Go to The Journal of Clinical Investigation
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • By specialty
    • COVID-19
    • Cardiology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • All ...
  • Videos
  • Collections
    • In-Press Preview
    • Resource and Technical Advances
    • Clinical Research and Public Health
    • Research Letters
    • Editorials
    • Perspectives
    • Physician-Scientist Development
    • Reviews
    • Top read articles

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • In-Press Preview
  • Resource and Technical Advances
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Research Letters
  • Editorials
  • Perspectives
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Reviews
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
Augmenting chemotherapy with low-dose decitabine through an immune-independent mechanism
Wade R. Gutierrez, Amanda Scherer, Jeffrey D. Rytlewski, Emily A. Laverty, Alexa P. Sheehan, Gavin R. McGivney, Qierra R. Brockman, Vickie Knepper-Adrian, Grace A. Roughton, Dawn E. Quelle, David J. Gordon, Varun Monga, Rebecca D. Dodd
Wade R. Gutierrez, Amanda Scherer, Jeffrey D. Rytlewski, Emily A. Laverty, Alexa P. Sheehan, Gavin R. McGivney, Qierra R. Brockman, Vickie Knepper-Adrian, Grace A. Roughton, Dawn E. Quelle, David J. Gordon, Varun Monga, Rebecca D. Dodd
View: Text | PDF
Research Article Oncology

Augmenting chemotherapy with low-dose decitabine through an immune-independent mechanism

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

The DNA methyltransferase inhibitor decitabine has classically been used to reactivate silenced genes and as a pretreatment for anticancer therapies. In a variation of this idea, this study explores the concept of adding low-dose decitabine (DAC) following administration of chemotherapy to bolster therapeutic efficacy. We find that addition of DAC following treatment with the chemotherapy agent gemcitabine improves survival and slows tumor growth in a mouse model of high-grade sarcoma. Unlike prior studies in epithelial tumor models, DAC did not induce a robust antitumor T cell response in sarcoma. Furthermore, DAC synergizes with gemcitabine independently of the immune system. Mechanistic analyses demonstrate that the combination therapy induces biphasic cell cycle arrest and apoptosis. Therapeutic efficacy was sequence dependent, with gemcitabine priming cells for treatment with DAC through inhibition of ribonucleotide reductase. This study identifies an apparently unique application of DAC to augment the cytotoxic effects of conventional chemotherapy in an immune-independent manner. The concepts explored in this study represent a promising paradigm for cancer treatment by augmenting chemotherapy through addition of DAC to increase tolerability and improve patient response. These findings have widespread implications for the treatment of sarcomas and other aggressive malignancies.

Authors

Wade R. Gutierrez, Amanda Scherer, Jeffrey D. Rytlewski, Emily A. Laverty, Alexa P. Sheehan, Gavin R. McGivney, Qierra R. Brockman, Vickie Knepper-Adrian, Grace A. Roughton, Dawn E. Quelle, David J. Gordon, Varun Monga, Rebecca D. Dodd

×

Figure 3

Drug sequencing is critical for Gem + DAC efficacy.

Options: View larger image (or click on image) Download as PowerPoint
Drug sequencing is critical for Gem + DAC efficacy.
(A) In vitro treatme...
(A) In vitro treatment scheme. KRIMS-1 cells were treated with Gem or media control on day 1, followed by DAC or DMSO control on days 2-3. (B) Representative synergy plot of Gem + DAC identifying concentrations that synergistically inhibit cell growth (maximum Bliss synergy score of 29.99 for gemcitabine 15 nM and DAC 128 nM). (C–H) Longitudinal viability and day 4 measurements of KRIMS-1 cells using different sequences of delivery for Gem (15 nM) and DAC (128 nM). (C and D) Sequential administration of Gem followed by DAC. (E and F) Concurrent administration of Gem + DAC treatment. (G and H) Reversed-sequence DAC + Gem treatment, with DAC preceding Gem treatment. Individual viability measurements and statistical analysis for data in C, E, and G are available in Supplemental Figure 8. For C–H, data represent independent experiments (n = 3) and the mean ± SEM. Ordinary 1-way ANOVA and Tukey’s multiple comparisons test used to analyze data in C–H. *P < 0.05.

Copyright © 2026 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN 2379-3708

Sign up for email alerts