Modulation of SLFN11 induces changes in DNA Damage response

Background:

Lack of Schlafen family member 11 (SLFN11) expression has been recently identified as a dominant genomic determinant of response to DNA damaging agents in numerous cancer types. Thus, strategies aimed at increasing SLFN11 could be used to restore chemosensitivity of refractory cancers.

As oncogenic downregulation is often driven by methylation of the promotor region, we explore the demethylation effect of 5-aza-2’-deoxycytidine (decitabine), on the SLFN11 gene methylation. Since SLFN11 has been reported as an interferon inducible gene, and interferon is secreted during an active anti-tumor immune response, we investigated the in vitro effect of IFN-γ on SLFN11 expression in breast cancer cell lines. A second broader approach to show cross talk between immune cells and SLFN11 expression is indirect co-culture of breast cancer cells with activated PBMCs and evaluate if this can drive SLFN11 upregulation. Finally, as a definitive and specific way to modulate SLFN11 expression we implemented SLFN11 dCas9 (dead CRISPR associated protein 9) systems to specifically increase or decrease SLFN11 expression.

Results:

We first confirmed a correlation previously reported between methylation of SLFN11 promoter and its expression across multiple cell lines. We showed in-vitro that decitabine and IFN-γ could increase moderately the expression of SLFN11 in both BT- 549 and T47D cell lines, but not in strongly methylated cell lines such as MDA-MB-231. Though, in-vitro , the co-culture of the same cell lines with CD8-CD25 activated PBMC failed to increase SLFN11 expression. On the one hand, the use of a CRISPR-dCas9 UNISAM system could increase SLFN11 expression significantly (up to 5-fold), stably and specifically in BT-549 and T47D cancer cell lines. Though, this system also failed to force a strong expression of SLFN11 in cell lines with robust SLFN11 promoter methylation such as MDA-MB-231. On the other hand, the use of CRISPR-dCas9 KRAB could significantly reduce the expression of SLFN11 in BT-549 and T47D. We then used the modified cell lines to confirm the alteration in chemo sensitivity of those cells to treatment with DNA Damaging Agents (DDAs) such as Cisplatin and Epirubicin or DNA Damage Response (DDRs) drugs like Olaparib. RNAseq was used to elucidate the mechanisms of action affected by the alteration in SLFN11 expression.

Conclusion:

To our knowledge this is the first report of the stable non-lethal increase of SLFN11 expression in a cancer cell line. Our results show that induction of SLFN11 expression can enhance DDA and DDR sensitivity in breast cancer cells and dCas9 systems may represent a novel approach to increase SLFN11 and achieve higher sensitivity to chemotherapeutic agents, improving outcome or decreasing required drug concentrations. SLFN11-targeting therapies might be explored pre-clinically to develop personalized approaches.