ABSTRACT
Resistance to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) remains a clinical challenge in Ph-positive variants of chronic myeloid leukemia. We provide mechanistic insights into a previously undisclosed MEK1/2/BCR::ABL1/BCR/ABL1-driven signaling loop that may determine the efficacy of arsenic trioxide (ATO) in TKI-resistant leukemic patients. We find that activated MEK1/2 assemble into a pentameric complex with BCR::ABL1, BCR and ABL1 to induce phosphorylation of BCR and BCR::ABL1 at Tyr360 and Tyr177, and ABL1, at Thr735 and Tyr412 residues thus provoking loss of BCR's tumor-suppression functions, enhanced oncogenic activity of BCR::ABL1, cytoplasmic retention of ABL1 and consequently drug resistance. Coherently, pharmacological blockade of MEK1/2 induces dissociation of the pentameric MEK1/2/BCR::ABL1/BCR/ABL1 complex and causes a concurrent BCRY360/Y177, BCR::ABL1Y360/Y177 and cytoplasmic ABL1Y412/T735 dephosphorylation thereby provoking the rescue of the BCR's anti-oncogenic activities, nuclear accumulation of ABL1 with tumor-suppressive functions and consequently, growth inhibition of the leukemic cells and an ATO sensitization via BCR-MYC and ABL1-p73 signaling axes activation. Additionally, the allosteric activation of nuclear ABL1 was consistently found to enhance the anti-leukemic effects of the MEK1/2 inhibitor Mirdametinib, which when combined with ATO, significantly prolonged the survival of mice bearing BCR::ABL1-T315I-induced leukemia. These findings highlight the therapeutic potential of MEK1/2-inhibitors/ATO combination for the treatment of TKI-resistant leukemia.
Subject(s)
Fusion Proteins, bcr-abl , Leukemia, Myelogenous, Chronic, BCR-ABL Positive , Mice , Animals , Arsenic Trioxide/pharmacology , Fusion Proteins, bcr-abl/genetics , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/pharmacology , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Drug Resistance, Neoplasm , Apoptosis , Leukemia, Myelogenous, Chronic, BCR-ABL Positive/drug therapyABSTRACT
In polycythemia vera (PV), the prognostic relevance of an ELN-defined complete response (CR) to hydroxyurea (HU), the predictors of response, and patients' triggers for switching to ruxolitinib are uncertain. In a real-world analysis, we evaluated the predictors of response, their impact on the clinical outcomes of CR to HU, and the correlations between partial or no response (PR/NR) and a patient switching to ruxolitinib. Among 563 PV patients receiving HU for ≥12 months, 166 (29.5%) achieved CR, 264 achieved PR, and 133 achieved NR. In a multivariate analysis, the absence of splenomegaly (p = 0.03), pruritus (p = 0.002), and a median HU dose of ≥1 g/day (p < 0.001) remained associated with CR. Adverse events were more frequent with a median HU dose of ≥1 g/day. Overall, 283 PR/NR patients (71.3%) continued HU, and 114 switched to ruxolitinib. In the 449 patients receiving only HU, rates of thrombosis, hemorrhages, progression, and overall survival were comparable among the CR, PR, and NR groups. Many PV patients received underdosed HU, leading to lower CR and toxicity rates. In addition, many patients continued HU despite a PR/NR; however, splenomegaly and other symptoms were the main drivers of an early switch. Better HU management, standardization of the criteria for and timing of responses to HU, and adequate intervention in poor responders should be advised.
ABSTRACT
Hematological patients at higher risk of severe COVID-19 were excluded from the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine trials. In this single-center observational prospective study (NCT05074706), we evaluate immune response in the hematological patients followed at the Hematological Division of San Gerardo Hospital, Monza (Italy) deemed to be severely immunosuppressed after vaccination with two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G titers above the cutoff value of 33.8 BAU/ml were detected in 303 (80.2%) out of the 378 patients enrolled. Patients with lymphoproliferative disorders had a significant lower probability of immunization (43.2% vs. 88.4%, p < 0.001). Patients treated with anti-CD20 showed a significantly lower probability of immunization compared to all other treatments (21.4%, p < 0.0001). Among 69 patients who failed seroconversion, 15 patients (22.7%) showed a positive T-cell response. Patients previously treated with anti-CD20 were 2.4 times more likely to test positive for T-cell responses (p = 0.014). Within a follow-up of 9 months from the second COVID-19 vaccination, symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections were reported by 20 patients (5.3%) and four of them required hospitalization. Successful serological or T-cell-mediated immunization conferred protection from symptomatic COVID-19. Patients treated with anti-CD20 who were not seroconverted after vaccination might still be protected from COVID-19 due to the T-cell immune response.