title: Cellular studies reveal mechanistic differences between taccalonolide A and paclitaxel.
abstract: Taccalonolide A is a microtubule stabilizer that has cellular effects almost identical to paclitaxel. However, biochemical studies show that, unlike paclitaxel, taccalonolide A does not enhance purified tubulin polymerization or bind tubulin/microtubules. Mechanistic studies aimed at understanding the nature of the differences between taccalonolide A and paclitaxel were conducted. Our results show that taccalonolide A causes bundling of interphase microtubules at concentrations that cause antiproliferative effects. In contrast, the concentration of paclitaxel that initiates microtubule bundling is 31-fold higher than its IC 50. Taccalonolide A's effects are further differentiated from paclitaxel in that it is unable to enhance the polymerization of tubulin in cellular extracts. This finding extends previous biochemical results with purified brain tubulin to demonstrate that taccalonolide A requires more than tubulin and a full complement of cytosolic proteins to cause microtubule stabilization. Reversibility studies were conducted and show that the cellular effects of taccalonolide A persist after drug washout. In contrast, other microtubule stabilizers, including paclitaxel and laulimalide, demonstrate a much higher degree of cellular reversibility in both short-term proliferation and long-term clonogenic assays.   The propensity of taccalonolide A to alter interphase microtubules at antiproliferative concentrations as well as its high degree of cellular persistence may explain why taccalonolide A is more potent in vivo than would be expected from cellular studies. The close linkage between the microtubule bundling and antiproliferative effects of taccalonolide A is of interest given the recent hypothesis that the effects of microtubule targeting agents on interphase microtubules might play a prominent role in their clinical anticancer efficacy.
authors: Department of Pharmacology, University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, TX, USA.
authors: April L
authors: AL
authors: Risinger
authors: Susan L
authors: SL
authors: Mooberry
references: Chem Biol. 2005 Dec;12(12):1269-79
references: 16356844
references: Toxicol In Vitro. 2006 Mar;20(2):163-75
references: 16271446
references: Cancer Res. 2008 Nov 1;68(21):8881-8
references: 18974132
references: Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2010 Sep;9(9):677-8
references: 20811375
references: Methods Enzymol. 1986;134:116-27
references: 2881189
references: Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2011 Feb 01;8(4):244-50
references: 21283127
references: J Natl Cancer Inst. 1990 Jul 4;82(13):1107-12
references: 2359136
references: Ann Oncol. 2007 Jul;18 Suppl 5:v3-8
references: 17656560
references: J Cell Biol. 1982 Feb;92(2):435-42
references: 6120944
references: Curr Biol. 2007 Oct 23;17(20):1765-70
references: 17919908
references: Nature. 1995 Jun 1;375(6530):424-7
references: 7760939
references: Cancer Res. 2001 Feb 1;61(3):1013-21
references: 11221827
references: Chem Biol. 2010 Jul 30;17(7):725-34
references: 20659685
references: Clin Cancer Res. 2009 Mar 1;15(5):1612-22
references: 19223496
references: J Cell Biol. 1975 Jul;66(1):188-93
references: 49354
references: Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2010 Oct;9(10):790-803
references: 20885410
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Apr 13;96(8):4256-61
references: 10200249
references: Cancer Biol Ther. 2006 Jan;5(1):22-7
references: 16357512
references: Ann Oncol. 2007 Dec;18 Suppl 12:xii15-20
references: 18083698
references: Clin Cancer Res. 2008 Nov 15;14(22):7167-72
references: 19010832
references: Cancer Res. 2011 Jan 15;71(2):496-505
references: 21127197
references: Cancer Res. 2003 Jun 15;63(12):3211-20
references: 12810650