# Cannabinoid WIN 55,212-2 Inhibits Human Glioma Cell Growth by Triggering ROS-Mediated Signal Pathways

Authors: Kun Wang; Qian Wang; Qinghao Li; Zhaoqiang Zhang; Jing Gao; Cundong Fan; Baoliang Sun; Qingbin Ni
Journal: BioMed Research International
 (2021)

---

## Abstract

Glioblastoma is a highly invasive primary malignant tumor of the central nervous system. Cannabinoid analogue WIN 55,212-2 (WIN) exhibited a novel anticancer effect against human tumors. However, the anticancer potential and underlying mechanism of WIN against human glioma remain unclear. Herein, the anticancer efficiency and mechanism of WIN in U251 human glioma cells were investigated. The results showed that WIN dose-dependently inhibited U251 cell proliferation, migration, and invasionin vitro. WIN treatment also effectively suppressed U251 tumor spheroids growth ex vivo. Further studies found that WIN induced significant apoptosis as convinced by the caspase-3 activation and release of cytochrome C. Mechanism investigation revealed that WIN triggered ROS-mediated DNA damage and caused dysfunction of VEGF-AKT/FAK signal axis. However, ROS inhibition effectively attenuated WIN-induced DNA damage and dysfunction of VEGF-AKT/FAK signal axis and eventually improved U251 cell proliferation, migration, and invasion. Taken together, our findings validated that WIN had the potential to inhibit U251 cell proliferation, migration, and invasion and induce apoptosis by triggering ROS-dependent DNA damage and dysfunction of VEGF-AKT/FAK signal axis.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

Glioblastoma (GBM), originating from neuroepithelial tissue, represents the most common primary malignant tumor of the central nervous system, which shows high morbidity, high recurrence rate, and high mortality rate [1]. Although a series of advances have been made in the treatment of GBM in recent years, it is difficult to completely remove it due to its invasive growth mode and unclear boundary with the surrounding normal brain tissue. Therefore, GBM therapy is still a difficult problem, and it is necessary to find a better treatment of GBM.The cannabis system is made up of cannabinoids and their receptors. It has been found that cannabinoids have analgesic, sedative, antispasmodic, antivomiting, reducing intraocular pressure, and other pharmacological effects [2]. There are three main types of cannabinoids, including endocannabinoids (such as 2-AG), natural cannabinoids (such as tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)), and synthetic cannabinoids (such as Win55212-2 (WIN)) [3]. Existing studies have shown that cannabinoids have an inhibitory effect on the occurrence and development of colorectal cancer [4], prostate cancer [5], non-small cell lung cancer [6], and breast cancer [7], all of which have good therapeutic effects. Among which, WIN can inhibit the proliferation and induce apoptosis of various tumor cells and inhibit the growth of tumors in vivo. However, the anticancer potential and mechanism of WIN against human GBM growth have not been reported yet.ROS is an important factor in inducing apoptosis which can mediate DNA damage [8]. The VEGF-AKT/FAK signal pathway is an intracellular signaling axis which is important in regulating cell proliferation. Therefore, it is directly related to cancer invasion and longevity. Dysfunction of VEGF-AKT/FAK signaling pathway is often found in tumor cells, which are emerging as new potential therapeutic targets [9].This study explored the anticancer effects of WIN on the proliferation, migration, and invasion of U251 cells and preliminarily studied its mechanism. The results indicated WIN had the potential to inhibit U251 cell proliferation, migration, and invasion and induce apoptosis by triggering ROS-dependent DNA damage and dysfunction of VEGF-AKT/FAK signal axis.


## 2. Materials and Methods

### 2.1. Chemicals

DMEM medium, fetal bovine serum, and penicillin streptomycin were purchased from Invitrogen. WIN, MTT, DMSO, and DCFH-DA probes were purchased from Sigma. Annexin V-FITC Cell Apoptosis Assay Kit was purchased from Roche. The BCA Detection Kit was purchased from Biyuntian Biotechnology Research Institute, China. All antibodies were purchased from CST Inc. The Transwell Compartment System was purchased from Corning Costar (No.3422) and Matrigel from BD Inc.


### 2.2. Cell Culture and Drug Treatment

U251 human glioma cells were obtained from Chinese Academy of Sciences Type Culture Collection, and U251 cells were cultured in DMEM high-sugar medium containing 10% fetal bovine serum, and penicillin G sodium and streptomycin sulfate 100μg/ml each. The cells were routinely cultured in an incubator (37°C, 5% CO2, and 95% humidity).


### 2.3. Measurement of Cell Viability

Logarithmic proliferative U251 cells were collected and inoculated in a 96-well plate (5000 cells/well) for 24 h. After adhering to the wall, the cells were treated with 0-40μM WIN for 48 h or with 20 μM WIN for 0-48 h. Then, 20 μl 5 mg/ml MTT solution was added, and the supernatant was discarded after 6 h incubation. Then, 150 μl DMSO was added to each well, and the light absorption value at 570 nm was measured. 3 duplicate wells were set for each test. Cell growth was reflected by the percentage of normal cell activity (%). Phase contrast microscope (Nikon Eclipse 80i) was used to observe the morphological changes of U251.


### 2.4. Cell Migration

U251 cells in logarithmic phase seeded in 6-well plate were cultured with DMEM medium supplemented with 10% FBS for 24 h. Cells after full monolayer were gently washed by medium for 3 times, and a 200μl pipette head was used to scratch the monolayer of cells in a straight line. Then, cells were cultured with DMEM medium supplemented with 1% FBS and treated with 5, 10, and 20 μM WIN for 48 h. Cell migration was imaged at 0 h and 48 h. The migrated distance was measured, and the migrated rate was calculated. All experiment was repeated for 3 times.


### 2.5. Cell Invasion

Matrigel-procoated Transwell cell invasion assay was carried out to examine cell invasion. Firstly, the Transwell chamber was precoated with Matrigel diluent at 4°C and placed at 37°C for 3 h. Then, the chamber was added with 100μl serum-free U251 cell suspension, and 600 μl DMEM medium containing 10% FBS was added below the chamber. After 24 h of culture, the chamber was taken out, the medium was discarded, and the cells in the upper chamber were erased with a cotton swab. The cells were gently washed and fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde for 20 min. After staining with crystal violet, cell invasion was detected by the microscope. All experiments were repeated three times.


### 2.6. Tumor Spheroids

U251 cells in logarithmic growth phase were inoculated into an ultralow adherent 6-well plate. Cells were gently shaken to disperse into a single cell. After 2 days of culture, one group was treated with 0-20μM WIN for 48 h, followed by 0.01% final concentration (W/V) Cy3 for 6 h. The other group was treated with 20 μM WIN for 0-120 min, with 3 replicates. The tumor sphere volume and ROS production were measured by taking photos under a fluorescence microscope.


### 2.7. Detection of Cell Apoptosis

U251 cells were inoculated into a 6-well plate and treated with 20μM WIN for 0-12 hours and Annexin V probe for 20 minutes in darkness. Then, cells were rinsed, and the degree of apoptosis was observed with a fluorescence microscope.


### 2.8. Examination of ROS Generation

U251 cells were inoculated into a 6-well plate and treated with 20μM WIN for 0-120 min after adhering to the wall. Cells were labeled by DCFH-DA probe for 20 min in darkness; then, cells were rinsed, and ROS production was observed with a fluorescence microscope.


### 2.9. Western Blotting

U251 cells were inoculated in a 10 cm culture dish and treated with 20μM WIN for 0-48 h. U251 cells in each group were collected and lysed, and the concentration of the protein samples was determined by the BCA protein kit. Next, the SDS-PAGE gel electrophoresis was used to separate the proteins, and then, the proteins were electrotransfered to the PVDF membrane. Subsequently, the proteins were sealed with TBST containing 5% skimmed milk powder at room temperature for 1 h, followed by a drop of primary antibody, incubated at 4°C overnight, and washed with 0.1% TBST for 10 min. Next, the membrane was incubated with secondary antibody at room temperature for 1 h and washed with TBST for 10 min. The ECL chemiluminescence method and gel imager were used for imaging.


### 2.10. Statistical Analysis

Each experiment was performed in triplicate and repeated for more than 3 times. Data were presented as themean±standarddeviation (x±s). Statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS statistical package (SPSS 13.0 for Windows; SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). The difference between two groups was analyzed by a two-tailed Student’s t test. The difference among three or more groups was analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with multiple comparisons, and the bars with different letters mean statistically significant differences (P<0.05). Bars with “∗” or “∗∗” represent statistically different at P<0.05 or P<0.01 level, respectively.


## 2.1. Chemicals

DMEM medium, fetal bovine serum, and penicillin streptomycin were purchased from Invitrogen. WIN, MTT, DMSO, and DCFH-DA probes were purchased from Sigma. Annexin V-FITC Cell Apoptosis Assay Kit was purchased from Roche. The BCA Detection Kit was purchased from Biyuntian Biotechnology Research Institute, China. All antibodies were purchased from CST Inc. The Transwell Compartment System was purchased from Corning Costar (No.3422) and Matrigel from BD Inc.


## 2.2. Cell Culture and Drug Treatment

U251 human glioma cells were obtained from Chinese Academy of Sciences Type Culture Collection, and U251 cells were cultured in DMEM high-sugar medium containing 10% fetal bovine serum, and penicillin G sodium and streptomycin sulfate 100μg/ml each. The cells were routinely cultured in an incubator (37°C, 5% CO2, and 95% humidity).


## 2.3. Measurement of Cell Viability

Logarithmic proliferative U251 cells were collected and inoculated in a 96-well plate (5000 cells/well) for 24 h. After adhering to the wall, the cells were treated with 0-40μM WIN for 48 h or with 20 μM WIN for 0-48 h. Then, 20 μl 5 mg/ml MTT solution was added, and the supernatant was discarded after 6 h incubation. Then, 150 μl DMSO was added to each well, and the light absorption value at 570 nm was measured. 3 duplicate wells were set for each test. Cell growth was reflected by the percentage of normal cell activity (%). Phase contrast microscope (Nikon Eclipse 80i) was used to observe the morphological changes of U251.


## 2.4. Cell Migration

U251 cells in logarithmic phase seeded in 6-well plate were cultured with DMEM medium supplemented with 10% FBS for 24 h. Cells after full monolayer were gently washed by medium for 3 times, and a 200μl pipette head was used to scratch the monolayer of cells in a straight line. Then, cells were cultured with DMEM medium supplemented with 1% FBS and treated with 5, 10, and 20 μM WIN for 48 h. Cell migration was imaged at 0 h and 48 h. The migrated distance was measured, and the migrated rate was calculated. All experiment was repeated for 3 times.


## 2.5. Cell Invasion

Matrigel-procoated Transwell cell invasion assay was carried out to examine cell invasion. Firstly, the Transwell chamber was precoated with Matrigel diluent at 4°C and placed at 37°C for 3 h. Then, the chamber was added with 100μl serum-free U251 cell suspension, and 600 μl DMEM medium containing 10% FBS was added below the chamber. After 24 h of culture, the chamber was taken out, the medium was discarded, and the cells in the upper chamber were erased with a cotton swab. The cells were gently washed and fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde for 20 min. After staining with crystal violet, cell invasion was detected by the microscope. All experiments were repeated three times.


## 2.6. Tumor Spheroids

U251 cells in logarithmic growth phase were inoculated into an ultralow adherent 6-well plate. Cells were gently shaken to disperse into a single cell. After 2 days of culture, one group was treated with 0-20μM WIN for 48 h, followed by 0.01% final concentration (W/V) Cy3 for 6 h. The other group was treated with 20 μM WIN for 0-120 min, with 3 replicates. The tumor sphere volume and ROS production were measured by taking photos under a fluorescence microscope.


## 2.7. Detection of Cell Apoptosis

U251 cells were inoculated into a 6-well plate and treated with 20μM WIN for 0-12 hours and Annexin V probe for 20 minutes in darkness. Then, cells were rinsed, and the degree of apoptosis was observed with a fluorescence microscope.


## 2.8. Examination of ROS Generation

U251 cells were inoculated into a 6-well plate and treated with 20μM WIN for 0-120 min after adhering to the wall. Cells were labeled by DCFH-DA probe for 20 min in darkness; then, cells were rinsed, and ROS production was observed with a fluorescence microscope.


## 2.9. Western Blotting

U251 cells were inoculated in a 10 cm culture dish and treated with 20μM WIN for 0-48 h. U251 cells in each group were collected and lysed, and the concentration of the protein samples was determined by the BCA protein kit. Next, the SDS-PAGE gel electrophoresis was used to separate the proteins, and then, the proteins were electrotransfered to the PVDF membrane. Subsequently, the proteins were sealed with TBST containing 5% skimmed milk powder at room temperature for 1 h, followed by a drop of primary antibody, incubated at 4°C overnight, and washed with 0.1% TBST for 10 min. Next, the membrane was incubated with secondary antibody at room temperature for 1 h and washed with TBST for 10 min. The ECL chemiluminescence method and gel imager were used for imaging.


## 2.10. Statistical Analysis

Each experiment was performed in triplicate and repeated for more than 3 times. Data were presented as themean±standarddeviation (x±s). Statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS statistical package (SPSS 13.0 for Windows; SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). The difference between two groups was analyzed by a two-tailed Student’s t test. The difference among three or more groups was analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with multiple comparisons, and the bars with different letters mean statistically significant differences (P<0.05). Bars with “∗” or “∗∗” represent statistically different at P<0.05 or P<0.01 level, respectively.


## 3. Results

### 3.1. WIN Inhibits GBM Cell Growth

Firstly, the MTT assay was used to detect the effect of WIN on U251 cell viability. As shown in Figure1(a), U251 cells exposed to WIN (0-40 μM) for 48 h showed a dose-dependent decrease of cell viability. For example, treatment of U251 cells with 10 and 40 μM WIN significantly decreased the cell viability to 46.2% and 14.9%, respectively. The half inhibition rate concentration (IC50) of WIN is 6.7 μM. Moreover, WIN treatment time-dependently inhibited U251 cell growth, which further confirmed WIN-induced growth inhibition against U251 cells (Figure 1(b)). Additionally, morphological changes of U251 cells by phase contrast were also detected. As shown in Figure 1(c), U251 cells treated with WIN showed dose-dependent cell shrinkage, reduction in attaching cell numbers, and loss of cell-to-cell contact, which further confirmed WIN-induced anticancer effect. Taken together, these results indicated that WIN could inhibit human glioma cell growth in vitro.Figure 1
WIN inhibits U251 cell viability. WIN dose-dependently (a) and time-dependently (b) inhibited U251 cell viability. U251 cells seeded in 96-well plate were treated with 0-40μM WIN for 48 h or cells were treated with 20 μM WIN for 0-48 h. Cell viability was detected by MTT assay. (c) Morphological changes. Cells after treatment were detected by microscope (magnification, × 200). All experiments were repeated three times. Bar with “∗” or “∗∗” indicates the significant difference at P<0.05 or P<0.01 level, respectively.
(a)(b)(c)


### 3.2. WIN Blocks the Migration and Invasion of U251 Cells

Cell scratch test and Transwell test were used to observe the changes of migration and invasion ability of U251 cells before and after WIN interference. As shown in Figures2(a) and 2(c), U251 cells without WIN treatment displayed obvious cell migration and invasion. However, the migration and invasion ability of U251 cells treated with WIN were both significantly inhibited with a dose-dependent manner. The quantitative analysis results of cell migration and invasion further verified the effects (Figures 2(b) and 2(d)). These results indicated that WIN could block migration and invasion of U251 cells.Figure 2
WIN inhibits migration and invasion of U251 cells. WIN dose-dependently inhibited U251 cell migration (a) and invasion (c). Quantitative analysis of cell migration (b) and invasion (d) of U251 cells. Cell migration was conducted in a 6-well plate by a wound-healing assay and observed at 0 h and 48 h. Cell invasion was conducted by Matrigel-procoated Transwell. Quantitative analysis of cell migration and invasion was conducted by manual calculating (% of control). All experiments were repeated three times. Bar with “∗∗” indicates the significant difference at P<0.01level.
(a)(b)(c)(d)


### 3.3. WIN Suppresses the Growth of U251 Tumor SpheroidsEx Vivo

To further confirm WIN-induced growth inhibition against human glioma cells, a tumor spheroid model was conducted to evaluate its anticancer efficiencyex vivo. As shown in Figure 3(a), treatment of tumor spheroids with WIN dose-dependently inhibited the growth of tumor spheroids, as convinced by the decreased volume of tumors spheroids. The quantitative analysis of tumor spheroids volume further confirmed this effect (Figure 3(c)). Moreover, a time-dependent ROS production was also detected in tumor spheroids, as demonstrated by the increased green fluorescence (Figure 3(b)). The quantitative analysis of DCF fluorescence in tumor spheroids further convinced this effect (Figure 3(d)). Taken together, these results suggested that WIN could suppress U251 tumor spheroids growth ex vivo involving ROS production.Figure 3
WIN inhibits tumor spheroids growth of U251 cellsex vivo. (a) WIN dose-dependently inhibited tumor spheroids growth of U251 cells ex vivo. U251 cells were cultured in an ultralow attachment 6-well plate for 2 days. Then, cells were treated with 0-20 μM WIN for 48 h. (b) Win time-dependently caused ROS production in tumor spheroids of U251. Tumor spheroids of U251 were prelabeled by 10 μM DCFH-DA for 15 min, and then tumor spheroids of U251 were treated with 20 μM WIN for 0-120 min. ROS production was monitored by fluorescence microscope (magnification, × 100). Quantitative analysis of tumor spheroids volume (c) and ROS generation (d) were measured, respectively. All experiments were repeated three times. Bar with “∗∗” indicates the significant difference at P<0.01 level.
(a)(b)(c)(d)


### 3.4. WIN Induces Apoptosis of U251 Cells

To investigate WIN-induced cell death mechanism of U251 cells, the Annexin V probe was used to detect early apoptosis of U251 cells induced by WIN. As shown in Figure4(a), U251 cells after WIN treatment showed significant increase of green fluorescence with a time-dependent manner, indicating that WIN treatment induced early cell apoptosis in U251 cells. The quantitative analysis of Annexin V-positive cells further confirmed this conclusion (Figure 4(b)). Moreover, western blotting was also employed to explore the apoptotic mechanism induced by WIN. As shown in Figure 4(c), WIN treatment time-dependently triggered caspase-3 activation and cytochrome c release, which further confirmed WIN-induced apoptosis of U251 cells in protein level. Taken together, these results indicated that WIN could inhibit U251 cell growth by induction of apoptosis.Figure 4
WIN induces apoptosis of U251 cells. (a) WIN time-dependently induces apoptosis of U251 cells. U251 cells seeded in 6-well plate were treated with 20μM WIN for 0-12 h and loaded with Annexin V probe for 20 min in darkness. Then, cells were washed and the cell apoptosis were imaged by a fluorescence microscope (magnification, ×200). (b) Quantitative analysis of cell apoptosis. (c) WIN induced caspase-3 activation and Cyto-C release. Protein expression was detected by western blotting assay. All experiments were repeated three times. Bar with “∗” or “∗∗” indicates the significant difference at P<0.05 or P<0.01 level, respectively.
(a)(b)(c)


### 3.5. WIN Triggers ROS-Mediated DNA Damage

To further explore the anticancer mechanism induced by WIN, a ROS-detecting probe (DCFH-DA) was used to determine the intracellular ROS accumulation. As shown in Figure5(a), intracellular ROS levels in U251 cells showed a time-dependent increase, as reflected by the increased green fluorescence. Quantitative analysis of ROS level further confirmed WIN-induced ROS generation (Figure 5(b)). Moreover, GSH level in WIN-treated U251 cells showed a dose-dependent decrease (Figure 5(c)). Excessive ROS can attack DNA and cause DNA damage. Herein, DNA-damaging axis was examined by the western blotting method. As shown in Figure 5(d), WIN treatment significantly increased the phosphorylation of ATR (Ser428), p53 (Ser15), and histone (Ser139), suggesting that WIN treatment caused DNA damage in U251 cells. However, ROS inhibition effectively attenuated WIN-induced DNA damage. As shown in Figure 5(e), pretreatment of cells with glutathione (GSH) significantly attenuated WIN-induced phosphorylation of ATR (Ser428), p53 (Ser15), and histone (Ser139). We speculated that ROS may act as an early event in WIN-induced growth inhibition against U251 cells. Taken together, these results suggested that WIN could trigger ROS-mediated DNA damage in U251 cells.Figure 5
WIN triggers ROS-mediated DNA damage in U251 cells. (a) WIN caused time-dependent ROS generation in U251 cells. U251 cells seeded in 6-well plate were treated with 20μM WIN for 0-120 min and loaded with DCFH-DA probe for 20 min in darkness. Then, cells were washed, and the ROS generation was imaged by a fluorescence microscope (magnification, ×200). (b) Quantitative analysis of ROS level. (c) GSH level. The ELIAS method was used to detect the GSH level in WIN-treated U251 cells. (d) WIN triggered time-dependent DNA damage in U251 cells. (e) ROS inhibition inhibited WIN-induced DNA damage in U251 cells. Cells were pretreated with GSH for 2 h and cotreated with 20 μM WIN for 48 h. Protein expression was detected by western blotting assay. All experiments were repeated three times.
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)


### 3.6. WIN Disturbs VEGF-AKT/FAK Signaling Axis

VEGF-AKT/FAK signal axis plays a key role in regulating cell proliferation, survival, migration, and apoptosis. Herein, the status of VEGF-AKT/FAK signal axis in WIN-treated U251 cells was examined by western blotting. As shown in Figure6(a), WIN treatment significantly inhibited VEGF, Ser473-AKT, and Tyr397-FAK expression with a dose-dependent manner. No significant change of VEGFR2 expression was observed. However, ROS inhibition effectively improved expression of VEGF, Ser473-AKT, and Tyr397-FAK (Figure 6(b)). These results indicated that WIN inhibited U251 cell proliferation, migration, and invasion with a ROS-dependent manner, and ROS as an early apoptotic event was involved in WIN-induced anticancer mechanism in U251 cells.Figure 6
WIN inhibits VEGF-AKT/FAK signaling pathway in U251 cells. (a) WIN inhibited VEGF-AKT/FAK signaling pathway in a time-dependent manner in U251 cells. (b) ROS inhibition attenuated WIN-induced VEGF-AKT/FAK dysfunction in U251 cells. Cells were pretreated with GSH for 2 h and cotreated with 20μM WIN for 48 h. Protein expression was detected by western blotting assay. All experiments were repeated three times.
(a)(b)


## 3.1. WIN Inhibits GBM Cell Growth

Firstly, the MTT assay was used to detect the effect of WIN on U251 cell viability. As shown in Figure1(a), U251 cells exposed to WIN (0-40 μM) for 48 h showed a dose-dependent decrease of cell viability. For example, treatment of U251 cells with 10 and 40 μM WIN significantly decreased the cell viability to 46.2% and 14.9%, respectively. The half inhibition rate concentration (IC50) of WIN is 6.7 μM. Moreover, WIN treatment time-dependently inhibited U251 cell growth, which further confirmed WIN-induced growth inhibition against U251 cells (Figure 1(b)). Additionally, morphological changes of U251 cells by phase contrast were also detected. As shown in Figure 1(c), U251 cells treated with WIN showed dose-dependent cell shrinkage, reduction in attaching cell numbers, and loss of cell-to-cell contact, which further confirmed WIN-induced anticancer effect. Taken together, these results indicated that WIN could inhibit human glioma cell growth in vitro.Figure 1
WIN inhibits U251 cell viability. WIN dose-dependently (a) and time-dependently (b) inhibited U251 cell viability. U251 cells seeded in 96-well plate were treated with 0-40μM WIN for 48 h or cells were treated with 20 μM WIN for 0-48 h. Cell viability was detected by MTT assay. (c) Morphological changes. Cells after treatment were detected by microscope (magnification, × 200). All experiments were repeated three times. Bar with “∗” or “∗∗” indicates the significant difference at P<0.05 or P<0.01 level, respectively.
(a)(b)(c)


## 3.2. WIN Blocks the Migration and Invasion of U251 Cells

Cell scratch test and Transwell test were used to observe the changes of migration and invasion ability of U251 cells before and after WIN interference. As shown in Figures2(a) and 2(c), U251 cells without WIN treatment displayed obvious cell migration and invasion. However, the migration and invasion ability of U251 cells treated with WIN were both significantly inhibited with a dose-dependent manner. The quantitative analysis results of cell migration and invasion further verified the effects (Figures 2(b) and 2(d)). These results indicated that WIN could block migration and invasion of U251 cells.Figure 2
WIN inhibits migration and invasion of U251 cells. WIN dose-dependently inhibited U251 cell migration (a) and invasion (c). Quantitative analysis of cell migration (b) and invasion (d) of U251 cells. Cell migration was conducted in a 6-well plate by a wound-healing assay and observed at 0 h and 48 h. Cell invasion was conducted by Matrigel-procoated Transwell. Quantitative analysis of cell migration and invasion was conducted by manual calculating (% of control). All experiments were repeated three times. Bar with “∗∗” indicates the significant difference at P<0.01level.
(a)(b)(c)(d)


## 3.3. WIN Suppresses the Growth of U251 Tumor SpheroidsEx Vivo

To further confirm WIN-induced growth inhibition against human glioma cells, a tumor spheroid model was conducted to evaluate its anticancer efficiencyex vivo. As shown in Figure 3(a), treatment of tumor spheroids with WIN dose-dependently inhibited the growth of tumor spheroids, as convinced by the decreased volume of tumors spheroids. The quantitative analysis of tumor spheroids volume further confirmed this effect (Figure 3(c)). Moreover, a time-dependent ROS production was also detected in tumor spheroids, as demonstrated by the increased green fluorescence (Figure 3(b)). The quantitative analysis of DCF fluorescence in tumor spheroids further convinced this effect (Figure 3(d)). Taken together, these results suggested that WIN could suppress U251 tumor spheroids growth ex vivo involving ROS production.Figure 3
WIN inhibits tumor spheroids growth of U251 cellsex vivo. (a) WIN dose-dependently inhibited tumor spheroids growth of U251 cells ex vivo. U251 cells were cultured in an ultralow attachment 6-well plate for 2 days. Then, cells were treated with 0-20 μM WIN for 48 h. (b) Win time-dependently caused ROS production in tumor spheroids of U251. Tumor spheroids of U251 were prelabeled by 10 μM DCFH-DA for 15 min, and then tumor spheroids of U251 were treated with 20 μM WIN for 0-120 min. ROS production was monitored by fluorescence microscope (magnification, × 100). Quantitative analysis of tumor spheroids volume (c) and ROS generation (d) were measured, respectively. All experiments were repeated three times. Bar with “∗∗” indicates the significant difference at P<0.01 level.
(a)(b)(c)(d)


## 3.4. WIN Induces Apoptosis of U251 Cells

To investigate WIN-induced cell death mechanism of U251 cells, the Annexin V probe was used to detect early apoptosis of U251 cells induced by WIN. As shown in Figure4(a), U251 cells after WIN treatment showed significant increase of green fluorescence with a time-dependent manner, indicating that WIN treatment induced early cell apoptosis in U251 cells. The quantitative analysis of Annexin V-positive cells further confirmed this conclusion (Figure 4(b)). Moreover, western blotting was also employed to explore the apoptotic mechanism induced by WIN. As shown in Figure 4(c), WIN treatment time-dependently triggered caspase-3 activation and cytochrome c release, which further confirmed WIN-induced apoptosis of U251 cells in protein level. Taken together, these results indicated that WIN could inhibit U251 cell growth by induction of apoptosis.Figure 4
WIN induces apoptosis of U251 cells. (a) WIN time-dependently induces apoptosis of U251 cells. U251 cells seeded in 6-well plate were treated with 20μM WIN for 0-12 h and loaded with Annexin V probe for 20 min in darkness. Then, cells were washed and the cell apoptosis were imaged by a fluorescence microscope (magnification, ×200). (b) Quantitative analysis of cell apoptosis. (c) WIN induced caspase-3 activation and Cyto-C release. Protein expression was detected by western blotting assay. All experiments were repeated three times. Bar with “∗” or “∗∗” indicates the significant difference at P<0.05 or P<0.01 level, respectively.
(a)(b)(c)


## 3.5. WIN Triggers ROS-Mediated DNA Damage

To further explore the anticancer mechanism induced by WIN, a ROS-detecting probe (DCFH-DA) was used to determine the intracellular ROS accumulation. As shown in Figure5(a), intracellular ROS levels in U251 cells showed a time-dependent increase, as reflected by the increased green fluorescence. Quantitative analysis of ROS level further confirmed WIN-induced ROS generation (Figure 5(b)). Moreover, GSH level in WIN-treated U251 cells showed a dose-dependent decrease (Figure 5(c)). Excessive ROS can attack DNA and cause DNA damage. Herein, DNA-damaging axis was examined by the western blotting method. As shown in Figure 5(d), WIN treatment significantly increased the phosphorylation of ATR (Ser428), p53 (Ser15), and histone (Ser139), suggesting that WIN treatment caused DNA damage in U251 cells. However, ROS inhibition effectively attenuated WIN-induced DNA damage. As shown in Figure 5(e), pretreatment of cells with glutathione (GSH) significantly attenuated WIN-induced phosphorylation of ATR (Ser428), p53 (Ser15), and histone (Ser139). We speculated that ROS may act as an early event in WIN-induced growth inhibition against U251 cells. Taken together, these results suggested that WIN could trigger ROS-mediated DNA damage in U251 cells.Figure 5
WIN triggers ROS-mediated DNA damage in U251 cells. (a) WIN caused time-dependent ROS generation in U251 cells. U251 cells seeded in 6-well plate were treated with 20μM WIN for 0-120 min and loaded with DCFH-DA probe for 20 min in darkness. Then, cells were washed, and the ROS generation was imaged by a fluorescence microscope (magnification, ×200). (b) Quantitative analysis of ROS level. (c) GSH level. The ELIAS method was used to detect the GSH level in WIN-treated U251 cells. (d) WIN triggered time-dependent DNA damage in U251 cells. (e) ROS inhibition inhibited WIN-induced DNA damage in U251 cells. Cells were pretreated with GSH for 2 h and cotreated with 20 μM WIN for 48 h. Protein expression was detected by western blotting assay. All experiments were repeated three times.
(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)


## 3.6. WIN Disturbs VEGF-AKT/FAK Signaling Axis

VEGF-AKT/FAK signal axis plays a key role in regulating cell proliferation, survival, migration, and apoptosis. Herein, the status of VEGF-AKT/FAK signal axis in WIN-treated U251 cells was examined by western blotting. As shown in Figure6(a), WIN treatment significantly inhibited VEGF, Ser473-AKT, and Tyr397-FAK expression with a dose-dependent manner. No significant change of VEGFR2 expression was observed. However, ROS inhibition effectively improved expression of VEGF, Ser473-AKT, and Tyr397-FAK (Figure 6(b)). These results indicated that WIN inhibited U251 cell proliferation, migration, and invasion with a ROS-dependent manner, and ROS as an early apoptotic event was involved in WIN-induced anticancer mechanism in U251 cells.Figure 6
WIN inhibits VEGF-AKT/FAK signaling pathway in U251 cells. (a) WIN inhibited VEGF-AKT/FAK signaling pathway in a time-dependent manner in U251 cells. (b) ROS inhibition attenuated WIN-induced VEGF-AKT/FAK dysfunction in U251 cells. Cells were pretreated with GSH for 2 h and cotreated with 20μM WIN for 48 h. Protein expression was detected by western blotting assay. All experiments were repeated three times.
(a)(b)


## 4. Discussion

Chemotherapy plays an irreplaceable role in therapy of human GBM. However, design of new anti-GBM drugs has become an urgent task due to the poor cure rate and high fatality rate. Previous studies have confirmed that, as a new approach, WIN provides a new idea for the treatment of GBM. Accumulated studies have confirmed that cannabinoids showed potential anticancer effects against human several cancers [4–7]. However, little information about WIN-mediated anticancer study in human glioma is available, and the underlying mechanism remains unclear. This study firstly explored WIN-induced anticancer activity and mechanism in human glioma, especially the role of ROS-mediated oxidative damage.Targeted systemic treatment of tumors with cannabis has been a hot topic in recent years [10]. It has been found that the cannabis system can regulate the proliferation and apoptosis of tumor cells by affecting the signaling pathway [11–15]. With the in-depth study of the mechanism of action, the endocannabinoid system is likely to become a new target for tumor therapy, which has important clinical significance for improving the chemotherapy effect of glioma. Currently, cannabinoid receptor agonists such as Nabilone, Marinol, and the cannabinoid extract THC and CBD (Sativex) have been approved as adjuvant treatments for tumor chemotherapy [16]. However, natural cannabinoids are limited as antitumor drugs due to their certain tolerance and addictiveness.Sildenafil mesylate (Win55212-2 (WIN)) is a highly specific synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonist [17], which has overcome the above shortcomings. It can exert strong hemp activity after binding to the receptor and is one of the representatives with promising application prospects [18]. It was found that WIN could relieve breast cancer [7], prostate cancer [15], and gastric cancer [19] in mice and prolong their survival by 50%. In vitro experiments showed that WIN could induce death of prostate cancer cells, liver cancer cells, and other tumor cells [20, 21]. WIN inhibited DNA synthesis in T3 lymphocytes of human blastocysts and rodents, as well as in the Lewis lung cancer cells [22].The ability of tumor cell migration and invasion is an important basis of tumor invasion and metastasis. GBM cells will continuously invade the surrounding brain tissue, and its invasion characteristics directly lead to low total surgical resection rate and high postoperative recurrence rate, which is directly related to poor prognosis of patients. Cannabinoids have been reported to inhibit both tumor cell migration and normal lymphocyte migration [23, 24]. Highly selective excitation of CBl/2 can inhibit tumor cell migration and metastasis without adverse effects on the immune system of tumor patients [25]. In this experiment, we first carried out cell scratch experiment and found that cell migration was significantly inhibited after WIN treatment of U251 cells. The Transwell cell invasion in vitro model is considered the most ideal determination of tumor cells in vitro invasion ability of experimental model at present [26]. In this study, we used Transwell assay to detect the effect of WIN on the invasion ability of U251 cells, and the results showed that WIN significantly inhibited the invasion ability of U251 cells. Compared with the single plane cultured tumor cells, 3D tumor ball can better simulate the signal transduction microenvironment between tumor cells and extracellular matrix; being one of the best in vitro models for cancer research, it is widely used in the study of tumor cell morphology, enrichment of cancer stem cells, cancer drug high-throughput screening, etc. [27]. This experiment showed that WIN inhibited the growth of U251 cells in vitro dose-dependently and promoted the production of ROS over time.Apoptosis is considered the main cytotoxic mechanism by which antitumor drugs exert anticancer effects which is a complex process involving many factors and molecules. Mitochondria are the control center of cellular life activities, which is not only the center of cellular respiration chain and oxidative phosphorylation but also the regulation center of apoptosis [28]. Recently, it has been reported that CB receptor agonists are mitochondrial inhibitors, because they can reduce oxygen consumption and reduce mitochondrial membrane potential and mitochondrial hydrogen peroxide products, thus promoting cell apoptosis [29]. In this study, caspase-3 was continuously cleaved and Cyto-C was released, and cleaved cappase-3 and Cyto-C protein expression were significantly increased in U251 cells during the 0-48 h period of U251 cells treated with 20 μM WIN, suggesting that apoptosis induced by WIN might be related to the mitochondrial pathway of apoptosis. ROS is an important factor in inducing apoptosis [30]. Studies have confirmed that ROS generation was an early apoptotic event, which can be detected as early as 5 min [31–33]. Loss of mitochondrial membrane potential, opening of mitochondrial permeability transition pore (MPTP), and drug metabolism all contribute to the ROS generation [31–33]. In this study, it was found that WIN induced ROS production during U251 cell apoptosis, which triggered nonspecific signals in the downstream region and activated caspase-3 which leads to ultimately apoptosis, and this was further confirmed by the antioxidant GSH. To further explore its possible action mechanism, we examined the apoptosis-related protein p53. As an important tumor suppressor, P53 is involved in cell proliferation and apoptosis [34–36]. Western blotting exhibited an upregulation in the protein expression of Ser428-ATR, Ser15-p53, total-p53, and Ser139-Histone in U251 cells treated with WIN time-dependently (Figure 5(b)). Khan et al. [18] showed that WIN could activate the classical apoptosis pathway of P53, increase the expression level of the proapoptotic protein Bax, and downregulate Bcl-2, which was consistent with the results of our experiment. It is known that VEGF-AKT/FAK signaling axis is the most important pathway regulating proliferation, migration, and invasion. Our experiment confirmed that WIN inhibited VEGF-AKT/FAK signaling pathway in U251 cells in a dose-dependent manner, thus resulting in the inhibition cell proliferation, migration, and invasion.In summary, our findings provided evidence that WIN effectively inhibited human GBM cell proliferation, migration, and invasion and induces apoptosis in glioblastoma cells by triggering ROS-mediated DNA damage and regulating VEGF-AKT/FAK signals (Figure7). This study provides a new idea of WIN for therapy of GBM with potential application in clinic. However, this study only explored the in vitro anticancer activity and mechanism in human glioma. The in vivo anticancer effect and mechanism need to be further evaluated.Figure 7
Proposed signal pathways. WIN induced ROS overproduction and subsequently caused DNA damage and dysfunction of VEGF-AKT/FAK signal axis, which eventually inhibited glioma cell migration, invasion, and proliferation.



---

*Source: 6612592-2021-04-23.xml*