RESUMEN
Missense variants throughout ACTA2, encoding smooth muscle α-actin (αSMA), predispose to adult onset thoracic aortic disease, but variants disrupting arginine 179 (R179) lead to Smooth Muscle Dysfunction Syndrome (SMDS) characterized by childhood-onset diverse vascular diseases. Our data indicate that αSMA localizes to the nucleus in wildtype (WT) smooth muscle cells (SMCs), enriches in the nucleus with SMC differentiation, and associates with chromatin remodeling complexes and SMC contractile gene promotors, and the ACTA2 p.R179 variant decreases nuclear localization of αSMA. SMCs explanted from a SMC-specific conditional knockin mouse model, Acta2SMC-R179/+, are less differentiated than WT SMCs, both in vitro and in vivo, and have global changes in chromatin accessibility. Induced pluripotent stem cells from patients with ACTA2 p.R179 variants fail to fully differentiate from neural crest cells to SMCs, and single cell transcriptomic analyses of an ACTA2 p.R179H patient's aortic tissue shows increased SMC plasticity. Thus, nuclear αSMA participates in SMC differentiation and loss of this nuclear activity occurs with ACTA2 p.R179 pathogenic variants.
RESUMEN
Treatment with therapy targeting BRAF and MEK (BRAF/MEK) has revolutionized care in melanoma and other cancers; however, therapeutic resistance is common and innovative treatment strategies are needed1,2. Here we studied a group of patients with melanoma who were treated with neoadjuvant BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy ( NCT02231775 , n = 51) and observed significantly higher rates of major pathological response (MPR; ≤10% viable tumour at resection) and improved recurrence-free survival (RFS) in female versus male patients (MPR, 66% versus 14%, P = 0.001; RFS, 64% versus 32% at 2 years, P = 0.021). The findings were validated in several additional cohorts2-4 of patients with unresectable metastatic melanoma who were treated with BRAF- and/or MEK-targeted therapy (n = 664 patients in total), demonstrating improved progression-free survival and overall survival in female versus male patients in several of these studies. Studies in preclinical models demonstrated significantly impaired anti-tumour activity in male versus female mice after BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy (P = 0.006), with significantly higher expression of the androgen receptor in tumours of male and female BRAF/MEK-treated mice versus the control (P = 0.0006 and P = 0.0025). Pharmacological inhibition of androgen receptor signalling improved responses to BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy in male and female mice (P = 0.018 and P = 0.003), whereas induction of androgen receptor signalling (through testosterone administration) was associated with a significantly impaired response to BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy in male and female patients (P = 0.021 and P < 0.0001). Together, these results have important implications for therapy.
Asunto(s)
Antagonistas de Receptores Androgénicos , Melanoma , Quinasas de Proteína Quinasa Activadas por Mitógenos , Terapia Molecular Dirigida , Proteínas Proto-Oncogénicas B-raf , Receptores Androgénicos , Animales , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Melanoma/patología , Ratones , Quinasas de Proteína Quinasa Activadas por Mitógenos/antagonistas & inhibidores , Inhibidores de Proteínas Quinasas/uso terapéutico , Proteínas Proto-Oncogénicas B-raf/antagonistas & inhibidores , Receptores Androgénicos/metabolismo , Neoplasias Cutáneas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Cutáneas/patología , Análisis de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Obesity is a well-known risk factor for endometrial cancer, but the mechanisms of obesity-related carcinogenesis are not well defined, particularly for premenopausal women. With the continuing obesity epidemic, increases in the incidence of endometrial cancer and a younger age of diagnosis are often attributed to a hyperestrogenic state created by hormone production in adipose tissue, but significant knowledge gaps remain. The balance of estrogen-responsive signals has not been defined in the endometrium of premenopausal women with obesity, where obesity may not create hyperestrogenism in the context of ovaries being the primary source of estrogen production. Obesity is associated with a state of low-grade, chronic inflammation that can promote tumorigenesis, and it is also known that hormonal changes alter the immune microenvironment of the endometrium. However, limited research has been conducted on endometrial immune-response changes in women who have an increased risk for cancer due to obesity. OBJECTIVE: Endometrial estrogen-regulated biomarkers, previously shown to be dysregulated in endometrial cancer, were evaluated in a cohort of premenopausal women to determine if obesity is associated with differences in the biomarker expression levels, which might reflect an altered risk of developing cancer. The expression of a multiplexed panel of immune-related genes was also evaluated for expression differences related to obesity. STUDY DESIGN: Premenopausal women with a body mass index of ≥30 kg/m2 (n=97) or a body mass index of ≤25 kg/m2 (n=33) were prospectively enrolled in this cross-sectional study, which included the assessment of serum metabolic markers and a timed endometrial biopsy for pathologic evaluation, hormone-regulated biomarker analysis, and immune response gene expression analysis. Medical and gynecologic histories were obtained. Endometrial gene expression markers were also compared across the body mass index groups in a previous cohort of premenopausal women with an inherited cancer risk (Lynch syndrome). RESULTS: In addition to known systemic metabolic differences, histologically normal endometria from women with obesity showed a decrease in gene expression of progesterone receptor (P=.0027) and the estrogen-induced genes retinaldehyde dehydrogenase 2 (P=.008), insulin-like growth factor 1 (P=.016), and survivin (P=.042) when compared with women without obesity. The endometrial biomarkers insulin-like growth factor 1, survivin, and progesterone receptor remained statistically significant in multivariate linear regression models. In contrast, women with obesity and Lynch syndrome had an increased expression of insulin-like growth factor 1 (P=.017). There were no differences in endometrial proliferation, and limited endometrial immune differences were observed. CONCLUSION: When comparing premenopausal women with and without obesity in the absence of endometrial pathology or an inherited cancer risk, the expression of the endometrial biomarkers does not reflect a local hyperestrogenic environment, but it instead reflects a decreased cancer risk profile that may be indicative of a compensated state. In describing premenopausal endometrial cancer risk, it may be insufficient to attribute a high-risk state to obesity alone; further studies are warranted to evaluate individualized biomarker profiles for differences in the hormone-responsive signals or immune response. In patients with Lynch syndrome, the endometrial biomarker profile suggests that obesity further increases the risk of developing cancer.