Salicylate, diflunisal and their metabolites inhibit CBP/p300 and exhibit anticancer activity

  1. Kotaro Shirakawa
  2. Lan Wang
  3. Na Man
  4. Jasna Maksimoska
  5. Alexander W Sorum
  6. Hyung W Lim
  7. Intelly S Lee
  8. Tadahiro Shimazu
  9. John C Newman
  10. Sebastian Schröder
  11. Melanie Ott
  12. Ronen Marmorstein
  13. Jordan Meier
  14. Stephen Nimer
  15. Eric Verdin  Is a corresponding author
  1. Gladstone Institutes, United States
  2. University of Miami, United States
  3. University of Pennsylvania, United States
  4. National Cancer Institute, United States

Abstract

Salicylate and acetylsalicylic acid are potent and widely used anti-inflammatory drugs. They are thought to exert their therapeutic effects through multiple mechanisms, including the inhibition of cyclo-oxygenases, modulation of NF-κB activity, and direct activation of AMPK. However, the full spectrum of their activities is incompletely understood. Here we show that salicylate specifically inhibits CBP and p300 lysine acetyltransferase activity in vitro by direct competition with acetyl-Coenzyme A at the catalytic site. We used a chemical structure-similarity search to identify another anti-inflammatory drug, diflunisal, that inhibits p300 more potently than salicylate. At concentrations attainable in human plasma after oral administration, both salicylate and diflunisal blocked the acetylation of lysine residues on histone and non-histone proteins in cells. Finally, we found that diflunisal suppressed the growth of p300-dependent leukemia cell lines expressing AML1-ETO fusion protein in vitro and in vivo. These results highlight a novel epigenetic regulatory mechanism of action for salicylate and derivative drugs.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Kotaro Shirakawa

    Gladstone Institutes, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Lan Wang

    University of Miami, Gables, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Na Man

    University of Miami, Gables, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Jasna Maksimoska

    Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Alexander W Sorum

    Chemical Biology Laboratory, National Cancer Institute, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Hyung W Lim

    Gladstone Institutes, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Intelly S Lee

    Gladstone Institutes, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Tadahiro Shimazu

    Gladstone Institutes, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. John C Newman

    Gladstone Institutes, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Sebastian Schröder

    Gladstone Institutes, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Melanie Ott

    Gladstone Institutes, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Ronen Marmorstein

    Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Jordan Meier

    Chemical Biology Laboratory, National Cancer Institute, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Stephen Nimer

    University of Miami, Gables, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Eric Verdin

    Gladstone Institutes, San Francisco, United States
    For correspondence
    everdin@gladstone.ucsf.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Copyright

© 2016, Shirakawa et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 4,774
    views
  • 1,206
    downloads
  • 59
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Kotaro Shirakawa
  2. Lan Wang
  3. Na Man
  4. Jasna Maksimoska
  5. Alexander W Sorum
  6. Hyung W Lim
  7. Intelly S Lee
  8. Tadahiro Shimazu
  9. John C Newman
  10. Sebastian Schröder
  11. Melanie Ott
  12. Ronen Marmorstein
  13. Jordan Meier
  14. Stephen Nimer
  15. Eric Verdin
(2016)
Salicylate, diflunisal and their metabolites inhibit CBP/p300 and exhibit anticancer activity
eLife 5:e11156.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.11156

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.11156

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Susanne Tilk, Judith Frydman ... Dmitri A Petrov
    Research Article

    In asexual populations that don’t undergo recombination, such as cancer, deleterious mutations are expected to accrue readily due to genome-wide linkage between mutations. Despite this mutational load of often thousands of deleterious mutations, many tumors thrive. How tumors survive the damaging consequences of this mutational load is not well understood. Here, we investigate the functional consequences of mutational load in 10,295 human tumors by quantifying their phenotypic response through changes in gene expression. Using a generalized linear mixed model (GLMM), we find that high mutational load tumors up-regulate proteostasis machinery related to the mitigation and prevention of protein misfolding. We replicate these expression responses in cancer cell lines and show that the viability in high mutational load cancer cells is strongly dependent on complexes that degrade and refold proteins. This indicates that the upregulation of proteostasis machinery is causally important for high mutational burden tumors and uncovers new therapeutic vulnerabilities.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Cell Biology
    Kourosh Hayatigolkhatmi, Chiara Soriani ... Simona Rodighiero
    Tools and Resources

    Understanding the cell cycle at the single-cell level is crucial for cellular biology and cancer research. While current methods using fluorescent markers have improved the study of adherent cells, non-adherent cells remain challenging. In this study, we addressed this gap by combining a specialized surface to enhance cell attachment, the FUCCI(CA)2 sensor, an automated image analysis pipeline, and a custom machine learning algorithm. This approach enabled precise measurement of cell cycle phase durations in non-adherent cells. This method was validated in acute myeloid leukemia cell lines NB4 and Kasumi-1, which have unique cell cycle characteristics, and we tested the impact of cell cycle-modulating drugs on NB4 cells. Our cell cycle analysis system, which is also compatible with adherent cells, is fully automated and freely available, providing detailed insights from hundreds of cells under various conditions. This report presents a valuable tool for advancing cancer research and drug development by enabling comprehensive, automated cell cycle analysis in both adherent and non-adherent cells.