[ 18 F]PARPi Imaging Is Not Affected by HPV Status In Vitro

Abstract

Background. Human papillomavirus- (HPV-) associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas (OPSCCs) are clinically and pathologically distinct from HPV-negative tumors. Here, we explore whether HPV affects functional biomarkers, including γH2AX, RAD51, and PARP1. Moreover, the role of [¹⁸F]PARPi as a broadly applicable imaging tool for head and neck carcinomas is investigated. Methods. HPV-positive and HPV-negative cell lines were used to evaluate the γH2AX, RAD51, and PARP1 expression with immunoblotting and immunofluorescence. Effects of external beam ionizing radiation were investigated in vitro, and survival was investigated via colony-formation assay. [¹⁸F]PARPi uptake experiments were performed on HPV-negative and HPV-positive cell lines to quantify PARP1 expression. PARP1 IHC and γH2AX foci were quantified using patient-derived oropharyngeal tumor specimens. Results. Differences in DNA repair were detected, showing higher RAD51 and γH2AX expression in HPV-positive cell lines. Clonogenic assays confirm HPV-positive cell lines to be significantly more radiosensitive. PARP1 expression levels were similar, irrespective of HPV status. Consequently, [¹⁸F]PARPi uptake assays demonstrated that this tracer is internalized in cell lines independently from their HPV status. Conclusion. The HPV status, often used clinically to stratify patients, did not affect PARP1 levels, suggesting that PARP imaging can be performed in both HPV-positive and HPV-negative patients. This study confirms that the PET imaging agent [¹⁸F]PARPi could serve as a general clinical tool for oropharyngeal cancer patients.

1. Introduction

More than half a million patients were diagnosed with oral or oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) in the United States in 2019 [1]. Squamous cell carcinomas constitute 90% of the head and neck cancers and are one of the most common cancers worldwide [2]. Although the incidence of head and neck cancers is decreasing in the United States, the rate of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) increased by 2.5% per year [3]. Oral and oropharyngeal tumors present different risk factors. Although the consumption of tobacco and alcohol are well-established risk factors, they do not explain, for example, the increased incidence of tongue OSCC in young women. Risk factors in those cases have not yet been defined [4]. Risk factors associated with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma, on the other hand, are mainly associated with the infection with human papillomavirus (HPV) [4]. In those cases, usually younger patients in their 40s and 50s are affected [5–7]. Although HPV infection is responsible for approximately 80% of oropharyngeal cancer, tobacco and alcohol consumption are also associated.

The treatment plan for a head and neck cancer patient depends on various factors such as location of the tumor, stage of the disease, and size of the lesion [3]. Moreover, the abovementioned risk factors play a very important role in the management decisions. This is related to two clinical trials, ECOG 2399 and RTOG 0129, conducted in patients harboring SCC of the head and neck (HN), along with several retrospective studies, which demonstrated that HPV-positive OPSCCs have better prognosis and better response to chemo/radiotherapy when compared to HPV-negative patients [8, 9]. The findings prompted the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) to modify the staging system where now, patients are stratified based on their HPV status [10].

In order to understand the reason for the better outcomes observed on concurrent chemoradiotherapy by the HPV-positive group of patients, studies have attempted to correlate their enhanced radiosensitivity to the underlying mechanisms of DNA repair and cell cycle control [11–16]. In addition, high-risk HPV subtypes, HPV-16 and HPV-18, encode two viral oncoproteins E6 and E7 which disrupt normal host cell division by targeting p53 and the retinoblastoma protein (pRb), respectively [17]. HPV-16 E7 has been shown to induce an increase in DNA double-strand breaks and γH2AX nuclear foci, a DNA damage response marker [17]. Moreover, it has also been correlated with the overexpression of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP), a single-strand DNA repair enzyme, and the increased level of RAD51, in response to radiation [18]. Further analysis of these markers through patient samples is performed in this study to understand these cellular mechanisms associated with the better prognosis of HPV-positive cancer.

Considering the importance of imaging in head and neck cancer treatment plans, we have recently published a paper stating the potential of fluorine-18 labeled poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase1 inhibitor ([¹⁸F]PARPi) as an alternative imaging tool in head and neck carcinomas that can provide high-contrast images compared to [¹⁸F]fluoro-deoxy-D-glucose ([¹⁸F]FDG) [19].

[¹⁸F]FDG is a glucose-mimicking metabolic tracer; therefore, it is retained not only in tumors but also in some normal tissues with high metabolism [20]. In contrast, [¹⁸F]PARPi is a DNA repair marker; therefore, it accumulates mostly in the nuclei of tumor cells, making it a good tracer for head and neck cancer imaging. PARP1 is a nuclear enzyme that plays an essential role in DNA damage repair. Several previous publications have demonstrated approaches to image PARP1 in vivo; see [21, 22] for an overview. The structure of [¹⁸F]PARPi is derived from the scaffold of Olaparib, an FDA-approved PARP1 inhibitor widely used as a therapeutic agent in gynecological malignancies [23]. [¹⁸F]PARPi has been previously shown to bind specifically to tumor areas with a minimal off-target uptake [24, 25].

As the HPV status affects DNA double-strand break repair, we aimed to address if the HPV status had an effect on PARP1 overexpression [26–30] and therefore on [¹⁸F]PARPi uptake in oral and oropharyngeal cancer. With the present study, we evaluated the diagnostic value of [¹⁸F]PARPi in oropharyngeal cancer which appears to be independent of a patient’s HPV status. However, further in vivo and patient data is required to further interrogate this.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Cell Culture and Reagents

All cell lines were grown in a monolayer culture at 37°C in a 5% CO₂ humidified atmosphere. We cultured three HPV-positive (UPCI:SCC 090, UPCI:SCC 154, and UPCI:SCC 152) and three HPV-negative (FaDu, Cal 27, and SCC 15) cell lines. All media contain 10% ( $v / v$ ) fetal bovine serum (FBS) and 1% penicillin and streptomycin. Both UPCI:SCC 090 (ATCC, Manassas, VA) and UPCI:SCC 154 (ATCC, Manassas, VA) cell lines were grown in MEM with 2 mM L-glutamine. The UPCI:SCC 152 (ATCC, Manassas, VA) was grown in MEM with 2 mM of L-glutamine, 50 μg/mL of Gentamicin, and 11.2 mL/L of NEAA. Cal 27 (ATCC, Manassas, VA) cells were cultured in DMEM and the FaDu (ATCC, Manassas, VA) cells in MEM medium. The SCC 15 (ATCC, Manassas, VA) cell line was cultured in a 1 : 1 mixture of high glucose DMEM and F12 medium containing 1.2 g/L of sodium bicarbonate, 2.5 mM L-glutamine, 15 mM HEPES, and 0.5 mM of sodium pyruvate supplemented with 400 ng/mL of hydrocortisone 500 mL solution.

2.2. Western Blot

Cell pellets obtained from 80% confluent flasks were washed twice with PBS and lysed with 200 μL ice cold RIPA buffer with Triton X100 (Boston BioProducts, Ashland, MA), one Mini Complete Protease Inhibitor Cocktail tablet (Roche, Indianapolis, IN), and one PhosSTOP tablet (Roche, Indianapolis, IN). Protein quantification was performed using bicinchoninic acid (BCA) protein assay (Pierce, Rockford, IL). For the PARP1 and RAD51 expression, 20 μg of protein lysate was loaded on the gel. For γH2AX, 40 μg of total cellular lysate was loaded on the gel in order to be able to detect the specific signal. Also, the 0.45 μm pore size membrane was replaced with 0.20 μm nitrocellulose membrane (Bio-Rad Laboratories Inc., Germany) for γH2AX detection. The substitution was made because gamma-H2AX is a 17 kDa protein, smaller than all the other proteins detected in this study. During transfer processes, with the 0.45 μm pore size membrane, gamma-H2AX was eluted from the membrane resulting in no detection. Various methods were used to improve detection. The one that enabled detection was the replacement with the 0.20 μm pore size. Transfer time was lowered to 50 min because more extended periods led to the protein being eluted from the membrane. After optimization, 50 min was found to be the optimum time for the gamma-H2AX transfer process. Blocking was performed by 1% BSA in TBS-T solution. Proteins were detected using antibodies specific for PARP1 (1 : 1,000, Invitrogen; PA5-16452), γH2AX (1 : 1000, EMD Millipore; 05-636,) RAD51 (1 : 1000, Abcam; ab63801), β-actin (1 : 40,000; Cell Signaling Technology; 3700), and Vinculin (1 : 1000, Abcam; ab129002) with a corresponding horseradish peroxidase- (HRP-) conjugated secondary antibody (1 : 20,000, ab6721(rabbit), ab6789 (mouse), Abcam, USA). Loading control choice was based on the molecular size of the target protein, in order to not interfere with the protein of interest. When a membrane was probed for different proteins, the same loading control was used. Detection was performed using a chemiluminescent substrate (Thermo Scientific #34077, Super Signal West Pico, USA). The bands were visualized using an automated blot processing machine (Ewen-Parker X-ray Corporation, New York, USA) with a light-sensitive clear blue X-ray film (Thermo Scientific, $24 \times 30 cm$ , SB2324231, Belgium) with 1 min exposure time.

2.3. Immunofluorescence

$4.0 ‐ 5.0 \times 10^{5}$ cells from all six cell lines were plated on a 6-well plate. On the following day, the plated cells were irradiated with 2 Gy γ-rays in a cesium irradiator (J.L. Shepherd, San Fernando, CA). Before blocking, cells were washed with 300 μL of PBS. Using 3% paraformaldehyde (PFA) in a PBS solution, cells were fixed for 10 min at 2 different time points: 30 min and 24 h. Blocking was performed for at least 1 h in 300 μL PBS with 1% BSA, 0.1% Triton, and 1% Goat serum at room temperature. After blocking, cells were incubated with primary antibodies: γH2AX and RAD51 in 1% BSA for 24 h. After washing with PBS, cells were incubated with Alexa 488 goat anti-rabbit (1 : 1200, Invitrogen; A11070) and Alexa 594 goat anti-mouse (1 : 1200, Invitrogen; A11020) in 1% BSA for 1 h at room temperature in the dark. To mount the cover slip containing cells on the microscope slide, 20 μL of vector shield solution with DAPI (H-1200, Vector Labs) was used to counterstain the nuclei. Using an inverted confocal microscope (LSM 880, Zeiss Confocal, Germany), cells were imaged and the number of RAD51 and γH2AX foci present in the cells was quantified using an ImageJ plugin software. In order to detect foci in patient samples, 0.5 μg of γH2AX antibody and 0.1 μg, 0.2 μg, and 0.4 μg of RAD51 antibody were used. The patient data used in the manuscript was conducted under a protocol approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB). No human approval was required for this study. IgG control was used to confirm specificity and control for false positive signals of the antibody. The slides were scanned (Pannoramic 250 Flash scanner, 3DHISTECH, Budapest, Hungary) at 40x magnification. Adjacent sections were stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E). Regions of interest (ROIs) were drawn on the H&E slides (tumor areas) and transported using CaseViewer (3DHistech, Hungary) to the consecutive slide, where immunofluorescence was carried out in order to analyze correct tumor areas. The images shown are representing one of the tumor areas in whole slide, and the mean number of foci includes foci count in all the tumor areas.

2.4. Cell Survival

In order to obtain a sufficient colony count, 800-3200 cells were seeded in 6-well plates in triplicates and exposed to known radiation doses. Cells were irradiated (IR) with 0, 2, 4, and 6 Gy using a cesium irradiator. Cells were allowed to grow for 21 days. After 21 days of incubation, the culture media were removed, and cells were stained in crystal violet (0.5%) in methanol for 2 min. Survival fractions were calculated based on the number of microscopic colonies where a colony is defined as >50 cells. The plating efficiency was calculated as previously reported [31]. The mean number of colonies was obtained from triplicates of three independent biological replicates for each cell line. The clonogenic survival curves fit to a linear-quadratic model were obtained as mentioned previously [31].

2.5. PARP1 Immunohistochemistry

Immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed by the Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK) Molecular Cytology Core Facility (MCCF) and as previously described by our group [32].

2.6. [¹⁸F]PARPi Uptake Assay

Uptake of [¹⁸F]PARPi was tested in vitro (3 replicates) as previously described [33]. [¹⁸F]PARPi was synthesized as reported by our group [19] and obtained from the Radiochemistry and Molecular Imaging Probes Core, MSK. See Supplementary Fig. S1 for details. Briefly, 250k HPV-positive and HPV-negative cells were plated 24 h prior to the experiment ( $n = 3$ ). Media was changed, and 1 h later, 370 kBq/well of [¹⁸F]PARPi were added to the cells. For blocking, cells were incubated with a 100-fold molar excess of Olaparib 1 h before adding [¹⁸F]PARPi. Media was removed, and cells were washed with PBS and lysed with 1 M sodium hydroxide (NaOH) after 1 h. The lysate was collected, and uptake was determined by measuring radioactivity on a Wizard² automatic γ-counter (PerkinElmer, Boston, MA).

2.7. Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism 8. Unless otherwise stated, data points represent mean values and error bars represent standard deviations of biological replicates. $P$ values were calculated using Student’s unpaired $t$ -test. Statistical significance was determined with $alpha = 0.05$ , and the level of significance for each result was displayed as $^{*} P < 0.05$ , $^{* *} P < 0.01$ , $^{* * *} P < 0.001$ , and $^{* * * *} P < 0.0001$ .

3. Results

3.1. Immunoblotting of PARP1, RAD51, and γH2AX Levels

A panel of cell lines was tested for levels of PARP1, RAD51, and γH2AX (Figure 1(a)). We observed an increase in the expression of PARP1 in both groups of cell lines, HPV-negative ( $mean \pm SD$ , pre-IR $0.59 \pm 0.19$ , and post-IR $1.0 \pm 0.18$ ) and HPV-positive (pre-IR $1.34 \pm 1.15$ and post-IR $2.0 \pm 0.71$ ), after irradiation. No statistically significant results were observed when comparing these two groups of cell lines pre- and postirradiation (Figure 1(b), left panel). Interestingly, although PARP1 levels seemed elevated after irradiation, no such correlation was found when analyzing RAD51 expression (Figure 1(b), middle panel). For HPV-negative cell lines, RAD51 expression did not vary significantly (pre-IR $1.02 \pm 0.34$ and post-IR $1.20 \pm 0.56$ ), and for HPV-positive cell lines after irradiation, a decrease in the expression was observed where the $mean \pm SD$ expression for pre-IR was $2.42 \pm 1.42$ , compared to post-IR $1.06 \pm 0.24$ . The level of γH2AX expression in nonirradiated HPV-positive cell lines ( $4.06 \pm 2.52$ ) was higher in HPV-negative cell lines ( $0.78 \pm 0.67$ ) (Figure 1(b), right panel). The mean difference between γH2AX expression in irradiated cell lines decreased due to lower γH2AX levels in both HPV-positive ( $0.26 \pm 0.34$ ) and HPV-negative cell lines ( $0.61 \pm 0.58$ ).

Figure 1

PARP1, RAD51, and ɣH2AX expression in HPV-negative and HPV-positive cell lines. (a) Western blot analysis of three HPV-negative (FaDu, Cal 27, and SCC 15) and three HPV-positive (SCC 090, SCC 154, and SCC 152) cell lines, both with and without external beam irradiation (2 Gy). Vinculin and β-actin served as loading controls. For irradiated cell lines, protein extraction was performed 24 h postirradiation. For irradiated PARP1 and RAD51 detection, the same gel was used; therefore, the same loading control is considered. (b) Quantification of PARP1, RAD51, and ɣH2AX from (a). Bars represent grouped $mean \pm SD$ of 3 HPV-/+ cell lines.

(b)

3.2. Immunofluorescence Analysis of γH2AX and RAD51 on HPV-Positive and HPV-Negative Cell Lines

In order to visualize and quantify the DNA strand breaks pre- and postirradiation, antibodies against γH2AX and RAD51 were used. The staining was performed on cells that were either nonirradiated or irradiated (30 min and 24 h postradiation) (Figure 2(a), Supplementary Fig. S2A). The mean number of foci was calculated for γH2AX (Figure 2(b)) and RAD51 (Figure 2(c)) to determine the difference in DNA damage in HPV-negative and HPV-positive cell lines. Heterogeneity within HPV-negative and HPV-positive cell lines was observed such as SCC 15 expressing a higher number of γH2AX foci pre- and postirradiation compared to all other cell lines. In HPV-negative cells, we observed an increase in residual double-strand breaks after radiation. We also observed a significantly higher number of gH2AX foci ( $^{*} P < 0.05$ ) at the 30 min postirradiation time point. Besides this, the mean number of the RAD51 focus count increased after irradiation and returned to baseline at 24 h. In HPV-positive cells, the mean number of gH2AX foci was closer to baseline, in both 30 min and 24 h postirradiation, compared to that of HPV-negative cells. Besides this, no difference was detected between pre and 30 min postirradiation in the RAD51 focus numbers. For the 24 h time point, instead of returning to baseline as HPV-negative cells did, the mean number of foci continued to show an increase.

Figure 2

Effect of radiation on HPV-negative and HPV-positive cells. (a) Immunofluorescence staining using ɣH2AX and RAD51 antibodies performed on three HPV-negative (FaDu, Cal 27, and SCC 15) and three HPV-positive (SCC 090, SCC 154, and SCC 152), irradiated (2 Gy) and nonirradiated (0 Gy), cell lines. Representative images showing DAPI (blue), RAD51 (green), and ɣH2AX (red), 24 h postirradiation. IgG control in Supplementary Fig. S3. (b, c) Quantification of the mean number of ɣH2AX and RAD51 foci calculated per cell for different conditions ( $^{*} P < 0.05$ , Student $t$ -test).

(b)

(c)

3.3. Effect of Irradiation on Survival of HPV-Positive and HPV-Negative Cells

We evaluated the effect of radiation by performing clonogenic assays on HPV-positive ( $n = 3$ ) and HPV-negative ( $n = 3$ ) cell lines. Corroborating previously published literature [12, 15], we observed that HPV-positive cells are more radiosensitive than HPV-negative cells (Figures 3(a) and 3(b)). Significant differences between the surviving fractions were seen at 2, 4 ( $^{* * *} P < 0.001$ ), and 6 Gy ( $^{* *} P < 0.01$ ) radiation doses in FaDu, an HPV-negative cell line, and SCC 154, an HPV-positive cell line. This difference is also evident by the reduction in colony count. The surviving fraction remains significant at all doses between HPV-negative and HPV-positive cell lines (Figures 3(a) and 3(b), Supplementary Fig. S2B).

Figure 3

Effect of radiation on HPV-negative and HPV-positive cell survivability. (a) Examples of clonogenic growth observed in HPV-negative, FaDu, and HPV-positive SCC 154 cell lines at 0, 2, 4, and 6 Gy external beam irradiation. (b) Surviving fraction curve of three HPV-negative and three HPV-positive cell lines after 0, 2, 4, and 6 Gy irradiation. $Means \pm SD$ of three independent experiments with three replicates each. Statistical significance is shown between FaDu and SCC 154. $^{* *} P < 0.01$ and $^{* * *} P < 0.001$ . Quantification for all cell lines is shown in Supplementary Fig. S2B.

(b)

3.4. PARP1 Expression in Human Oropharyngeal HPV-Negative and HPV-Positive Biospecimens

In order to investigate the expression of PARP1 in oropharyngeal cancer, HPV-negative ( $n = 7$ ) and HPV-positive ( $n = 18$ ) samples were derived from patients’ posttransoral resection of oropharyngeal tumors. None of the patients received presurgical adjuvant treatment. In order to evaluate the expression of PARP1, 3-5 fields of view from three tissue sites were randomly selected, deep margin (submucosa, muscle tissue), epithelium, and tumor, from the H&E and IHC scan of entire tissue for quantification (Figure 4(a)). Automated thresholding was conducted, and the PARP1-positive area was calculated (Figure 4(b)). We observed a statistical difference ( $^{* * *} P < 0.001$ ) between both deep margin and epithelium when compared to tumors in both HPV-positive and HPV-negative samples. No statistical significance was found between HPV-negative and HPV-positive tumor areas ( $32.49 \pm 15.05 %$ and $33.04 \pm 23.46 %$ , respectively).

Figure 4

PARP1 expression in patient-derived oropharyngeal biospecimens. (a) PARP1 immunohistochemical staining of HPV-negative and HPV-positive oropharyngeal patient slides and H&E staining of corresponding sections. Scale bar 50 μm. (b) PARP1 quantification of deep margin, epithelium, and tumor for all patient samples ( $^{* * *} P < 0.001$ , $^{* * * *} P < 0.0001$ , Student $t$ -test).

(b)

3.5. Immunofluorescence in Human Biospecimens

To investigate levels of DSB, γH2AX, a double-strand break marker, was used in HPV-positive and HPV-negative oropharyngeal patient samples. Using H&E as a reference, random tumor sections were chosen, and a focus count was performed (Figure 5(a)). The images in the figure represent one of the tumor areas in the slide. For quantification (mean focus count), all the tumor areas were included. Quantification did not show any statistical difference in the number of γH2AX foci between HPV-negative and HPV-positive patient samples (Figure 5(b)).

Figure 5

ɣH2AX immunofluorescence in human oropharyngeal biospecimens. (a) Representative immunofluorescence staining images displaying nuclear stain in blue, ɣH2AX in green, and autofluorescence in red. H&E corresponding with the immunofluorescence section is also shown. (b) Quantification of number of focus count per cell in all HPV-negative and HPV-positive oropharyngeal specimens using the entire slide. Each dot represents a patient.

(b)

3.6. [¹⁸F]PARPi Uptake Assay

In vitro internalization of [¹⁸F]PARPi was performed using three HPV-negative and three HPV-positive cell lines. In order to analyze the specificity, a 100-fold excess dose of Olaparib was used to outcompete the tracer uptake. A significant blockable signal was observed in all the cell lines ( $^{* * * *} P < 0.0001$ ) (Figure 6(a)) confirming specificity of the imaging agent. Mean counts per minute calculated between HPV-negative and HPV-positive cell lines did not show any statistically significant difference when compared to each other (Figure 6(b)).

Figure 6

[¹⁸F]PARPi uptake in HPV-negative and HPV-positive cell lines. (a) In vitro internalization assay of 370 kBq of [¹⁸F]PARPi showing significant specific tracer uptake. Uptake was blocked using 100-fold excess Olaparib 1 h before adding [¹⁸F]PARPi. (b) Quantification of total uptake in relation to HPV status showing no significant difference of HPV-negative and HPV-positive cell lines ( $^{*} P < 0.05$ , $^{* * *} P < 0.001$ , $^{* * * *} P < 0.0001$ , Student $t$ -test).

(b)

4. Discussion

High-risk HPV subtypes, HPV-16 and HPV-18, encode two viral oncoproteins, E6 and E7, which play a role in disrupting normal host cell division by targeting p53 and the retinoblastoma protein (pRb), respectively [17]. HPV-16 E7 has been shown to induce an increase in DNA double-strand breaks and, consequently, in the expression of γH2AX [18]. Moreover, it has also been correlated with the overexpression of PARP1 [17] and RAD51 [18], in response to radiation. For this reason, we speculated that HPV status might affect the uptake of [¹⁸F]PARPi, a PET imaging agent for head and neck cancers, which binds specifically to PARP. In order to confirm the correlation of the HPV status with cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying favorable prognosis, we investigated γH2AX, RAD51, and PARP1 protein expressions in HPV-positive and HPV-negative cell lines and oropharyngeal carcinoma patient samples.

We observed higher expression levels of double-strand break biomarkers in HPV-positive cell lines compared to those in HPV-negative cell lines, confirming previous findings [18]. In response to radiation, a decline in expression level of both γH2AX and RAD51 was detected. This reduction can be attributed to the intrinsic radiosensitivity of HPV-positive cell lines which was confirmed through clonogenic assays. HPV-positive cell lines displayed significant radiosensitivity at all dose levels which show a higher cell death and a higher probability of getting washed away during the washing steps in immunofluorescence microscopy and western blot. The inconsistency observed in RAD51 levels can be related to the divergent role of RAD51 where, on the one hand, the E7 oncoprotein increases the level of RAD51 protein [18, 34]; on the other hand, p16^INK4A plays a role in decreased RAD51 recruitment, thus inhibiting homologous recombination repair [15]. Moreover, a recent study has demonstrated the role of the HPV16 E7 oncoprotein in promoting error-prone microhomology-mediated end-joining while suppressing canonical nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) [35]. Therefore, further in-depth studies are required to understand the effect of HPV status on RAD51 expression, to establish a consistent pattern and their relation to radiosensitivity.

Different studies have suggested the persistence of γH2AX foci in HPV-positive cell lines for the favorable prognosis in HPV-associated tumors and their increased radiosensitivity [16, 29]. However, similar results were not observed in this study. Also, patient sample size is a limiting factor; thus, clinical data with a larger sample size can be helpful in understanding the differences seen in HPV-positive and HPV-negative patients in response to therapy.

HPV correlation to single-strand DNA breaks was investigated through PARP expression. In immunoblotting, both HPV-negative and HPV-positive cell lines revealed an increasing trend in the expression of PARP1 in response to radiation. This observation aligns with the literature as radiation increases the formation of DNA breaks, and the expression of PARP1, being a DNA repair enzyme, increases [30, 36]. PARP1 IHC also showed significantly higher expression in tumor regions in both HPV-positive and HPV-negative oropharyngeal samples. Tumor regions displayed significantly higher PARP1 expression compared to deep margin and epithelium. While no significance was observed between tumor regions of the two cohorts, these results allowed us to explore the potential effect on the use of [¹⁸F]PARPi imaging in oropharyngeal carcinomas.

Our lab recently published a paper which demonstrated [¹⁸F]PARPi as a potential clinical tool for imaging [19]. There have been pitfalls associated with the [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT imaging due to its accumulation not only in the tumor area but also in normal cells [37]. The high physiologic uptake can be problematic in the head and neck region, which has complex anatomy and is intrinsically metabolically active [38, 39]. Considering the importance of imaging in head and neck cancers to design treatment plans, we here have demonstrated that the diagnostic performance of [¹⁸F]PARPi is probably independent of HPV status. Through [¹⁸F]PARPi uptake assays, we demonstrated similar internalization in HPV-negative and HPV-positive cell lines. Since HPV-positive tumors have an entirely different prognostic profile compared to HPV-negative tumors, ensuring that [¹⁸F]PARPi uptake will not be biased towards either cohort was a necessary factor to explore. This study suggests that [¹⁸F]PARPi is a valuable imaging tool in head and neck tumors with probably no need to stratify patients based on their HPV status. However, new studies, encompassing larger cohort sizes, are necessary to more accurately access the tracer’s capability of imaging both HPV-positive and HPV-negative patients. Since the current study was conducted solely in vitro, further in vivo and human studies are needed to interrogate the biological factors that may impact the uptake pattern and PARP expression.

5. Conclusions

We have demonstrated the ability of [¹⁸F]PARPi to image oropharyngeal tumors regardless of HPV status. Independence of HPV status and PARP allowed internalization of the tracer with no significant variability. Future experiments will focus on evaluating [¹⁸F]PARPi imaging in patient cohorts to determine its efficacy for imaging oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma with greater specificity.

Footnotes

Data Availability

The data is available on request.

Disclosure

S.P. and T.R. are shareholders of Summit Biomedical Imaging, LLC., S.P. and T.R. are coinventors on a filed U.S. patent (WO2016164771) that covers methods of use for PARPi-FL. T.R. is a coinventor on a U.S. patent (WO2012074840) covering the compositions of matter for PARPi-FL. T.R. is a paid consultant for Theragnostics, Inc. This arrangement has been reviewed and approved by MSK in accordance with its conflict of interest policies. The funding sources were not involved in study design, data collection and analysis, writing of the report, or the decision to submit this article for publication.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Authors’ Contributions

N.G., P.D.S.F., G.P., and T.R. conceived of the study and designed the experiments. N.G. and G.P. carried out the experiments and collected the data. N.G., P.D.S.F., S.P., and C.H. collected and analyzed the patient data. N.G., P.D.S.F., G.P., and T.R analyzed the data and conducted statistical analysis of the data. N.G., P.D.S.F, G.P., and T.R. primarily wrote the manuscript. All authors carefully read and edited the manuscript.

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the Radiochemistry and Molecular Imaging Probes Core, Pathology Core, and Molecular Cytology Core Facility at MSK. We also thank the Department of Surgery, Head and Neck team for their help in extracting patient data from the database. This work was supported by National Institutes of Health grants P30 CA008748 and R01 CA204441 (TR) and the Society of Memorial Sloan Kettering Imaging and Radiation Sciences Program.

Supplementary Materials

References

Siegel

R. L.

Miller

K. D.

Jemal

Cancer statistics, 2020

CA: a Cancer Journal for Clinicians 2020 70

6641397

1 7 30

10.3322/caac.21590

Sanderson

R. J.

Squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck

*

commentary: head and neck carcinomas in the developing world

BMJ 2002 325

6641397

827

Mourad

Jetmore

Jategaonkar

A. A.

Moubayed

Moshier

Urken

M. L.

Epidemiological trends of head and neck cancer in the United States: a SEER population study

Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2017 75

6641397

12 2562 2572

10.1016/j.joms.2017.05.008

2-s2.0-85021743732

28618252

Patel

S. C.

Carpenter

W. R.

Tyree

Couch

M. E.

Weissler

Hackman

Hayes

D. N.

Shores

Chera

B. S.

Increasing incidence of oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma in young white women, age 18 to 44 years

Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 2011 29

6641397

11 1488 1494

10.1200/JCO.2010.31.7883

2-s2.0-79955033400

21383286

Chakraborty

Natarajan

Mukherjee

Advances in oral cancer detection

Advances in Clinical Chemistry 2019 91

6641397

181 200

10.1016/bs.acc.2019.03.006

2-s2.0-85064996476

Fedele

Diagnostic aids in the screening of oral cancer

Head & Neck Oncology 2009 1

6641397

1, article 5

10.1186/1758-3284-1-5

2-s2.0-68349104447

Zanoni

D. K.

Migliacci

J. C.

Katabi

Montero

P. H.

Ganly

Shah

J. P.

Wong

R. J.

Ghossein

R. A.

Patel

S. G.

A proposal to redefine close surgical margins in squamous cell carcinoma of the oral tongue

JAMA Otolaryngology. Head & Neck Surgery 2017 143

6641397

6 555 560

10.1001/jamaoto.2016.4238

2-s2.0-85020807962

28278337

Nguyen-Tan

P. F.

Zhang

Ang

K. K.

Weber

R. S.

Rosenthal

D. I.

Soulieres

Kim

Silverman

Raben

Galloway

T. J.

Fortin

Gore

Westra

W. H.

Chung

C. H.

Jordan

R. C.

Gillison

M. L.

List

Q.-T.

Randomized phase III trial to test accelerated versus standard fractionation in combination with concurrent cisplatin for head and neck carcinomas in the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0129 trial: long-term report of efficacy and toxicity

Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 2014 32

6641397

3858 3866

10.1200/jco.2014.55.3925

2-s2.0-84912534074

Fakhry

Westra

W. H.

Cmelak

Ridge

J. A.

Pinto

Forastiere

Gillison

M. L.

Improved survival of patients with human papillomavirus-positive head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in a prospective clinical trial

Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2008 100

6641397

261 269

10.

Huang

S. H.

O'Sullivan

Overview of the 8th edition TNM classification for head and neck cancer

Current Treatment Options in Oncology 2017 18

6641397

7 40

10.1007/s11864-017-0484-y

2-s2.0-85019767114

11.

Ziemann

Seltzsam

Dreffke

Preising

Arenz

Subtil

F. S. B.

Rieckmann

Engenhart-Cabillic

Dikomey

Wittig

Roscovitine strongly enhances the effect of olaparib on radiosensitivity for HPV neg. but not for HPV pos. HNSCC cell lines

Oncotarget 2017 8

6641397

105170 105183

12.

Mirghani

Amen

Tao

Deutsch

Levy

Increased radiosensitivity of HPV-positive head and neck cancers: molecular basis and therapeutic perspectives

Cancer Treatment Reviews 2015 41

6641397

10 844 852

10.1016/j.ctrv.2015.10.001

2-s2.0-84958913993

26476574

13.

Pirotte

E. F.

Holzhauser

Owens

Quine

Al-Hussaini

Christian

A. D.

Giles

P. J.

Man

S. T.

Evans

Powell

N. G.

Sensitivity to inhibition of DNA repair by olaparib in novel oropharyngeal cancer cell lines infected with human papillomavirus

PLoS One 2018 13

6641397

12, article e0207934

10.1371/journal.pone.0207934

2-s2.0-85058408955

30543656

14.

Güster

J. D.

Weissleder

S. V.

Busch

C.-J.

Kriegs

Petersen

Knecht

Dikomey

Rieckmann

The inhibition of PARP but not EGFR results in the radiosensitization of HPV/p16-positive HNSCC cell lines

Radiotherapy and Oncology 2014 113

6641397

345 351

15.

Rieckmann

Tribius

Grob

T. J.

Meyer

Busch

C.-J.

Petersen

Dikomey

Kriegs

HNSCC cell lines positive for HPV and p16 possess higher cellular radiosensitivity due to an impaired DSB repair capacity

Radiotherapy and Oncology 2013 107

6641397

2 242 246

10.1016/j.radonc.2013.03.013

2-s2.0-84879014884

23602369

16.

Nickson

C. M.

Moori

Carter

R. J.

Rubbi

C. P.

Parsons

J. L.

Misregulation of DNA damage repair pathways in HPV-positive head and neck squamous cell carcinoma contributes to cellular radiosensitivity

Oncotarget 2017 8

6641397

29963 29975

17.

Duensing

Münger

The human papillomavirus type 16 E6 and E7 oncoproteins independently induce numerical and structural chromosome instability

Cancer Research 2002 62

6641397

7075 7082

18.

Park

J. W.

Nickel

K. P.

Torres

A. D.

Lee

Lambert

P. F.

Kimple

R. J.

Human papillomavirus type 16 E7 oncoprotein causes a delay in repair of DNA damage

Radiotherapy and Oncology 2014 113

6641397

337 344

19.

de Souza França

P. D.

Roberts

Kossatz

Guru

Mason

Zanoni

D. K.

Abrahão

Schöder

Ganly

Patel

S. G.

Reiner

Fluorine-18 labeled poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase1 inhibitor as a potential alternative to 2-deoxy-2-[(18)F]fluoro-d-glucose positron emission tomography in oral cancer imaging

Nuclear Medicine and Biology 2020 84-85

6641397

80 87

20.

Manca

Vanzi

Rubello

Giammarile

Grassetto

Wong

K. K.

Perkins

A. C.

Colletti

P. M.

Volterrani

(18)F-FDG PET/CT quantification in head and neck squamous cell cancer: principles, technical issues and clinical applications

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2016 43

6641397

1360 1375

21.

Carney

Kossatz

Reiner

Molecular imaging of PARP

Journal of Nuclear Medicine 2017 58

6641397

1025 1030

22.

Strome

Kossatz

Zanoni

D. K.

Rajadhyaksha

Patel

Reiner

Current practice and emerging molecular imaging technologies in oral cancer screening

Molecular Imaging 2018 17

6641397

153601211880864

10.1177/1536012118808644

2-s2.0-85058124627

23.

Boussios

Karihtala

Moschetta

Karathanasi

Sadauskaite

Rassy

Pavlidis

Combined strategies with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors for the treatment of ovarian cancer: a literature review

Diagnostics (Basel) 2019 9

6641397

24.

Schöder

França

P. D. D. S.

Nakajima

Burnazi

Roberts

Brand

Grkovski

Mauguen

Dunphy

M. P.

Ghossein

R. A.

Lyashchenko

S. K.

Lewis

J. S.

O'Donoghue

J. A.

Ganly

Patel

S. G.

Lee

N. Y.

Reiner

Safety and feasibility of PARP1/2 imaging with (18)F-PARPi in patients with head and neck cancer

Clinical Cancer Research 2020 26

6641397

3110 3116

25.

Young

R. J.

Demétrio De Souza França

Pirovano

Piotrowski

A. F.

Nicklin

P. J.

Riedl

C. C.

Schwartz

Bale

T. A.

Donabedian

P. L.

Kossatz

Burnazi

E. M.

Roberts

Lyashchenko

S. K.

Miller

A. M.

Moss

N. S.

Fiasconaro

Zhang

Mauguen

Reiner

Dunphy

M. P.

Preclinical and first-in-human-brain-cancer applications of [18F]poly-(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor PET/MR

Neuro-Oncology Advances 2020 article vdaa119

10.1093/noajnl/vdaa119

26.

Kossatz

Pirovano

França

P. D. D. S.

Strome

A. L.

Sunny

S. P.

Zanoni

D. K.

Mauguen

Carney

Brand

Shah

Ramanajinappa

R. D.

Hedne

Birur

Sihag

Ghossein

R. A.

Gönen

Strome

Suresh

Molena

Ganly

Kuriakose

M. A.

Patel

S. G.

Reiner

Validation of the use of a fluorescent PARP1 inhibitor for the detection of oral, oropharyngeal and oesophageal epithelial cancers

Nature Biomedical Engineering 2020 4

6641397

272 285

27.

Chow

J. P. H.

Man

W. Y.

Mao

Chen

Cheung

Nicholls

Tsao

S. W.

Lung

M. L.

Poon

R. Y. C.

PARP1 is overexpressed in nasopharyngeal carcinoma and its inhibition enhances radiotherapy

Molecular Cancer Therapeutics 2013 12

6641397

2517 2528

28.

Kossatz

Brand

Gutiontov

Liu

J. T. C.

Lee

N. Y.

Gönen

Weber

W. A.

Reiner

Detection and delineation of oral cancer with a PARP1 targeted optical imaging agent

Scientific Reports 2016 6, article 21371

6641397

29.

Weaver

A. N.

Cooper

T. S.

Rodriguez

Trummell

H. Q.

Bonner

J. A.

Rosenthal

E. L.

Yang

E. S.

DNA double strand break repair defect and sensitivity to poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibition in human papillomavirus 16-positive head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

Oncotarget 2015 6

6641397

29 26995 27007

10.18632/oncotarget.4863

2-s2.0-84944454709

26336991

30.

Kossatz

Weber

W. A.

Reiner

Optical imaging of PARP1 in response to radiation in oral squamous cell carcinoma

PLoS One 2016 11, article e0147752

6641397

31.

Mariotti

L. G.

Pirovano

Savage

K. I.

Ghita

Ottolenghi

Prise

K. M.

Schettino

Use of the γ-H2AX assay to investigate DNA repair dynamics following multiple radiation exposures

PLoS One 2013 8, article e79541

6641397

32.

de Souza França

P. D.

Guru

Roberts

Kossatz

Mason

Abrahão

Ghossein

R. A.

Patel

S. G.

Reiner

Fluorescence-guided resection of tumors in mouse models of oral cancer

Scientific Reports 2020 10, article 11175

6641397

33.

Pirovano

Jannetti

S. A.

Carter

L. M.

Sadique

Kossatz

Guru

Franca

P. D. D. S.

Maeda

Zeglis

B. M.

Lewis

J. S.

Humm

J. L.

Reiner

Targeted brain tumor radiotherapy using an auger emitter

Clinical Cancer Research 2020 26

6641397

2871 2881

34.

Choi

E. H.

Kim

K. P.

E2F1 facilitates DNA break repair by localizing to break sites and enhancing the expression of homologous recombination factors

Experimental & Molecular Medicine 2019 51

6641397

1 12

35.

Leeman

J. E.

Bell

Hussain

S. S.

Majumdar

Rong-Mullins

Blecua

Damerla

Narang

Ravindran

P. T.

Lee

N. Y.

Riaz

Powell

S. N.

Higginson

D. S.

Human papillomavirus 16 promotes microhomology-mediated end-joining

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2019 116

6641397

43 21573 21579

10.1073/pnas.1906120116

2-s2.0-85073750200

31591214

36.

Ray Chaudhuri

Nussenzweig

The multifaceted roles of PARP1 in DNA repair and chromatin remodelling

Nature Reviews. Molecular Cell Biology 2017 18

6641397

610 621

37.

Park

G. C.

Roh

J.-L.

Cho

K.-J.

Kim

J. S.

Jin

M. H.

Choi

S.-H.

Nam

S. Y.

Kim

S. Y.

(18) F-FDG PET/CT vs. human papillomavirus, p16 and Epstein-Barr virus detection in cervical metastatic lymph nodes for identifying primary tumors

International Journal of Cancer 2017 140

6641397

1405 1412

38.

Al-Ibraheem

Buck

Krause

B. J.

Scheidhauer

Schwaiger

Clinical applications of FDG PET and PET/CT in head and neck cancer

Journal of Oncology 2009 2009

6641397

208725

10.1155/2009/208725

2-s2.0-69249203592

19707528

39.

Hojgaard

Berthelsen

A. K.

Loft

Head and neck: normal variations and benign findings in FDG positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging

PET Clinics 2014 9

6641397

2 141 145

10.1016/j.cpet.2013.11.002

2-s2.0-84897396762

25030278

[ 18 F]PARPi Imaging Is Not Affected by HPV Status In Vitro

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Cell Culture and Reagents

2.2. Western Blot

2.3. Immunofluorescence

2.4. Cell Survival

2.5. PARP1 Immunohistochemistry

2.6. [18F]PARPi Uptake Assay

2.7. Statistical Analysis

3. Results

3.1. Immunoblotting of PARP1, RAD51, and γH2AX Levels

3.2. Immunofluorescence Analysis of γH2AX and RAD51 on HPV-Positive and HPV-Negative Cell Lines

3.3. Effect of Irradiation on Survival of HPV-Positive and HPV-Negative Cells

3.4. PARP1 Expression in Human Oropharyngeal HPV-Negative and HPV-Positive Biospecimens

3.5. Immunofluorescence in Human Biospecimens

3.6. [18F]PARPi Uptake Assay

4. Discussion

5. Conclusions

Footnotes

Data Availability

Disclosure

Conflicts of Interest

Authors’ Contributions

Acknowledgments

Supplementary Materials

References

2.6. [¹⁸F]PARPi Uptake Assay

3.6. [¹⁸F]PARPi Uptake Assay