Session I - Advances in cancer research and therapeutics
Vol. 99 No. s1 (2026): Abstract Book del 98° Congresso Nazionale della Società Italiana di...
https://doi.org/10.4081/jbr.2026.15262

010 | Combining a gemcitabine-derived prodrug, GEM-C18, with nanoparticles to counteract acidic ph-dependent chemoresistance of pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Francesca Fracasso, Marilena Ardone, Tiago Miguel Amaral Carvalho1|2, Barbara Rolando3, Silvia Arpicco3, Valeria Bincoletto3, Francesca Bianco4, Alessandra Fiorio Pla4, Daniela Isabel Abbrescia5, Ylenia Antonacci5, Chrysovalentinos Pousis5, Sharon Natasha Cox1, Flaviana Marzano5, Graziano Pesole1, Apollonia Tullo5, Stephan Joel Reshikn1, Rosa Angela Cardone1 | 1Dept of Biosciences, Biotechnology and Environment, University of Bari, ltaly; 2CICS-UBI-Health Sciences Research Center, Universidade da Beira Interior, Covilhã, Portugal; 3Dept. of Drug Science and Technology, University of Turin, ltaly; 4Dept of Life Sciences and Systems Biology, University of Turin, Italy 5Institute of Biomembranes, Bioenergetics and Molecular Biotechnologies – IBIOM - CNR, Bari, Italy.

Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Received: 31 March 2026
Published: 31 March 2026
69
Views

Authors

Gemcitabine (GEM) is still the standard chemotherapeutic drug for advanced pancreatic cancer (PDAC) but with dismal results as most patients develop chemoresistance and metastasis. Chemoresistance is also supported by the particular PDAC tumor microenvironment (TME), in which the parenchymal tumor cells and the cancer stem cells (CSCs) grow in an extracellular matrix (ECM) with areas of low extracellular pH (pHe 6.6-6.8), which are now considered a new hallmark of cancer, being a driver of invasion and a niche for the CSCs. Therefore, reproducing the tumor ECM composition and acidic pHe could improve our understanding of PDAC malignant progression and chemoresistance. In PDAC organotypic cultures mimicking the stromal TME, we have already determined the effect of different ECM compositions on the growth of tumor parenchymal cells and CSCs, their invasion, vasculogenic abilities and their chemiosensitivity to both GEM and to a GEM prodrug, GEM-C18, which is more cytotoxic to CSCs than GEM. Here we have characterized the role of acidic pHe on PDAC malignancy, its transcriptomic landscape and its chemosensitivity to GEM- and GEM-C18. While cell exposition to acidic pHe increases PDAC cell growth, invadopodia-mediated ECM digestion, vasculogenic mimicry (VM) and chemoresistance to both drugs, GEM-C18 is more effective than GEM in increasing cell death and inhibiting ECM digestion at both physiological and acidic pHe. Further, to increase the efficacy of GEM-C18, we have now assembled this prodrug in two different liposomal formulations, DPPC and DSPC. We found that while an early treatment with free GEM-C18 doesn’t have any cytotoxic effect either in Panc1 or in CSCs, GEM-C18 incorporated into the liposomes increased cytotoxicity with a greater effect of the DSPC for both the Panc1 and the CSCs. Importantly, DSPC-containing GEM-C18 also showed an improved anti-invadopodia activity compared to free GEM-C18. Our data highlights the importance of the TME in the development of new therapeutic strategies and suggest that the incorporation of GEM-C18 in DSPC liposomes could be a strategic approach to enhance GEM-C18 cytotoxicity and its anti-invasive activity.
This work was supported by PRIN 2022 “AdaPtiviTy” and PRIN 2022 PNRR “PhOXyOmicGEM” from MUR.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

How to Cite



010 | Combining a gemcitabine-derived prodrug, GEM-C18, with nanoparticles to counteract acidic ph-dependent chemoresistance of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: Francesca Fracasso, Marilena Ardone, Tiago Miguel Amaral Carvalho1|2, Barbara Rolando3, Silvia Arpicco3, Valeria Bincoletto3, Francesca Bianco4, Alessandra Fiorio Pla4, Daniela Isabel Abbrescia5, Ylenia Antonacci5, Chrysovalentinos Pousis5, Sharon Natasha Cox1, Flaviana Marzano5, Graziano Pesole1, Apollonia Tullo5, Stephan Joel Reshikn1, Rosa Angela Cardone1 | 1Dept of Biosciences, Biotechnology and Environment, University of Bari, ltaly; 2CICS-UBI-Health Sciences Research Center, Universidade da Beira Interior, Covilhã, Portugal; 3Dept. of Drug Science and Technology, University of Turin, ltaly; 4Dept of Life Sciences and Systems Biology, University of Turin, Italy 5Institute of Biomembranes, Bioenergetics and Molecular Biotechnologies – IBIOM - CNR, Bari, Italy. (2026). Journal of Biological Research - Bollettino Della Società Italiana Di Biologia Sperimentale, 99(s1). https://doi.org/10.4081/jbr.2026.15262