The development of a drug-resistant cell line can take from 3-18 months. However, little is published on the methodology of this development process. This article will discuss key decisions to be made prior to starting resistant cell line development; the choice of parent cell line, dose of selecting agent, treatment interval and optimising the dose of drug for the parent cell line. Clinically-relevant drug-resistant cell lines are developed by mimicking the conditions cancer patients experience during chemotherapy and cell lines display between 2-8 fold resistance compared to their parental cell line. Doses of drug administered are low, and a pulsed treatment strategy is often used where the cells recover in drug-free media. High-level laboratory models are developed with the aim of understanding potential mechanisms of resistance to chemotherapy agents. Doses of drug are higher and escalated over time. It is common to have difficulty developing stable clinically-relevant drug-resistant cell lines. A comparative selection strategy of multiple cell lines or multiple chemotherapeutic agents mitigates this risk and gives insight into which agents or type of cell line develops resistance easily. Successful selection strategies from our research are presented. Pulsed-selection produced platinum or taxane-resistant large cell lung cancer (H1299, H460) and temozolomide-resistant melanoma (Malme-3M and HT144) cell lines. Continuous selection produced lapatinib-resistant breast cancer cell line (HCC1954). Techniques for maintaining drug-resistant cell lines are outlined including; maintaining cells with chemotherapy, pulse treating with chemotherapy or returning to master drug-resistant stocks. The heterogeneity of drug-resistant models produced from the same parent cell line with the same chemotherapy agent is explored with reference to P-glycoprotein. Heterogeneity in drug-resistant cell lines reflects the heterogeneity that can occur in clinical drug resistance.

Cancer, responsible for approximately 10 million lives annually, urgently requires innovative treatments, as well as solutions to mitigate the limitations of traditional chemotherapy, such as long‐term adverse side effects and multidrug resistance. This review focuses on Carbon Dots (CDs), an emergent class of nanoparticles (NPs) with remarkable physicochemical and biological properties, and their burgeoning applications in bioimaging and as nanocarriers in drug delivery systems for cancer treatment. The review initiates with an overview of NPs as nanocarriers, followed by an in‐depth look into the biological barriers that could affect their distribution, from barriers to administration, to intracellular trafficking. It further explores CDs′ synthesis, including both bottom‐up and top‐down approaches, and their notable biocompatibility, supported by a selection of in vitro, in vivo, and ex vivo studies. Special attention is given to CDs′ role in bioimaging, highlighting their optical properties. The discussion extends to their emerging significance as drug carriers, particularly in the delivery of doxorubicin and other anticancer agents, underscoring recent advancements and challenges in this field. Finally, we showcase examples of other promising bioapplications of CDs, emergent owing to the NPs flexible design. As research on CDs evolves, we envisage key challenges, as well as the potential of CD‐based systems in bioimaging and cancer therapy.

A number of recent studies have suggested that cancer incidence rates may be lower in patients receiving statin treatment for hypercholesterolemia. We examined the effects of statin drugs on in vitro proliferation, migration and invasion of melanoma cells.

Background: Metastatic melanoma is a highly chemotherapy resistant tumour. The use of newer targeted therapies alone and in combination with chemotherapy may offer new hope of improving response to treatment. Dasatinib, a multi-target kinase inhibitor, is currently approved for the treatment of chronic myeloid leukaemia and has shown promising results in preclinical studies in a number of solid tumours. Methods: We examined the effects of dasatinib on proliferation, chemo-sensitivity, cell cycle arrest, apoptosis, migration and invasion in human melanoma cell lines. Expression and activation of Src kinase, FAK and EphA2 were also examined in the melanoma cells. Results: Dasatinib inhibited growth of three of the five melanoma cell lines. Comparison with sorafenib showed that in these three cell lines dasatinib inhibited growth at lower concentrations than sorafenib. Dasatinib in combination with the chemotherapy drug temozolomide showed greater efficacy than either drug alone. Dasatinib induced cell cycle arrest and apoptosis and significantly inhibited cell migration and invasion of melanoma cells. Dasatinib inhibition of proliferation was associated with reduced phosphorylation of Src kinase, while decreased phosphorylation of FAK was implicated in dasatinib-mediated inhibition of migration and invasion in melanoma cells. Conclusion: Dasatinib has both anti-proliferative and anti-invasive effects in melanoma cells and combined with chemotherapy may have clinical benefit in the treatment of malignant melanoma.

Purpose: Antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC) is one mechanism of action of the monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies trastuzumab and pertuzumab. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), like lapatinib, may have added therapeutic value in combination with mAbs through enhanced ADCC activity. Using clinical data, we examined the impact of lapatinib on HER2/EGFR expression levels and natural killer (NK) cell gene signatures. We investigated the ability of three TKIs (lapatinib, afatinib, and neratinib) to alter HER2/immune-related protein levels in preclinical models of HER2-positive (HER2+) and HER2-low breast cancer, and the subsequent effects on trastuzumab/pertuzumab-mediated ADCC. Experimental Design: Preclinical studies (proliferation assays, Western blotting, high content analysis, and flow cytometry) employed HER2+ (SKBR3 and HCC1954) and HER2-low (MCF-7, T47D, CAMA-1, and CAL-51) breast cancer cell lines. NCT00524303 provided reverse phase protein array–determined protein levels of HER2/pHER2/EGFR/pEGFR. RNA-based NK cell gene signatures (CIBERSORT/MCP-counter) post-neoadjuvant anti-HER2 therapy were assessed (NCT00769470/NCT01485926). ADCC assays utilized flow cytometry–based protocols. Results: Lapatinib significantly increased membrane HER2 levels, while afatinib and neratinib significantly decreased levels in all preclinical models. Single-agent lapatinib increased HER2 or EGFR levels in 10 of 11 (91%) tumor samples. NK cell signatures increased posttherapy (P = 0.03) and associated with trastuzumab response (P = 0.01). TKI treatment altered mAb-induced NK cell–mediated ADCC in vitro, but it did not consistently correlate with HER2 expression in HER2+ or HER2-low models. The ADCC response to trastuzumab and pertuzumab combined did not exceed either mAb alone. Conclusions: TKIs differentially alter tumor cell phenotype which can impact NK cell–mediated response to coadministered antibody therapies. mAb-induced ADCC response is relevant when rationalizing combinations for clinical investigation.