IT WAS 25 YEARS AGO that the war against cancer was officially launched by President Nixon. The ensuing investment in the study of cancer has been a major engine driving the current revolution in cell and molecular biology. Yet, the clinical rewards have been less than remarkable. This runs the danger of raising the level of skepticism among the public and may erode the level of support, just when it is needed most to effect a translation of the accomplishments of basic research into the fruits of clinical medicine.

Over the last 3 to 5 decades, the treatment of cancer has relied primarily on the use of various forms of cytotoxic chemotherapy and radiation therapy. These interventions have had profound positive results on many hematologic malignancies and a few solid tumors, especially germ cell and some childhood malignancies. However, the most prevalent of malignancies have proved to be more or less resistant to these interventions. Dose escalation using high-dose chemotherapy may have resulted in a modest improvement in responses but has not constituted a breakthrough. In all these cases, the effectiveness of cytotoxic treatments has been limited by the side effects of these agents on normal tissues and cells, even with the successful attempts of reducing these toxicities using various forms of supportive measures (such as bone marrow rescue, antibiotics, antiemetics, and growth factor support).

On the other hand, recent accomplishments in the understanding of mechanisms of growth regulation, stress response, and the action of several cytotoxic agents may allow us to begin to develop a conceptual framework for pursuing cancer chemotherapy at the cell and molecular level. This may then translate into a goal-directed and rational approach to cancer treatment.

Indeed, accruing evidence obtained in the last few years is beginning to establish that many (and perhaps all) agents of cancer chemotherapy effect tumor cell killing in vitro and in vivo through launching the mechanisms of apoptosis (or programmed cell death). These lines of investigation have provided significant insight into the mechanisms involved in cell death in general and tumor cell death more specifically. Such insight may allow the identification of novel targets and the development of more specific chemotherapeutic agents that are designed to launch specifically the apoptotic machinery of the cell. Paradoxically, the realization that chemotherapeutic agents (and possibly ionizing irradiation) are effective primarily because they activate apoptosis raises the concern that tumors that are intrinsically resistant to chemotherapy are unable to activate the apoptotic machinery and may therefore be fundamentally resistant to chemotherapeutic cell death.

This review will highlight the recent developments in the field of apoptosis in general (especially at the mechanistic level), provide evidence linking chemotherapy-induced cell death and apoptosis, formulate a hypothesis for cancer chemotherapy, and conclude with a discussion of the ramifications of such a formulation for the future development of cancer chemotherapy.

APOPTOSIS: DEFINITIONS AND MECHANISMS

The History and Biology of Apoptosis

Apoptosis has become one of the hottest areas of cell biology research, probably because of the belated realization that cell death is a biochemically regulated process that may be as complex as other fundamental biological processes. The existence of various forms of cell death involving tissues and cells was recognized in the 19th century, although it never received primary attention.1 Programmed forms of cell death have also been recognized in the field of botany, but it has been labeled mostly as senescence. In 1970, Wyllie and Kerr formalized the existence of a human form of cell death distinct from necrosis that they termed apoptosis.2,3 Apoptosis received its primary boost with the identification of internucleosomal DNA breakdown during apoptosis and not necrosis.2 Because this form of DNA breakdown suggested the action of an endonuclease, this singular finding may have convinced many investigators that apoptosis is the manifestation or outcome of biochemical processes.

Apoptosis is now recognized as a mechanistically driven form of cell death that is either developmentally regulated,3 launched in response to specific stimuli (such as the cytokines tumor necrosis factor α or the fas ligand),4,5 or activated in response to various forms of cell injury or stress.6,7 In developmental biology, programmed cell death is responsible for eliminating superfluous or redundant precursor or mature cells. For example, in immunobiology, apoptosis accounts for the elimination of self-reacting lymphocytes.8 Apoptosis also appears to play an important role in tissue remodeling and reaction to the environment whereby unnecessary cells may undergo cell death to allow the growth and differentiation of cells that are better geared to deal with the changing environmental demands.3 In cancer biology, it is becoming increasingly apparent that many cancer cells circumvent the normal apoptotic mechanisms to prevent their self-destruction, which would have been indicated because of the many mutations they may harbor.9,10 Indeed, disarming apoptosis and other surveillance mechanisms may be of fundamental significance in allowing the development of the malignant and metastatic phenotype.

Mechanisms of Apoptosis

In the 1980s, two major endogenous regulators of apoptosis were identified. Although initially identified as an oncoprotein, it soon became clear that the wild-type p53 protein functioned as an inducer of cell death, especially in response to DNA damaging events.11-13 Reciprocally, studies on the Bcl-2 oncogene led to the identification of an important antiapoptotic function for this protein that therefore gave survival advantage to lymphomas that overexpressed the protein product.14,15 Bcl-2 is now appreciated to belong to a family of related and interacting molecules such as Bax, Bcl-x, Bad, Bag, Bak, and Bik, some of which are antiapoptotic, whereas other members of the family, such as Bax, display pro-apoptotic function.15-17 

In independent lines of investigation, investigators determined the existence of specific genes that regulate cell death during the development of Caenorhabditis elegans, including a homologue of Bcl-2 and a protease that is a member of the interleukin-converting enzyme (ICE) family of cysteine proteases.18,19 These key developments appear to have convinced the scientific community that apoptosis and cell death are regulated outcomes. As a consequence, an intensive effort has been applied in the recent past aimed at defining mechanisms involved in the initiation and execution of cell death. These intensive efforts have resulted in a flurry of activity and a wealth of information as well as the realization that this is a complex process with many as yet undiscovered components and processes that ultimately regulate apoptosis. There are numerous reviews2,3,6-10,14,15,20-28 that cover various aspects of apoptosis, its historical development, components involved in apoptosis, and mechanisms regulating apoptosis.

Mechanisms regulating cell death are perhaps best exemplified in cytokine-induced apoptosis (Fig 1). For example, both tumor necrosis factor α and the Fas ligand cause the death of certain malignant and normal cells. Activation of the receptors for these cytokines launches an intracellular pathway through specific proteins29,30 that interact with these receptors (FADD, TRADD, and others). These proteins appear to couple to a protease (MACH/FLICE), and activation of this protease propagates the apoptotic signal.31,32 A component of this pathway includes sphingomyelinases that act on membrane sphingomyelin and cause the release of the lipid mediator ceramide.33,34 Ceramide may then cause the activation of downstream proteases that, in turn, seem to launch the final phase of apoptosis. This phase involves the breakdown of several macromolecules including DNA and proteins, fragmentation of organelles, and packaging of the cellular debris into apoptotic bodies that are then engulfed by phagocytic cells. Through as yet unidentified mechanisms, Bcl-2 appears to interfere with the activation of the distal proteases,35,36 whereas p53 seems to launch a more proximal component of this pathway. Obviously, major gaps exist in connecting the different components of this scheme and in defining the relative contribution of these components. Nevertheless, this is a very promising beginning towards unraveling the regulation of this important process.

Fig. 1.

Scheme for induction of apoptosis in response to the cytokines tumor necrosis factor α and the Fas (APO-1) ligand. Both cytokines bind to specific membrane receptors (such as TNFR and Fas) and allow for the interaction of the receptors with specific proteins (such as TRADD and FADD/MORT). This may result in activation of a protease (Mach/Flice) that somehow launches the apoptotic response. Downstream mediators of this response may include sphingomyelinase causing the accumulation of ceramide, phospholipase A2 with accumulation of arachidonate, and other mediators such the Fast kinase.94 Eventually, this results in activation of downstream proteases such as prICE/CPP-32, which cleaves PARP and possibly other protein substrates. This then appears to induce the terminal and irreversible phase of apoptosis characterized by macromolecular breakdown and cellular fragmentation.

Fig. 1.

Scheme for induction of apoptosis in response to the cytokines tumor necrosis factor α and the Fas (APO-1) ligand. Both cytokines bind to specific membrane receptors (such as TNFR and Fas) and allow for the interaction of the receptors with specific proteins (such as TRADD and FADD/MORT). This may result in activation of a protease (Mach/Flice) that somehow launches the apoptotic response. Downstream mediators of this response may include sphingomyelinase causing the accumulation of ceramide, phospholipase A2 with accumulation of arachidonate, and other mediators such the Fast kinase.94 Eventually, this results in activation of downstream proteases such as prICE/CPP-32, which cleaves PARP and possibly other protein substrates. This then appears to induce the terminal and irreversible phase of apoptosis characterized by macromolecular breakdown and cellular fragmentation.

CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY AND APOPTOSIS

Chemotherapeutic Agents Kill Susceptible Cells by Apoptosis

In a landmark study investigating the mechanism of action of etoposide (an inhibitor of topoisomerase II) and other chemotherapeutic agents, it was found that etoposide, early on, induced internucleosomal DNA fragmentation.37 This observation raised the possibility that etoposide caused apoptotic cell death. Since then, the spectrum of chemotherapeutic agents causing apoptosis has expanded progressively, and the evidence supporting the role of apoptosis in chemotherapy action continues to accumulate. The chemotherapeutic agents that have thus far been identified as apoptosis-inducing include etoposide, VM26, m-AMSA, dexamethasone, vincristine, cis-platinum, cyclophosphamide, paclitaxel, 5′-fluoro-deoxyuridine, 5′-fluorouracil, and adriamycin37-41 (Table 1). These apoptotic effects have been observed in several cell lines in tissue culture, including normal thymocytes, lymphoma cells, ovarian epithelial tumors, leukemia cells, adenocarcinoma cells, and others. In addition, tumor hypoxia, ionizing radiation, and hormone withdrawal in hormone-dependent tumors have been shown to cause apoptosis.42-47 The occurrence of apoptosis has been documented by morphologic criteria, the occurrence of endonucleosomal DNA breakdown, flow cytometric analysis of DNA content, and other criteria. The reader is referred to multiple reviews that document the ability of chemotherapeutic interventions to cause apoptosis.9,14,48-50 

Table 1.

Cancer Therapy and Apoptosis

Some Agents Associated With Apoptosis Cancer Types Susceptible to Apoptosis 
   
Etoposide Camptothecin Lymphoma 
VM26 Hydroxyurea Leukemia 
m-AMSA Ara-C Breast carcinoma 
Dexamethasone 5-Azacytidine Ovarian carcinoma 
Vincristine Nitrogen Mustard Colon carcinoma 
cis-Platinum Methotrexate Prostate cancer 
Cyclophosphamide Chlorambucil Miscellaneous adenocarcinomas 
Adriamycin Bleomycin Seminoma 
Paclitaxel BCNU Malignant glioma 
5′-Flourouracil Actinomycin D  
5′-Flouro-deoxyuridine Melphalan  
Ionizing radiation 
Hyperthermia 
Hormone withdrawal 
Some Agents Associated With Apoptosis Cancer Types Susceptible to Apoptosis 
   
Etoposide Camptothecin Lymphoma 
VM26 Hydroxyurea Leukemia 
m-AMSA Ara-C Breast carcinoma 
Dexamethasone 5-Azacytidine Ovarian carcinoma 
Vincristine Nitrogen Mustard Colon carcinoma 
cis-Platinum Methotrexate Prostate cancer 
Cyclophosphamide Chlorambucil Miscellaneous adenocarcinomas 
Adriamycin Bleomycin Seminoma 
Paclitaxel BCNU Malignant glioma 
5′-Flourouracil Actinomycin D  
5′-Flouro-deoxyuridine Melphalan  
Ionizing radiation 
Hyperthermia 
Hormone withdrawal 

Other studies are also beginning to provide evidence that chemotherapeutic agents induce apoptotic tumor cell death in vivo. For example, a retinoic acid-treated T-cell lymphoma was shown to undergo apoptosis in vivo.51 In a study of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, it was shown that both radiation and chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil, cis-platinum, and bleomycin) induced apoptotic cell death in vivo, as determined by examination of biopsy specimens.52 In an experimental study in murine tumors, evidence was also provided that cis-platinum, cyclophosphamide, and other chemotherapeutic agents caused apoptosis in several in vivo tumors, including adenocarcinoma, lymphoma, sarcomas, and squamous cell carcinomas.53 (Although not all agents caused apoptosis in all the tumors.) Similarly, in a study of murine mammary adenocarcinoma and ovarian carcinoma, it was observed that cyclophosphamide treatment increased apoptosis in these tumors.54 Antileukemic therapy (including etoposide, m-AMSA, and cytosine arabinoside) caused apoptotic cell death in patients undergoing chemotherapy for acute leukemia.55 

Mechanisms of Chemotherapy-Induced Apoptosis

With the developing understanding of mechanisms regulating apoptosis, it is becoming increasingly clear that chemotherapeutic agents operate through similar mechanisms. Indeed, some of the insight into mechanisms regulating apoptosis has come from the examination of chemotherapy-induced death. This is best illustrated again with the case of etoposide in which Kaufmann et al56 identified proteolytic cleavage of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) in response to etoposide. Subsequent studies indicated that this was a result of activation of a specific protease and that it preceded endonuclease activation and DNA fragmentation.57 This PARP protease has evolved as a centerpiece in the study of apoptotic mechanisms, and it has been cloned by several investigators and has been given several names, including CPP-32, prICE, Yama, and apopain.58-60 It now appears that many inducers of cell death, including cytokines and other chemotherapeutic agents, ultimately converge on the activation of this and related proteases, which then appear to launch the terminal and execution stages of apoptosis (Fig 1).

Another convincing set of data supporting the role of apoptosis in chemotherapy action has come from studies on the interaction of chemotherapeutic agents with modulators of apoptosis. Bcl-2 overexpression has been shown to inhibit apoptosis in vitro in response to several chemotherapeutic agents, including etoposide, methylmethanesulfonate, N′-methyl-N′-nitrosourea, dexamethasone, camptothecin, doxorubicin, 4-hydroxyperoxy-cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and actinomycin D.14,61-67 In addition, the level of expression of Bcl-2 in clinical tissue samples has been correlated with disease prognosis in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma,68 but not in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia.69 On the other hand, reduced expression of Bax, a pro-apoptotic homologue of Bcl-2, was found to be associated with poor response to combination chemotherapy and worse survival in patients with metastatic breast carcinoma.70 In addition, many chemotherapeutic agents, such as cytosine arabinoside, vincristine, daunorubicin, and ionizing radiation, have been shown to cause accumulation of ceramide.71-74 In the case of ionizing radiation, it has been shown recently that this may involve activation of an acidic sphingomyelinase and that mice lacking this enzyme acquire resistance to radiation-induced apoptosis in the lung.75 

Other modulators of apoptosis have also been shown to interact with chemotherapy-induced cell death. For example, the cytotoxicity of several chemotherapeutic agents, including vincristine, adriamycin, cytosine arabinoside, and cyclophosphamide, has been shown to be inhibited by hematopoietic growth factors such as granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, or interleukin-6.76 Disruption of p53 protects breast carcinoma cells from platinum-induced death,77,78 and BCR-ABL protects from apoptosis induced by a variety of chemotherapeutic agents.79 The Epstein-Barr viral protein BHRF1, which shows structural80 and functional81 homology to Bcl-2, was shown to protect against cell death induced by etoposide and cis-platinum,82 and the expression of bcl-x was shown to modulate drug sensitivity of breast cancer neuroblastoma83,84 and prolymphocytic85 cells. The oncogenes H-ras and MDM2 were shown to confer resistance to chemotherapy-induced apoptosis in rhabdomyosarcoma and glioblastoma, respectively.86,87 Safingol, an inhibitor of protein kinase C (which is usually associated with a viability response), was found to potentiate the ability of Mitomycin C to kill gastric cancer cells.88 

These in vitro and in vivo studies, coupled with the mechanistic insight evolving on the regulation of chemotherapy-induced cell death, clearly show the induction of apoptosis by several chemotherapeutic agents in different cell lines and tumors. On the other hand, it has not yet been ascertained what fraction of tumor cell death is effected through apoptotic mechanisms. Determining this fraction may not be trivial, but it could underscore the extent of apoptosis and its significance in chemotherapy-induced death. (It is anticipated that the more we learn about chemotherapy-induced cell death, the more we will appreciate the extent and significance of apoptosis in mediating chemotherapy-induced cytotoxicity.)

HYPOTHESIS AND RAMIFICATIONS

If, indeed, various agents of cancer chemotherapy act primarily through the induction of apoptotic cell death in susceptible cancer cells, then how can we reconcile the existence of distinct targets for these disparate chemotherapeutic agents with the more or less unifying concept of apoptosis?

Hypothesis

The simplest, yet most encompassing, hypothesis (Fig 2) proposes that each chemotherapeutic agent interacts with a specific target causing dysfunction and injury, which is then interpreted by susceptible cancer cells as an instruction to undergo apoptosis. Thus, we may consider that chemotherapy-induced cell death proceeds through three distinct general phases. (1) Phase I: an insult-generating mechanism. In this phase, each class of chemotherapeutic agents interacts with a specific target such as DNA, RNA, and microtubules and the action of these agents on their respective targets causes target injury or dysfunction. (2) Phase II: signal transduction. In this phase, the cell, through yet poorly defined mechanisms, is able to decipher and assess the specific injury to the chemotherapy target. For example, DNA-damaging agents may use the c-Abl tyrosine kinase to induce cell cycle arrest in a p53-dependent mechanism.89 Treatment of some T-cell leukemia lines with doxorubicin results in upregulation of the ligand to the Fas receptor, which may mediate the ability of doxorubicin to kill these cells.90 Such a mechanism may account for the sensitivity of leukemia cells to chemotherapy. As described in the previous section, the existence of such mechanisms for transducing cell death in response to cytokines is becoming increasingly appreciated and defined, and further studies should clarify the mechanisms involved in transducing the apoptotic responses to chemotherapeutic agents. (3) Phase III: induction of apoptosis. In the third and final phase, a decision point may exist such that susceptible cells react to the signals generated in response to chemotherapy-induced injury as a go-ahead for the execution phase of apoptosis. For example, γ-radiation causes the induction of the pro-apoptotic Bax in radiosensitive but not in radio-resistant cells. This may drive cells to apoptosis.91 In this phase, the cells undergo the orderly breakdown of macromolecules through the operation of proteases, endonucleases, transglutaminases, and possibly lipases. Other cell types may preferentially execute programs of cell cycle arrest and damage repair in response to these same signals. Although such a decision point appears critical in imparting selectivity of responses to similar stimuli, little is known concerning its existence, components, or regulation.

Fig. 2.

Hypothesized phases in the induction of apoptosis in response to chemotherapeutic agents. In phase I, cytotoxic agents impart damage to a critical component of the cell such as DNA or microtubules. In phase II, the cell recognizes the damage and its degree of severity through poorly characterized signaling mechanisms. In phase III, the cell assesses the extent of damage and decides on the appropriate response. In many cancer cells, the preferred response is the induction of apoptosis, whereas in most normal cells and in many cancer cells, the response may involve growth arrest to allow for repair. It is also possible that certain cells may react to damage by undergoing senescence or terminal cell differentiation. Cancer cells may acquire resistance to apoptosis at several points in this pathway. For example, mutant p53 may impart resistance to DNA-damaging agents; mutations may exist in the signaling phase (phase II) or in the apoptotic phase III such as with mutant Bcl-2, mutant ras, or hyperactive protein kinase C (PKC).

Fig. 2.

Hypothesized phases in the induction of apoptosis in response to chemotherapeutic agents. In phase I, cytotoxic agents impart damage to a critical component of the cell such as DNA or microtubules. In phase II, the cell recognizes the damage and its degree of severity through poorly characterized signaling mechanisms. In phase III, the cell assesses the extent of damage and decides on the appropriate response. In many cancer cells, the preferred response is the induction of apoptosis, whereas in most normal cells and in many cancer cells, the response may involve growth arrest to allow for repair. It is also possible that certain cells may react to damage by undergoing senescence or terminal cell differentiation. Cancer cells may acquire resistance to apoptosis at several points in this pathway. For example, mutant p53 may impart resistance to DNA-damaging agents; mutations may exist in the signaling phase (phase II) or in the apoptotic phase III such as with mutant Bcl-2, mutant ras, or hyperactive protein kinase C (PKC).

Analogy: The Cell as a Highly Organized Factory Owned by a Large Multinational Company

A useful analogy would be to think of the cell as a highly efficient production facility with different components charged with specific functions (such as engines, batteries, software, etc). For the sake of high efficiency, the activities of these different components must be highly coordinated so that the final product is not seriously limited by any one component. This also ensures that energy is not wasted on overproduction of other components. This necessitates that the function and status of each component be monitored closely and that these monitoring systems interact and feed back into each other. According to this analogy, if one component receives an insult (such as a fire affecting the battery-producing facility), then the factory has to make a decision as to whether to slow down other production facilities to allow repair (analogous to cells undergoing cell cycle arrest to take care of DNA damage). If the injury is severe and leads to irreversible damage (complete burn down), then the decision may be to permanently close down the production facility and move viable functions to other existing and better-suited production units so as to minimize the losses of the mother company (cells altruistically undergoing irreversible apoptosis for the sake of the tissue or organism).

Ramifications

This formulation suggests a number of ramifications that ultimately impact not only on how we perceive of cancer chemotherapy, but also, more importantly, on what we need to do to achieve a new level of success in cancer therapeutics.

New targets for chemotherapy.As discussed above, most chemotherapeutic agents in current practice appear to induce damage to a major component in the cell, ie, they appear to act in phase I of the proposed scheme (Fig 2). The first ramification suggested by the apoptosis hypothesis stipulates that cancer cell death may be effected by bypassing the initial targets of currently existing chemotherapeutic agents. That is, agents could be developed that either target phase II (ie, falsely signaling damage) or phase III (instructing the cell to undergo apoptosis directly). An advantage to this approach is that it may bypass many of the current hurdles and obstacles facing chemotherapeutic agents. This may be considered the mechanistic approach to cancer chemotherapy. Its development requires significantly more understanding of the various components of phases II and III and how they can be modulated therapeutically.

Why are some cancer cells prone to apoptosis?This component of the hypothesis suggests that most normal cells in the human body are intrinsically much more resistant to apoptosis than several cancer types. Indeed, some experimental evidence shows that diploid fibroblasts are more resistant to apoptosis and actually undergo cell cycle arrest in response to many of the agents that would cause leukemia and lymphoma cells to undergo apoptosis (M. Smyth and Y. Hannun, unpublished observations). This is also supported by the observation that activation of p53 fails to induce apoptosis in normal diploid fibroblasts; however, transformation of these cells renders them susceptible to apoptosis.92 Why are then some cancer cells more susceptible to apoptosis? Unfortunately, at this point in time very little is known concerning the mechanisms that determine whether a cell undergoes apoptosis, cell cycle arrest, or other responses to agents of injury. Understanding the biochemical and molecular bases for this decision making by the cell (Fig 2) could allow a better therapeutic window to drive more cancer cells into apoptosis while preserving normal cells. This would result in better selectivity for cancer chemotherapy.

It should also be noted that conceptualizing the rationale for the increased susceptibility of cancer cells to apoptosis is somewhat counterintuitive. Current understanding of molecular cancer pathogenesis suggests that cancers should be more resistant to apoptosis as a mechanism to escape self-elimination. This problem is revisited in the next section.

Why are most cancers resistant to apoptosis?The third ramification of this hypothesis concerns the issue of resistance. Why are certain tumor cells more intrinsically resistant to apoptosis? Are they more resistant than normal cells? And what can we do about it? The major contention of this hypothesis is that most solid tumors are intrinsically resistant to apoptosis in general and to chemotherapy-induced apoptosis in particular. These cancers may very well have disarmed regulatory mechanisms that survey damage or injury. This is supported by the frequent mutations in p53, which appears to play a critical role in the response to DNA damage. Other mutations may exist that also allow these cancer cells to escape suicide. If chemotherapeutic agents act primarily to induce apoptosis, then it becomes obvious that these cancer cells may be a priori resistant to cell death in response to these agents. If this is the case, then the hematologic and germ cell malignancies may be the exceptional malignancies. For some reason these cancers may have traded the increased susceptibility to apoptosis for some survival or growth advantage. What the era of cytotoxic chemotherapy may have accomplished is to segregate cancers into two groups: those that are prone to apoptosis and those that are resistant!

At this point in time it is not known if the resistant cancers have defects solely in phase II or also defects in phase III. By having defects in either phase II or III, these cells would be very resistant to any agent that acts in phase I. Therefore, pursuing classical cytotoxic chemotherapy would be a futile endeavor.

THE DILEMMA

Addressing these issues of resistance could either provide us with a rational approach to cancer therapy or it could present us with the insurmountable dilemma: many cancer cells are at least as intrinsically resistant to apoptosis as normal cells. There are no windows of opportunity to selectively kill cancer cells without killing the host tissues!

Let us consider a few possibilities as to what could make cancer cells resistant to chemotherapy (Fig 2).

(1) A cancer cell has a defect in one arm of induction of apoptosis, such as a mutation in p53, and the cell becomes resistant to activators of that arm (such as DNA-damaging agents). All other components of the apoptotic pathways are intact. This resistance could be overcome by using agents that either act on another arm in phase I or bypass the defect by acting further downstream. This is probably not a very common scenario because the cancers we need to deal with most are the ones that appear to be resistant to a variety of apoptosis-inducing agents.

(2) A cancer cell has one or more mutations or defects in the common signaling components of phase II, but otherwise the downstream apoptotic machinery is intact. This resistance can be overcome by developing agents that act later in phase II or in phase III. This would result in therapy based on apoptosis only.

(3) A cancer has a mutation or a change in a gene that provides a selective survival advantage (eg, overexpression of Bcl-2). If these blocks are undone or bypassed (eg, agents that downregulate or act downstream of Bcl-2), then the cancer cells can be killed. Indeed, antisense approaches to Bcl-2 (which attenuate the expression of Bcl-2) have been shown to relieve the block to apoptosis in leukemia cells with elevated expression of Bcl-2.93 Mutations in ras, which may confer resistance to chemotherapy,86 may be overcome by specific approaches that target the function of ras (such as inhibitors of prenylation of ras). Such approaches may result in combination chemotherapy with a cytotoxic agent coupled to a specific agent designed mechanistically for the particular cancer.

(4) The cancer cells have either a defect in the apoptotic machinery or are unable to respond to damage by undergoing apoptosis. The existence of such a defect may allow the selective killing of cancer cells if the defect is repaired or overcome. On the other hand, these cells may resemble normal cells in their intrinsic resistance to apoptosis: their decision process may be more similar to normal cells in that they may preferentially undergo cell cycle arrest or other nonapoptotic responses to damaging insults. In this case, selectivity over normal cells may not be achievable. Alternative strategies have to target treatments to the cancer cells specifically to avoid toxicity to normal cells (eg, antibody- or receptor-based targeting). A recent and promising example is the use of an engineered adenovirus that selectively replicates in and kills cells lacking a functional p53.95 

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS

There is an emerging realization that cancer chemotherapeutic agents act primarily by inducing cancer cell death through the mechanisms of apoptosis. This review has attempted to provide the foundation for this concept and develop it further with the aim of generating the next level of hypotheses and questions: (1) Does apoptosis account for all, or at least most, of the action of chemotherapeutic agents? (2) What are the intracellular mechanisms responsible for transducing the apoptotic signals generated by chemotherapeutic agents? (3) What are the general mechanisms operating in the induction of apoptosis (the mechanisms that operate with cytokines, injury, stress, irradiation, starvation, etc)? (4) Can we target directly the machinery of apoptosis in cancer cells and effect cancer cell death? (5) What makes some cancers (primarily leukemias and lymphomas) very prone to apoptosis? Is this peculiar to these malignancies or does it extend to other curable cancers? Can we use this knowledge to render resistant cancers sensitive? (6) What are the mechanisms that bestow on most solid tumors resistance to chemotherapy? Is it because of a generalized resistance to apoptosis? Can this be bypassed? (7) Can we find experimental windows of opportunity that allow us to induce cancer cell death selectively without killing normal cells?

These questions and hypotheses should provide a foundation for a rational approach towards cancer chemotherapy based on the premise that cancer cell death is a biochemically driven outcome that is subject to scientific understanding as well as rational targeting.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The author thanks Drs Miriam Smyth and Lina Obeid for their suggestions and the careful review of the manuscript and Rita Fortune for expert secretarial assistance.

Supported by the following grants: NIH-GM 43825, ACS CB-122, and DoD AIBS-516.

Address reprint requests to Yusuf A. Hannun, MD, Division of Medical Oncology, Program in Molecular Medicine, Box 3355, Departments of Medicine and Cell Biology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710.

REFERENCES

REFERENCES
1
Clarke
PGH
Clarke
S
Nineteenth century research on naturally occurring cell death and related phenomena.
Anat Embryol
193
1996
81
2
Kerr JFR, Harmon BV: Definition and incidence of apoptosis: An historical perspective, in Tomei LD, Cope FO (eds): Apoptosis: The Molecular Basis of Cell Death. Cold Spring Harbor, NY, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, 1991, p 5
3
Wyllie
AH
Kerr
JFR
Currie
AR
Cell death: The significance of apoptosis.
Int Rev Cytol
68
1992
251
4
Smith
CA
Farrah
T
Goodwin
RG
The TNF receptor superfamily of cellular and viral proteins: Activation, costimulation, and death.
Cell
76
1994
959
5
Nagata
S
Apoptosis regulated by a death factor and its receptor: Fas ligand and Fas.
Phil Trans R Soc Lond Biol
345
1994
281
6
Gerschenson
LE
Rotello
RJ
Apoptosis: A different type of cell death.
FASEB J
6
1992
2450
7
Michaelson J: The significance of cell death, in Tomei LD, Cope FO (eds): Apoptosis: The Molecular Basis of Cell Death. Cold Spring Harbor, NY, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, 1991, p 31
8
Carson
DA
Ribeiro
JM
Apoptosis and disease.
Lancet
341
1993
1251
9
Kerr
JFR
Winterford
CM
Harmon
BV
Apoptosis: Its significance in cancer and cancer therapy.
Cancer
73
1994
2013
10
Williams
GT
Programmed cell death: Apoptosis and oncogenesis.
Cell
65
1991
1097
11
Vogelstein
B
Kinzler
KW
p53 function and dysfunction.
Cell
70
1992
523
12
Oren
M
p53: The ultimate tumor suppressor gene?
FASEB J
6
1992
3169
13
Lane
DP
p53, guardian of the genome.
Nature
358
1992
15
14
Reed
JC
BCL-2: Prevention of apoptosis as a mechanism of drug resistance.
Hematol Oncol Clin North Am
9
1995
451
15
Korsmeyer
SJ
Yin
X-M
Oltvai
ZN
Veis-Novack
DJ
Linette
GP
Reactive oxygen species and the regulation of cell death by the Bcl-2 gene family.
Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Basis Dis
1271
1995
63
16
Yang
E
Zha
J
Jockel
J
Boise
LH
Thompson
CB
Korsmeyer
SJ
Bad, a heterodimeric partner for Bcl-xL and Bcl-2, displaces Bax and promotes cell death.
Cell
80
1995
285
17
Wang
HG
Takayama
S
Rapp
UR
Reed
JC
Bcl-2 interacting protein, BAG-1, binds to and activates the kinase Raf-1.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
93
1996
7063
18
Yuan
J
Shaham
S
Ledoux
S
Ellis
HM
Horvitz
HR
The C. elegans cell death gene ced-3 encodes a protein similar to mammalian interleukin-1β-converting enzyme.
Cell
75
1993
641
19
Hedgecock
EM
Salston
JE
Thomson
JN
Mutations affecting programmed cell death in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans.
Science
220
1983
1277
20
McConkey
DJ
Orrenius
S
Signal transduction pathways to apoptosis.
Trends Cell Biol
4
1994
370
21
Fesus
L
Davies
PJA
Piacentini
M
Apoptosis: Molecular mechanisms in programmed cell death.
Eur J Cell Biol
56
1991
170
22
Bursch
W
Kleine
L
Tenniswood
M
The biochemistry of cell death by apoptosis.
Biochem Cell Biol
68
1990
1071
23
Jacobson
MD
Evan
GI
Apoptosis: Breaking the ICE.
Curr Biol
4
1994
337
24
Hannun
YA
Obeid
LM
Ceramide: An intracellular signal for apoptosis.
Trends Biochem Sci
20
1995
73
25
Martin
SJ
Green
DR
Protease activation during apoptosis: Death by a thousand cuts?
Cell
82
1995
349
26
Lu
W
Andrieu
J-M
Apoptosis and HIV disease.
Nat Med
1
1995
386
27
Cohen
JJ
Al-Rubeai
M
Apoptosis-targeted therapies: The ‘next big thing’ in biotechnology?
Trends Biotechnol
13
1995
281
28
Jacobson
MD
Reactive oxygen species and programmed cell death.
Trends Biochem Sci
21
1996
83
29
Chinnaiyan
AM
Tepper
CG
Seldin
MF
O'Rourke
K
Kischkel
FC
Hellbardt
S
Krammer
PH
Peter
ME
Dixit
VM
FADD/MORT1 is a common mediator of CD95 (Fas/APO-1) and tumor necrosis factor receptor-induced apoptosis.
J Biol Chem
271
1996
4961
30
Hsu
H
Xiong
J
Goeddel
DV
The TNF receptor 1-associated protein TRADD signals cell death and NF-kappaB activation.
Cell
81
1995
495
31
Boldin
MP
Goncharov
TM
Goltsev
YV
Wallach
D
Involvement of MACH, a novel MORT1/FADD-interacting protease, in Fas/APO-1- and TNF receptor-induced cell death.
Cell
85
1996
803
32
Muzio
M
Chinnaiyan
AM
Kischkel
FC
O'Rourke
K
Shevchenko
A
Ni
J
Scaffidi
C
Bretz
JD
Zhang
M
Gentz
R
Mann
M
Krammer
PH
Peter
ME
Dixit
VM
FLICE, a novel FADD-homologous ICE/CED-3-like protease, is recruited to the CD 95 (Fas/APO-1) death-inducing signaling complex.
Cell
85
1996
817
33
Obeid
LM
Linardic
CM
Karolak
LA
Hannun
YA
Programmed cell death induced by ceramide.
Science
259
1993
1769
34
Obeid
LM
Hannun
YA
Ceramide: A stress signal and mediator of growth suppression and apoptosis.
J Cell Biochem
58
1995
191
35
Smyth
MJ
Perry
DK
Zhang
J
Poirier
GG
Hannun
YA
Obeid
LM
prICE: A downstream target for ceramide-induced apoptosis and for the inhibitory action of bcl-2.
Biochem J
316
1996
25
36
Chinnaiyan
AM
Orth
K
O'Rourke
K
Duan
HJ
Poirier
GG
Dixit
VM
Molecular ordering of the cell death pathway — Bcl-2 and Bcl-xL function upstream of the CED-3-like apoptotic proteases.
J Biol Chem
271
1996
4573
37
Kaufmann
S
Induction of endonucleolytic DNA cleavage in human acute myelogenous leukemia cells by etoposide, camptothecin, and other cytotoxic anticancer drugs: A cautionary note.
Cancer Res
49
1989
5870
38
Walker
PR
Smith
C
Youdale
T
Leblanc
J
Whitfield
JF
Sikorska
M
Topoisomerase II-reactive chemotherapeutic drugs induce apoptosis in thymocytes.
Cancer Res
51
1991
1078
39
Shinomiya
N
Shinomiya
M
Wakiyama
H
Katsura
Y
Rokutanda
M
Enhancement of CDDP cytotoxicity by caffeine is characterized by apoptotic cell death.
Exp Cell Res
210
1994
236
40
Havrilesky
LJ
Elbendary
A
Hurteau
JA
Whitaker
RS
Rodriguez
GC
Berchuck
A
Chemotherapy-induced apoptosis in epithelial ovarian cancers.
Obstet Gynecol
85
1995
1007
41
Huschtscha
LI
Bartier
WA
Ross
CEA
Tattersall
MHN
Characteristics of cancer cell death after exposure to cytotoxic drugs in vitro.
Br J Cancer
73
1996
54
42
Tomei
LD
Kanter
P
Werner
CE
Inhibition of radiation-induced apoptosis in vitro by tumor promoters.
Biochem Biophys Res Commun
155
1988
324
43
Yao
K-S
Clayton
M
O'Dwyer
PJ
Apoptosis in human adenocarcinoma HT29 cells induced by exposure to hypoxia.
J Natl Cancer Inst
87
1995
117
44
Haimovitz-Friedman
A
Kan
C-C
Ehleiter
D
Persaud
RS
McLoughlin
M
Fuks
Z
Kolesnick
RN
Ionizing radiation acts on cellular membranes to generate ceramide and initiate apoptosis.
J Exp Med
180
1994
525
45
Harmon
BV
Takano
YS
Winterford
CM
Bove
GC
The role of apoptosis in the response of cells and tumours to mild hyperthermia.
Int J Radiat Biol
59
1991
489
46
Kyprianou
N
English
HF
Davidson
NE
Isaacs
JT
Programmed cell death during regression of the MCF-7 human breast cancer following estrogen ablation.
Cancer Res
51
1991
162
47
Redding
TW
Schally
AV
Radulovic
S
Milovanovic
S
Szepeshazi
K
Isaacs
JT
Sustained release formulations of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone antangonist SB-75 inhibit proliferation and enhance apoptotic cell death of human prostate carcinoma (PC-82) in male nude mice.
Cancer Res
52
1992
2538
48
D'Amico
AV
McKenna
WG
Apoptosis and a re-investigation of the biologic basis for cancer therapy.
Radiother Oncol
33
1994
3
49
Sen
S
D'Incalci
M
Apoptosis: Biochemical events and relevance to cancer chemotherapy.
FEBS Lett
307
1992
122
50
Dive
C
Evans
CA
Whetton
AD
Induction of apoptosis-new targets for cancer chemotherapy.
Cancer Biol
3
1992
417
51
Su
I-J
Cheng
A-L
Tsai
T-F
Lay
J-D
Retinoic acid-induced apoptosis and regression of a refractory Epstein-Barr virus-containing T cell lymphoma expressing multidrug-resistance phenotypes.
Br J Haematol
85
1993
826
52
Moreira
LF
Naomoto
Y
Hamada
M
Kamikawa
Y
Orita
K
Assessment of apoptosis in oesophageal cancinoma preoperatively treated by chemotherapy and radiotherapy.
Anticancer Res
15
1995
639
53
Meyn
RE
Stephens
LC
Hunter
NR
Milas
L
Apoptosis in murine tumors treated with chemotherapy agents.
Anticancer Drugs
6
1995
443
54
Meyn
RE
Stephens
C
Hunter
NR
Milas
L
Induction of apoptosis in murine tumors by cyclophosphamide.
Cancer Chemother Pharmacol
33
1994
410
55
Gorczyca
W
Bigman
K
Mittelman
A
Ahmed
T
Gong
J
Melamed
MR
Darzynkiewicz
Z
Induction of DNA strand breaks associated with apoptosis during treatment of leukemias.
Leukemia
7
1993
659
56
Kaufmann
SH
Desnoyers
S
Ottaviano
Y
Davidson
NE
Poirier
GG
Specific proteolytic cleavage of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase: An early marker of chemotherapy-induced apoptosis.
Cancer Res
53
1993
3976
57
Lazebnik
YA
Kaufmann
SH
Desnoyers
S
Poirier
GG
Earnshaw
WC
Cleavage of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase by a proteinase with properties like ICE.
Nature
371
1994
346
58
Fernandes-Alnemri
T
Litwack
G
Alnemri
ES
CPP32, a novel human apoptotic protein with homology to Caenorhabditis elegans cell death protein Ced-3 and mammalian interleukin-1β-converting enzyme.
J Biol Chem
269
1994
30761
59
Tewari
M
Quan
LT
O'Rourke
K
Desnoyers
S
Zeng
Z
Beidler
DR
Poirier
GG
Salvesen
GS
Dixit
VM
Yama/CPP32b, a mammalian homolog of CED-3, is a CrmA-inhibitable protease that cleaves the death substrate poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase.
Cell
81
1995
1
60
Nicholson
DW
Ali
A
Thornberry
NA
Vaillancourt
JP
Ding
CK
Gallant
M
Gareau
Y
Griffin
PR
Labelle
M
Lazebnik
YA
Munday
NA
Raju
SM
Smulson
ME
Yamin
T-T
Yu
VL
Miller
DK
Identification and inhibition of the ICE/CED-3 protease necessary for mammalian apoptosis.
Nature
376
1995
37
61
Miyashita
T
Reed
JC
Bcl-2 oncoprotein blocks chemotherapy-induced apoptosis in a human leukemia cell line.
Blood
81
1993
151
62
Kamesaki
S
Kamesaki
H
Jorgensen
TJ
Tanizawa
A
Pommier
Y
Cossman
J
Bcl-2 protein inhibits etoposide-induced apoptosis through its effects on events subsequent to topoisomerase II-induced DNA strand breaks and their repair.
Cancer Res
53
1993
4251
63
Fairgairn
LJ
Cowling
GJ
Dexter
TM
Rafferty
JA
Margison
GP
Reipert
B
bcl-2 delay of alkylating agent-induced apoptotic death in a murine hemopoietic stem cell line.
Mol Carcinogen
11
1994
49
64
Lotem
J
Sachs
L
Control of sensitivity to induction of apoptosis in myeloid leukemic cells by differentiation and bcl-2 dependent and independent pathways.
Cell Growth Diff
5
1994
321
65
Kondo
S
Yin
D
Takeuchi
J
Morimura
T
Oda
Y
Kikuchi
H
bcl-2 gene enables rescue from in vitro myelosuppression (bone marrow cell death) induced by chemotherapy.
Br J Cancer
70
1994
421
66
Keith
FJ
Bradbury
DA
Zhu
Y-M
Russell
NH
Inhibition of bcl-2 with antisense oligonucleotides induces apoptosis and increases the sensitivity of AML blasts to Ara-C.
Leukemia
9
1995
131
67
Weller
M
Malipiero
U
Aguzzi
A
Reed
JC
Fontana
A
Protooncogene bcl-2 gene transfer abrogates Fas/APO-1 antibody-mediated apoptosis of human malignant glioma cells and confers resistance to chemotherapeutic drugs and therapeutic irradiation.
J Clin Invest
95
1995
2633
68
Hermine
O
Haioun
C
Lepage
E
d'Agay
M-F
Briere
J
Lavignac
C
Fillet
G
Salles
G
Marolleau
J-P
Diebold
J
Reyes
F
Gaulard
P
Prognostic significance of bcl-2 protein expression in aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
Blood
87
1996
265
69
Coustan-Smith
E
Kitanaka
A
Pui
C-H
McNinch
L
Evans
WE
Raimondi
SC
Behm
FG
Arico
M
Campana
D
Clinical relevance of Bcl-2 overexpression in clinical childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Blood
87
1996
1140
70
Krajewski
S
Blomqvist
C
Franssila
K
Krajewska
M
Wasenius
V-M
Niskanen
E
Nordling
S
Reed
JC
Reduced expression of proapoptotic gene Bax is associated with poor response rates to combination chemotherapy and shorter survival in women with metastatic breast adenocarcinoma.
Cancer Res
55
1995
4471
71
Strum
JC
Small
GW
Pauig
SB
Daniel
LW
1-β-D-arabinofuranosylcytosine stimulates ceramide and diglyceride formation in HL-60 cells.
J Biol Chem
269
1994
15493
72
Zhang
J
Alter
N
Reed
JC
Borner
C
Obeid
LM
Hannun
YA
Bcl-2 interrupts the ceramide-mediated pathway of cell death.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
93
1996
5325
73
Bose
R
Verheij
M
Haimovitz-Friedman
A
Scotto
K
Fuks
Z
Kolesnick
R
Ceramide synthase mediates daunorubicin-induced apoptosis: An alternative mechanism for generating death signals.
Cell
82
1995
405
74
Jaffrézou
J-P
Levade
T
Bettaieb
A
Andrieu
N
Bezombes
C
Maestre
N
Vermeersch
S
Rousse
A
Laurent
G
Daunorubucin induced apoptosis: Triggering of ceramide generation through sphingomyelin hydrolysis.
EMBO J
15
1996
2417
75
Santana
P
Pena
LA
Haimovitz-Friedman
A
Martin
S
Green
D
McLoughlin
M
Cordon-Cardo
C
Schuchman
EH
Fuks
Z
Kolesnick
R
Acid sphingomyelinase-deficient human lymphoblasts and mice are defective in radiation-induced apoptosis.
Cell
86
1996
189
76
Lotem
J
Sachs
L
Hematopoietic cytokines inhibit apoptosis induced by transforming growth factor β1 and cancer chemotherapy compounds in myeloid leukemic cells.
Blood
80
1992
1750
77
Fan
S
Smith
ML
Rivet
DJ II
Duba
D
Zhan
Q
Kohn
KW
Fornace
AJ Jr
O'Connor
PM
Disruption of p53 function sensitizes breast cancer MCF-7 cells to cisplatin and pentoxifylline.
Cancer Res
55
1995
1649
78
Eliopoulos
AG
Derr
DJ
Herod
J
Hodgkins
L
Krajewski
S
Reed
JC
Young
LS
The control of apoptosis and drug resistance in ovarian cancer: Influence of p53 and Bcl-2.
Oncogene
11
1995
1217
79
Fuchs
EJ
Bedi
A
Jones
RJ
Hess
AD
Cytotoxic T cells overcome BCR-ABL-mediated resistance to apoptosis.
Cancer Res
55
1995
463
80
Cleary
ML
Smith
SD
Sklar
J
Cloning and structural analysis of cDNAs for bcl-2 and a hybrid bcl-2/immunoglobulin transcript resulting from the t(14; 18) translocation.
Cell
47
1986
19
81
Henderson
S
Huen
D
Rowe
M
Dawson
C
Johnson
G
Rickinson
A
Epstein-Barr virus-coded BHRF1 protein, a viral homologue of Bcl-2, protects human B cells from programmed cell death.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
90
1993
8479
82
Tarodi
B
Subramanian
T
Chinnadurai
G
Epstein-Barr virus BHRF1 protein protects against cell death by DNA-damaging agents and heterologous viral infection.
Virology
201
1994
404
83
Dole
MG
Jasty
R
Cooper
MJ
Thompson
CB
Nunez
G
Castle
VP
Bcl-xL is expressed in neuroblastoma cells and modulates chemotherapy-induced apoptosis.
Cancer Res
55
1995
2576
84
Sumantran
VN
Ealovega
MW
Nuñez
G
Clarke
MF
Wicha
MS
Overexpression of Bcl-xs sensitizes MCF-7 cells to chemotherapy-induced apoptosis.
Cancer Res
55
1995
2507
85
Minn
AJ
Rudin
C
M.
Boise
LH
Thompson
CB
Expression of Bcl-xL can confer a multidrug resistance phenotype.
Blood
86
1995
1903
86
Nooter
K
Boersma
AWM
Oostrum
RG
Burger
H
Jochemsen
AG
Stoter
G
Constitutive expression of the c-H-ras oncogene inhibits doxorubicin-induced apoptosis and promotes cell survival in a rhabdomyosarcoma cell line.
Br J Cancer
71
1995
556
87
Kondo
S
Barnett
GH
Hara
H
Morimura
T
Takeuchi
J
MDM2 protein confers the resistance of a human glioblastoma cell line to cisplatin-induced apoptosis.
Oncogene
10
1995
2001
88
Schwartz
GK
Haimovitz-Friedman
A
Dhupar
SK
Ehleiter
D
Maslak
P
Lai
L
Loganzo
F Jr
Kelsen
DP
Fuks
Z
Albino
AP
Potentiation of apoptosis by treatment with the protein kinase C-specific inhibitor Safingol in Mitomycin C-treated gastric cancer cells.
J Natl Cancer Inst
87
1995
1394
89
Yuan
Z-M
Huang
Y
Whang
Y
Sawyers
C
Weichselbaum
R
Kharbanda
S
Kufe
D
Role for c-Abl tyrosine kinase in growth arrest response to DNA damage.
Nature
382
1996
272
90
Friesen
C
Herr
I
Krammer
PH
Debatin
KM
Involvement of the CD95 (APO-1/Fas) receptor/ligand system in drug-induced apoptosis in leukemia cells.
Nat Med
2
1996
574
91
Yuan
Z-M
Huang
Y
Whang
Y. Sawyers C
Weichselbaum
R
Kharbanda
S
Kufe
D
Role for c-Abl tyrosine kinase in growth arrest response to DNA damage.
Nature
382
1996
272
92
Lowe
SW
Ruley
HE
Jacks
T
Housman
DE
p53-dependent apoptosis modulates the cytotoxicity of anticancer agents.
Cell
74
1993
957
93
Kitada
S
Takayama
S
De Riel
K
Tanaka
S
Reed
JC
Reversal of chemoresistance of lymphoma cells by antisense-mediated reduction of bcl-2 gene expression.
Antisense Res Dev
4
1994
71
94
Tian
QS
Taupin
JL
Elledge
S
Robertson
M
Anderson
P
Fas-activated serine threonine kinase (FAST) phosphorylates TIA-1 during Fas-mediated apoptosis.
J Exp Med
182
1995
865
95
Bischoff
JR
Kim
DH
Williams
A
Heise
C
Horn
S
Muna
M
Ng
L
Nye
JA
Sampson-Johannes
A
Fattaey
A
McCormick
F
An adenovirus mutant that replicates selectively in p53-deficient human tumor cells.
Science
274
1996
373