It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has reactive stroma that promotes tumor signaling, fibrosis, inflammation, and hypoxia, which activates HIF-1α to increase tumor cell metastasis and therapeutic resistance. Carbonic anhydrase IX (CA9) stabilizes intracellular pH following induction by HIF-1α. Redox effector factor-1 (APE1/Ref-1) is a multifunctional protein with redox signaling activity that converts certain oxidized transcription factors to a reduced state, enabling them to upregulate tumor-promoting genes. Our studies evaluate PDAC hypoxia responses and APE1/Ref-1 redox signaling contributions to HIF-1α-mediated CA9 transcription. Our previous studies implicated this pathway in PDAC cell survival under hypoxia. We expand those studies, comparing drug responses using patient-derived PDAC cells displaying differential hypoxic responses in 3D spheroid tumor-stroma models to characterize second generation APE1/Ref-1 redox signaling and CA9 inhibitors. Our data demonstrates that HIF-1α-mediated CA9 induction differs between patient-derived PDAC cells and that APE1/Ref-1 redox inhibition attenuates this induction by decreasing hypoxia-induced HIF-1 DNA binding. Dual-targeting of APE1/Ref-1 and CA9 in 3D spheroids demonstrated that this combination effectively kills PDAC tumor cells displaying drastically different levels of CA9. New APE1/Ref-1 and CA9 inhibitors were significantly more potent alone and in combination, highlighting the potential of combination therapy targeting the APE1-Ref-1 signaling axis with significant clinical potential.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details

1 Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Indianapolis, IN, USA
2 Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Wells Center for Pediatric Research, Indianapolis, IN, USA
3 University of Florence, Neurofarba Department, Section of Medicinal Chemistry, Florence, Italy
4 Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Nephrology, Indianapolis, IN, USA
5 Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
6 Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Indianapolis, IN, USA; Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Wells Center for Pediatric Research, Indianapolis, IN, USA; Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Indianapolis, IN, USA
7 Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Indianapolis, IN, USA; Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Wells Center for Pediatric Research, Indianapolis, IN, USA