexed, block the formation
of dTMP and deplete intracellular nucleotide pools so that actively
proliferating cells then depend on salvage of preformed nucleosides
from extracellular fluid. The DNA synthesis inhibitors 5-FU and
raltitrexed have been shown previously to up-regulate the number of
cell surface es-NTs (11
, 12)
. An increase in
these transporters has the potential to augment the effects of drugs
like gemcitabine, which enters cells via this mechanism of nucleoside
transport. It also has the capacity to demonstrate that an absence or
lack of cell surface NTs will give rise to cells that are resistant to
the effects of the nucleoside analogue drugs like gemcitabine.
We have shown that in the four human cancer cell lines studied, there
is no correlation between basal levels of cell surface es-NT
and gemcitabine sensitivity as determined by IC50
concentrations (Table 3)
. We hypothesized that cell lines containing greater numbers of
es-NTs would show increased cytotoxicity when treated with
gemcitabine. This, however, did not prove to be the case, indicating
that es-NT levels on their own do not provide a good measure
for predicting gemcitabine cytotoxicity. Other factors, such as other
NTs, cellular efflux, and intracellular activation, are most probably
playing a greater role in the determination of gemcitabine
cytotoxicity. These other factors could also be examined in light of
their effects on gemcitabine resistance, because an alteration in their
levels may have a more pronounced effect on resistance than
cytotoxicity (i.e., the presence of other types of NTs may
not affect cytotoxicity; however, their absence may confer resistance).
A study of the effects of gemcitabine in cell lines possessing no
functional cell surface es-NTs has demonstrated that their
presence is a requirement for gemcitabine toxicity (21)
.
Therefore, studies examining the relationship between a decrease in
functional es-NTs and the rise of gemcitabine resistance should now be
undertaken. In addition, the number of es-NT sites may not
necessarily correspond to their functionality. Functional studies of
the es-NT in these cell lines are also necessary to fully
understand and characterize the relationship between NT and gemcitabine
cytotoxicity and resistance.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 3 Number of cell-surface equilibrative-sensitive (es) transport sites per
cell and gemcitabine sensitivities in all four human tumor cell lines
studied
Flow cytometric analysis was carried out as described in "Materials
and Methods" on all four cell lines at basal conditions.
Cell-associated fluorescence values were converted to MESF from
calibration curves generated using rainbow calibration particles. These
measurements correspond to the number of cells-surface es
transport sites. Gemcitabine sensitivities are expressed as
IC50s obtained from the concentration-response curves generated
in all four cell lines for gemcitabine.
|
|
Cell surface es-NT content in the MGH-U1, PANC-1, and
HS-766T cell lines was also quantified after treatment with varying
concentrations of 5-FU, raltitrexed, or gemcitabine to ascertain
whether changes in cytotoxicity would correlate with up-regulation of
es-NT. When gemcitabine was administered in a combination
regimen where it sequentially followed the TS inhibitors, the
es-NT contribution to the modulation of gemcitabine toxicity
became more pronounced. We found that in one of the pancreatic
carcinoma cell lines (HS-766T), the amount of es-NT
increased by a factor of 1.7 over basal levels when pretreated with 30
and 100 µM 5-FU. When pretreated with 100 and
1000 nM raltitrexed, the same cell line showed a
1.9- and 1.4-fold increase, respectively, in cell surface
es-NT over basal levels. In the other pancreatic tumor cell
line (PANC-1), the cell surface es-NT content increased by a
factor of 1.6 over basal levels when the cells were pretreated with 30
µM 5-FU but was unaffected by raltitrexed
pretreatment (Table 2)
. When pretreated with 100
µM 5-FU, the PANC-1 cells did exhibit increased
cell kill as compared with gemcitabine monotherapy but did not show a
significant increase in cell surface es-NT. All of these
increases, although small in magnitude, were found to be statistically
significant (P < 0.05, t test)
when compared with basal levels. These concentrations of 5-FU and
raltitrexed were analyzed for increased es-NT content
because the cytotoxic effects seen during their use in combination
studies showed increased cell kill over single-agent gemcitabine
administration. This evidence lends support to our hypothesis that an
increase in cell surface es-NTs can positively modulate the
in vitro cytotoxicity to gemcitabine in the pancreatic tumor
cell lines tested. From the viewpoint of gemcitabine resistance, these
findings also lend support to the assumption that decreased amounts of
cell surface es-NTs lead to increased resistance to the
cytotoxic effects of gemcitabine.
The relevance of NT to cancer treatment is an area that is rapidly
expanding. There exist two aspects of nucleoside transport as it
relates to chemotherapy: (a) reduced transporter expression
may be associated with resistance to treatment with nucleoside analogue
agents such as
1-ß-D-arabinofuranosylcytosine,
2-chlorodeoxyadenosine, and gemcitabine; and (b) increased
cellular salvage capacity for preformed nucleosides from the
extracellular fluid is believed to confer resistance to drugs of the
antimetabolite class such as methotrexate and 5-FU, which inhibit the
de novo process of DNA synthesis. This second aspect can be
exploited by combining TS inhibitors with nucleoside analogues. We have
shown that gemcitabine cytotoxicity increased when administered
immediately after a TS inhibitor in two of the human pancreatic cell
lines studied. Further studies addressing the functional and molecular
aspects of using agents to increase NT expression and their application
in clinical use are warranted.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
|
|---|
We are grateful to James S. Wiley and Alan R. P. Paterson for
supplying 5-(SAENTA-x8)-fluorescein, without
which this study could not have been completed.
 |
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 To whom requests for reprints should be
addressed, at Princess Margaret Hospital, Room 5205, 610 University
Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2 M9 Canada. Phone: (416) 946-2263; Fax:
(416) 946-2082; E-mail: Malcolm.moore{at}uhn.on.ca 
2 The abbreviations used are: gemcitabine,
2',2'-difluorodeoxycytidine; 5-FU, 5-fluorouracil; NBMPR,
S-(p-nitrobenzyl)-6-thioinosine;
es, equilibrative NBMPR-sensitive; ei,
equilibrative NBMPR-insensitive; cit, concentrative
insensitive to NBMPR and thymidine selective; cib,
concentrative insensitive to NBMPR and broadly selective;
cif, concentrative insensitive to NBMPR and formycin
B-selective; cs, concentrative and sensitive to NBMPR;
csg, concentrative sensitive to NBMPR and guanosine
selective; NT, nucleoside transporter; SAENTA,
5'-S-(2-aminomethyl)-N6-(4-nitrobenzyl)-5'-thioadenosine;
MESF, molecules equivalent soluble fluorescein; TS, thymidylate
synthase. 
Received 12/ 1/99.
Accepted 8/24/00.
 |
REFERENCES
|
|---|
-
Moore M. Activity of gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic carcinoma. A review. Cancer (Phila.), 78(Suppl.3): 633-638, 1996.[Medline]
-
Clark J. W., Glicksman A. S., Wanebo H. J. Systemic and adjuvant therapy for patients with pancreatic carcinoma. Cancer (Phila.), 78(Suppl.3): 688-693, 1996.[Medline]
-
Moore M. J. Current status of chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic cancer. Curr. Oncol., 1: 212-216, 1994.
-
Heinemann V., Schulz L., Issels R. D., Plunkett W. Gemcitabine: a modulator of intracellular nucleotide and deoxynucleotide metabolism. Semin. Oncol., 22(4Suppl.11): 11-18, 1995.
-
Gaffen J. D., Chambers E. A., Bennett A. The effects of dipyridamole and indomethacin on methotrexate cytotoxicity in lovo human colon cancer cells. J. Pharm. Pharmacol., 41: 350-352, 1989.[Medline]
-
Cabral S., Leis S., Bover L., Nembrot M., Mordoh J. Dipyridamole inhibits reversion by thymidine of methotrexate effect and increases drug uptake in sarcoma 180 cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 81: 3200-3203, 1984.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Chan T. C. Augmentation of 1-ß-D-arabinofuranosylcytosine cytotoxicity in human tumor cells by inhibiting drug efflux. Cancer Res., 49: 2656-2660, 1989.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Wiley J. S., Taupin J., Jamieson G. P., Snook M., Sawyer W. H., Finch L. R. 1-ß-D-arabinofuranosylcytosine transport and metabolism in acute leukemias and T cell lymphoblastic lymphoma. J. Clin. Investig., 75: 632-642, 1985.
-
White J. C., Rathmell J. P., Capizzi R. L. Membrane transport influences the rate of accumulation of 1-ß-D-arabinofuranosylcytosine in human leukemia cells. J. Clin. Investig., 79: 380-387, 1987.
-
Burke T., Lee S., Ferguson P., Hammond J. R. Interaction of 2',2'-difluorodeoxycytidine (gemcitabine) and formycin B with the Na+-dependent and -independent nucleoside transporters of Ehrlich ascites tumor cells. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., 286: 1333-1340, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Pressacco J., Wiley J. S., Jamieson G. P., Erlichman C., Hedley D. W. Modulation of the equilibrative nucleoside transporter by inhibitors of DNA synthesis. Br. J. Cancer, 72: 939-942, 1995.[Medline]
-
Pressacco J., Mitrovski B., Erlichman C., Hedley D. W. Effects of thymidylate synthase inhibition on thymidine kinase activity and nucleoside transporter expression. Cancer Res., 55: 1505-1508, 1995.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Cass C. E. Nucleoside transport Georgopapadakou N. H. eds. . Antimicrobial and Anticancer Chemotherapy, : 403-451, Marcel Dekker, Inc. New York 1995.
-
Griffith D. A., Jarvis S. M. Nucleoside and nucleobase transport systems of mammalian cells. Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1286: 153-181, 1996.[Medline]
-
Belardinelli L., Linden J., Berne R. M. The cardiac effects of adenosine. Prog. Cardiovasc. Dis., 32: 73-97, 1989.[Medline]
-
In: K. A. Jacobson, J. W. Daly, and V. Manganiello (eds.), Purines in Cellular Signalling: Targets for New Drugs, pp. 2032. New York: Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., 1990.
-
Cass C. E., Young J. D., Baldwin S. A. Recent advances in the molecular biology of nucleoside transporters of mammalian cells. Biochem. Cell Biol., 76: 761-770, 1998.[Medline]
-
Belt J. A., Harper E. H., Byl J. A., Noel L. D. Sodium-dependent nucleoside transport in human myeloid leukemic cell lines and freshly isolated myeloblasts. Proc. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res., 33: 20 1992.
-
Huang Q. Q., Yao S. Y. M., Ritzel M. W. L., Paterson A. R. P., Cass C. E., Young J. D. Cloning and functional expression of a complementary DNA encoding a mammalian nucleoside transport protein. J. Biol. Chem., 269: 17757-17760, 1994.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Ritzel M. W., Yao S. Y., Huang M. Y., Elliott J. F., Cass C. E., Young J. D. Molecular cloning and functional expression of cDNAs encoding a human Na+-nucleoside cotransporter (hCNT1). Am. J. Physiol., 272: 707-714, 1997.
-
Mackey J. R., Mani R. S., Selner M., Mowles D., Young J. D., Belt J. A., Crawford C. R., Cass C. E. Functional nucleoside transporters are required for gemcitabine influx and manifestation of toxicity in cancer cell lines. Cancer Res., 58: 4349-4357, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Hammond J. R. Comparative pharmacology of the nitrobenzylthiguanosine-sensitive and -resistant nucleoside transport mechanisms of Ehrlich ascites tumor cells. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., 259: 799-807, 1991.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Nottebrock H., Then R. Thymidine concentrations in serum and urine of different animal species and man. Biochem. Pharmacol., 26: 2175-2179, 1977.[Medline]
-
Patil S. D., Unadkat J. D. Sodium-dependent nucleoside transport in the human intestinal brush-border membrane. Am. J. Physiol., 272: 1314-1320, 1997.
-
Belt J. A., Marina N. M., Phelps D. A., Crawford C. R. Nucleoside transport in normal and neoplastic cells. Adv. Enzyme Regul., 33: 235-252, 1993.[Medline]
-
Jamieson G. P., Brocklebank A. M., Snook M. B., Sawyer W. H., Buolamwini J. K., Paterson A. R. P., Wiley J. S. Flow cytometric quantitation of nucleoside transport sites in human leukemic cells. Cytometry, 14: 32-38, 1993.[Medline]
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. Sugiyama, N. Kaniwa, S.-R. Kim, R. Kikura-Hanajiri, R. Hasegawa, K. Maekawa, Y. Saito, S. Ozawa, J.-i. Sawada, N. Kamatani, et al.
Pharmacokinetics of Gemcitabine in Japanese Cancer Patients: The Impact of a Cytidine Deaminase Polymorphism
J. Clin. Oncol.,
January 1, 2007;
25(1):
32 - 42.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. Bepler, I. Kusmartseva, S. Sharma, A. Gautam, A. Cantor, A. Sharma, and G. Simon
RRM1 Modulated In Vitro and In Vivo Efficacy of Gemcitabine and Platinum in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer
J. Clin. Oncol.,
October 10, 2006;
24(29):
4731 - 4737.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. Giovannetti, V. Mey, S. Nannizzi, G. Pasqualetti, M. Del Tacca, and R. Danesi
Pharmacogenetics of anticancer drug sensitivity in pancreatic cancer.
Mol. Cancer Ther.,
June 1, 2006;
5(6):
1387 - 1395.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
V. Sebastiani, F. Ricci, B. Rubio-Viquiera, P. Kulesza, C. J. Yeo, M. Hidalgo, A. Klein, D. Laheru, and C. A. Iacobuzio-Donahue
Immunohistochemical and Genetic Evaluation of Deoxycytidine Kinase in Pancreatic Cancer: Relationship to Molecular Mechanisms of Gemcitabine Resistance and Survival
Clin. Cancer Res.,
April 15, 2006;
12(8):
2492 - 2497.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. Giovannetti, M. Del Tacca, V. Mey, N. Funel, S. Nannizzi, S. Ricci, C. Orlandini, U. Boggi, D. Campani, M. Del Chiaro, et al.
Transcription analysis of human equilibrative nucleoside transporter-1 predicts survival in pancreas cancer patients treated with gemcitabine.
Cancer Res.,
April 1, 2006;
66(7):
3928 - 3935.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. Giovannetti, V. Mey, S. Nannizzi, G. Pasqualetti, L. Marini, M. Del Tacca, and R. Danesi
Cellular and Pharmacogenetics Foundation of Synergistic Interaction of Pemetrexed and Gemcitabine in Human Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Cells
Mol. Pharmacol.,
July 1, 2005;
68(1):
110 - 118.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Akada, T. Crnogorac-Jurcevic, S. Lattimore, P. Mahon, R. Lopes, M. Sunamura, S. Matsuno, and N. R. Lemoine
Intrinsic Chemoresistance to Gemcitabine Is Associated with Decreased Expression of BNIP3 in Pancreatic Cancer
Clin. Cancer Res.,
April 15, 2005;
11(8):
3094 - 3101.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
L. A. Huxham, A. H. Kyle, J. H. E. Baker, L. K. Nykilchuk, and A. I. Minchinton
Microregional Effects of Gemcitabine in HCT-116 Xenografts
Cancer Res.,
September 15, 2004;
64(18):
6537 - 6541.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
W.-P. Lee, D.-I. Tai, S.-L. Tsai, C.-T. Yeh, Y. Chao, S.-D. Lee, and M.-C. Hung
Adenovirus Type 5 E1A Sensitizes Hepatocellular Carcinoma Cells to Gemcitabine
Cancer Res.,
October 1, 2003;
63(19):
6229 - 6236.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. W. Blackstock, H. Lightfoot, L. D. Case, J. E. Tepper, S. K. Mukherji, B. S. Mitchell, S. G. Swarts, and S. M. Hess
Tumor Uptake and Elimination of 2',2'-Difluoro-2'-deoxycytidine (Gemcitabine) after Deoxycytidine Kinase Gene Transfer: Correlation with in Vivo Tumor Response
Clin. Cancer Res.,
October 1, 2001;
7(10):
3263 - 3268.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|