Comparison of tumor-informed and tumor-naïve sequencing assays for ctDNA detection in breast cancer.

Analysis of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) to monitor cancer dynamics and detect minimal residual disease has been an area of increasing interest. Multiple methods have been proposed but few studies have compared the performance of different approaches. Here, we compare detection of ctDNA in serial plasma samples from patients with breast cancer using different tumor-informed and tumor-naïve assays designed to detect structural variants (SVs), single nucleotide variants (SNVs), and/or somatic copy-number aberrations, by multiplex PCR, hybrid capture, and different depths of whole-genome sequencing. Our results demonstrate that the ctDNA dynamics and allele fractions (AFs) were highly concordant when analyzing the same patient samples using different assays. Tumor-informed assays showed the highest sensitivity for detection of ctDNA at low concentrations. Hybrid capture sequencing targeting between 1,347 and 7,491 tumor-identified mutations at high depth was the most sensitive assay, detecting ctDNA down to an AF of 0.00024% (2.4 parts per million, ppm). Multiplex PCR targeting 21-47 tumor-identified SVs per patient detected ctDNA down to 0.00047% AF (4.7 ppm) and has potential as a clinical assay.

Rearrangement processes and structural variations show evidence of selection in oesophageal adenocarcinomas.

Oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) provides an ideal case study to characterize large-scale rearrangements. Using whole genome short-read sequencing of 383 cases, for which 214 had matched whole transcriptomes, we observed structural variations (SV) with a predominance of deletions, tandem duplications and inter-chromosome junctions that could be identified as LINE-1 mobile element (ME) insertions. Complex clusters of rearrangements resembling breakage-fusion-bridge cycles or extrachromosomal circular DNA accounted for 22% of complex SVs affecting known oncogenes. Counting SV events affecting known driver genes substantially increased the recurrence rates of these drivers. After excluding fragile sites, we identified 51 candidate new drivers in genomic regions disrupted by SVs, including ETV5, KAT6B and CLTC. RUNX1 was the most recurrently altered gene (24%), with many deletions inactivating the RUNT domain but preserved the reading frame, suggesting an altered protein product. These findings underscore the importance of identification of SV events in OAC with implications for targeted therapies.

NRG1 fusions in breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: NRG1 gene fusions may be clinically actionable, since cancers carrying the fusion transcripts can be sensitive to tyrosine kinase inhibitors. The NRG1 gene encodes ligands for the HER2(ERBB2)-ERBB3 heterodimeric receptor tyrosine kinase, and the gene fusions are thought to lead to autocrine stimulation of the receptor. The NRG1 fusion expressed in the breast cancer cell line MDA-MB-175 serves as a model example of such fusions, showing the proposed autocrine loop and exceptional drug sensitivity. However, its structure has not been properly characterised, its oncogenic activity has not been fully explained, and there is limited data on such fusions in breast cancer. METHODS: We analysed genomic rearrangements and transcripts of NRG1 in MDA-MB-175 and a panel of 571 breast cancers. RESULTS: We found that the MDA-MB-175 fusion-originally reported as a DOC4(TENM4)-NRG1 fusion, lacking the cytoplasmic tail of NRG1-is in reality a double fusion, PPP6R3-TENM4-NRG1, producing multiple transcripts, some of which include the cytoplasmic tail. We hypothesise that many NRG1 fusions may be oncogenic not for lacking the cytoplasmic domain but because they do not encode NRG1's nuclear-localised form. The fusion in MDA-MB-175 is the result of a very complex genomic rearrangement, which we partially characterised, that creates additional expressed gene fusions, RSF1-TENM4, TPCN2-RSF1, and MRPL48-GAB2. We searched for NRG1 rearrangements in 571 breast cancers subjected to genome sequencing and transcriptome sequencing and found four cases (0.7%) with fusions, WRN-NRG1, FAM91A1-NRG1, ARHGEF39-NRG1, and ZNF704-NRG1, all splicing into NRG1 at the same exon as in MDA-MB-175. However, the WRN-NRG1 and ARHGEF39-NRG1 fusions were out of frame. We identified rearrangements of NRG1 in many more (8% of) cases that seemed more likely to inactivate than to create activating fusions, or whose outcome could not be predicted because they were complex, or both. This is not surprising because NRG1 can be pro-apoptotic and is inactivated in some breast cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight the complexity of rearrangements of NRG1 in breast cancers and confirm that some do not activate but inactivate. Careful interpretation of NRG1 rearrangements will therefore be necessary for appropriate patient management.

Fbxl17 is rearranged in breast cancer and loss of its activity leads to increased global O-GlcNAcylation.

In cancer, many genes are mutated by genome rearrangement, but our understanding of the functional consequences of this remains rudimentary. Here we report the F-box protein encoded by FBXL17 is disrupted in the region of the gene that encodes its substrate-binding leucine rich repeat (LRR) domain. Truncating Fbxl17 LRRs impaired its association with the other SCF holoenzyme subunits Skp1, Cul1 and Rbx1, and decreased ubiquitination activity. Loss of the LRRs also differentially affected Fbxl17 binding to its targets. Thus, genomic rearrangements in FBXL17 are likely to disrupt SCFFbxl17-regulated networks in cancer cells. To investigate the functional effect of these rearrangements, we performed a yeast two-hybrid screen to identify Fbxl17-interacting proteins. Among the 37 binding partners Uap1, an enzyme involved in O-GlcNAcylation of proteins was identified most frequently. We demonstrate that Fbxl17 binds to UAP1 directly and inhibits its phosphorylation, which we propose regulates UAP1 activity. Knockdown of Fbxl17 expression elevated O-GlcNAcylation in breast cancer cells, arguing for a functional role for Fbxl17 in this metabolic pathway.

Complex multi-enhancer contacts captured by genome architecture mapping.

The organization of the genome in the nucleus and the interactions of genes with their regulatory elements are key features of transcriptional control and their disruption can cause disease. Here we report a genome-wide method, genome architecture mapping (GAM), for measuring chromatin contacts and other features of three-dimensional chromatin topology on the basis of sequencing DNA from a large collection of thin nuclear sections. We apply GAM to mouse embryonic stem cells and identify enrichment for specific interactions between active genes and enhancers across very large genomic distances using a mathematical model termed SLICE (statistical inference of co-segregation). GAM also reveals an abundance of three-way contacts across the genome, especially between regions that are highly transcribed or contain super-enhancers, providing a level of insight into genome architecture that, owing to the technical limitations of current technologies, has previously remained unattainable. Furthermore, GAM highlights a role for gene-expression-specific contacts in organizing the genome in mammalian nuclei.

Whole-genome sequencing of nine esophageal adenocarcinoma cell lines.

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is highly mutated and molecularly heterogeneous. The number of cell lines available for study is limited and their genome has been only partially characterized. The availability of an accurate annotation of their mutational landscape is crucial for accurate experimental design and correct interpretation of genotype-phenotype findings. We performed high coverage, paired end whole genome sequencing on eight EAC cell lines-ESO26, ESO51, FLO-1, JH-EsoAd1, OACM5.1 C, OACP4 C, OE33, SK-GT-4-all verified against original patient material, and one esophageal high grade dysplasia cell line, CP-D. We have made available the aligned sequence data and report single nucleotide variants (SNVs), small insertions and deletions (indels), and copy number alterations, identified by comparison with the human reference genome and known single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). We compare these putative mutations to mutations found in primary tissue EAC samples, to inform the use of these cell lines as a model of EAC.

Mutational signatures in esophageal adenocarcinoma define etiologically distinct subgroups with therapeutic relevance.

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) has a poor outcome, and targeted therapy trials have thus far been disappointing owing to a lack of robust stratification methods. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) analysis of 129 cases demonstrated that this is a heterogeneous cancer dominated by copy number alterations with frequent large-scale rearrangements. Co-amplification of receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) and/or downstream mitogenic activation is almost ubiquitous; thus tailored combination RTK inhibitor (RTKi) therapy might be required, as we demonstrate in vitro. However, mutational signatures showed three distinct molecular subtypes with potential therapeutic relevance, which we verified in an independent cohort (n = 87): (i) enrichment for BRCA signature with prevalent defects in the homologous recombination pathway; (ii) dominant T>G mutational pattern associated with a high mutational load and neoantigen burden; and (iii) C>A/T mutational pattern with evidence of an aging imprint. These subtypes could be ascertained using a clinically applicable sequencing strategy (low coverage) as a basis for therapy selection.

Mobile element insertions are frequent in oesophageal adenocarcinomas and can mislead paired-end sequencing analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mobile elements are active in the human genome, both in the germline and cancers, where they can mutate driver genes. RESULTS: While analysing whole genome paired-end sequencing of oesophageal adenocarcinomas to find genomic rearrangements, we identified three ways in which new mobile element insertions appear in the data, resembling translocation or insertion junctions: inserts where unique sequence has been transduced by an L1 (Long interspersed element 1) mobile element; novel inserts that are confidently, but often incorrectly, mapped by alignment software to L1s or polyA tracts in the reference sequence; and a combination of these two ways, where different sequences within one insert are mapped to different loci. We identified nine unique sequences that were transduced by neighbouring L1s, both L1s in the reference genome and L1s not present in the reference. Many of the resulting inserts were small fragments that include little or no recognisable mobile element sequence. We found 6 loci in the reference genome to which sequence reads from inserts were frequently mapped, probably erroneously, by alignment software: these were either L1 sequence or particularly long polyA runs. Inserts identified from such apparent rearrangement junctions averaged 16 inserts/tumour, range 0-153 insertions in 43 tumours. However, many inserts would not be detected by mapping the sequences to the reference genome, because they do not include sufficient mappable sequence. To estimate total somatic inserts we searched for polyA sequences that were not present in the matched normal or other normals from the same tumour batch, and were not associated with known polymorphisms. Samples of these candidate inserts were verified by sequencing across them or manual inspection of surrounding reads: at least 85 % were somatic and resembled L1-mediated events, most including L1Hs sequence. Approximately 100 such inserts were detected per tumour on average (range zero to approximately 700). CONCLUSIONS: Somatic mobile elements insertions are abundant in these tumours, with over 75 % of cases having a number of novel inserts detected. The inserts create a variety of problems for the interpretation of paired-end sequencing data.

Ordering of mutations in preinvasive disease stages of esophageal carcinogenesis.

Cancer genome sequencing studies have identified numerous driver genes, but the relative timing of mutations in carcinogenesis remains unclear. The gradual progression from premalignant Barrett's esophagus to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) provides an ideal model to study the ordering of somatic mutations. We identified recurrently mutated genes and assessed clonal structure using whole-genome sequencing and amplicon resequencing of 112 EACs. We next screened a cohort of 109 biopsies from 2 key transition points in the development of malignancy: benign metaplastic never-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus (NDBE; n=66) and high-grade dysplasia (HGD; n=43). Unexpectedly, the majority of recurrently mutated genes in EAC were also mutated in NDBE. Only TP53 and SMAD4 mutations occurred in a stage-specific manner, confined to HGD and EAC, respectively. Finally, we applied this knowledge to identify high-risk Barrett's esophagus in a new non-endoscopic test. In conclusion, mutations in EAC driver genes generally occur exceptionally early in disease development with profound implications for diagnostic and therapeutic strategies.

The relative timing of mutations in a breast cancer genome.

Many tumors have highly rearranged genomes, but a major unknown is the relative importance and timing of genome rearrangements compared to sequence-level mutation. Chromosome instability might arise early, be a late event contributing little to cancer development, or happen as a single catastrophic event. Another unknown is which of the point mutations and rearrangements are selected. To address these questions we show, using the breast cancer cell line HCC1187 as a model, that we can reconstruct the likely history of a breast cancer genome. We assembled probably the most complete map to date of a cancer genome, by combining molecular cytogenetic analysis with sequence data. In particular, we assigned most sequence-level mutations to individual chromosomes by sequencing of flow sorted chromosomes. The parent of origin of each chromosome was assigned from SNP arrays. We were then able to classify most of the mutations as earlier or later according to whether they occurred before or after a landmark event in the evolution of the genome, endoreduplication (duplication of its entire genome). Genome rearrangements and sequence-level mutations were fairly evenly divided earlier and later, suggesting that genetic instability was relatively constant throughout the life of this tumor, and chromosome instability was not a late event. Mutations that caused chromosome instability would be in the earlier set. Strikingly, the great majority of inactivating mutations and in-frame gene fusions happened earlier. The non-random timing of some of the mutations may be evidence that they were selected.

Structural analysis of the genome of breast cancer cell line ZR-75-30 identifies twelve expressed fusion genes.

BACKGROUND: It has recently emerged that common epithelial cancers such as breast cancers have fusion genes like those in leukaemias. In a representative breast cancer cell line, ZR-75-30, we searched for fusion genes, by analysing genome rearrangements. RESULTS: We first analysed rearrangements of the ZR-75-30 genome, to around 10kb resolution, by molecular cytogenetic approaches, combining array painting and array CGH. We then compared this map with genomic junctions determined by paired-end sequencing. Most of the breakpoints found by array painting and array CGH were identified in the paired end sequencing-55% of the unamplified breakpoints and 97% of the amplified breakpoints (as these are represented by more sequence reads). From this analysis we identified 9 expressed fusion genes: APPBP2-PHF20L1, BCAS3-HOXB9, COL14A1-SKAP1, TAOK1-PCGF2, TIAM1-NRIP1, TIMM23-ARHGAP32, TRPS1-LASP1, USP32-CCDC49 and ZMYM4-OPRD1. We also determined the genomic junctions of a further three expressed fusion genes that had been described by others, BCAS3-ERBB2, DDX5-DEPDC6/DEPTOR and PLEC1-ENPP2. Of this total of 12 expressed fusion genes, 9 were in the coamplification. Due to the sensitivity of the technologies used, we estimate these 12 fusion genes to be around two-thirds of the true total. Many of the fusions seem likely to be driver mutations. For example, PHF20L1, BCAS3, TAOK1, PCGF2, and TRPS1 are fused in other breast cancers. HOXB9 and PHF20L1 are members of gene families that are fused in other neoplasms. Several of the other genes are relevant to cancer-in addition to ERBB2, SKAP1 is an adaptor for Src, DEPTOR regulates the mTOR pathway and NRIP1 is an estrogen-receptor coregulator. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first structural analysis of a breast cancer genome that combines classical molecular cytogenetic approaches with sequencing. Paired-end sequencing was able to detect almost all breakpoints, where there was adequate read depth. It supports the view that gene breakage and gene fusion are important classes of mutation in breast cancer, with a typical breast cancer expressing many fusion genes.

Independence of repressive histone marks and chromatin compaction during senescent heterochromatic layer formation.

The expansion of repressive epigenetic marks has been implicated in heterochromatin formation during embryonic development, but the general applicability of this mechanism is unclear. Here we show that nuclear rearrangement of repressive histone marks H3K9me3 and H3K27me3 into nonoverlapping structural layers characterizes senescence-associated heterochromatic foci (SAHF) formation in human fibroblasts. However, the global landscape of these repressive marks remains unchanged upon SAHF formation, suggesting that in somatic cells, heterochromatin can be formed through the spatial repositioning of pre-existing repressively marked histones. This model is reinforced by the correlation of presenescent replication timing with both the subsequent layered structure of SAHFs and the global landscape of the repressive marks, allowing us to integrate microscopic and genomic information. Furthermore, modulation of SAHF structure does not affect the occupancy of these repressive marks, nor vice versa. These experiments reveal that high-order heterochromatin formation and epigenetic remodeling of the genome can be discrete events.

Tumor initiating but differentiated luminal-like breast cancer cells are highly invasive in the absence of basal-like activity.

The majority of human breast cancers exhibit luminal epithelial differentiation. However, most aggressive behavior, including invasion and purported cancer stem cell activity, are considered characteristics of basal-like cells. We asked the following questions: Must luminal-like breast cancer cells become basal-like to initiate tumors or to invade? Could luminally differentiated cells within a basally initiated hierarchy also be tumorigenic? To answer these questions, we used rare and mutually exclusive lineage markers to isolate subsets of luminal-like and basal-like cells from human breast tumors. We enriched for populations with or without prominent basal-like traits from individual tumors or single cell cloning from cell lines and recovered cells with a luminal-like phenotype. Tumor cells with basal-like traits mimicked phenotypic and functional behavior associated with stem cells assessed by gene expression, mammosphere formation and lineage markers. Luminal-like cells without basal-like traits, surprisingly, were fully capable of initiating invasive tumors in NOD SCID gamma (NSG) mice. In fact, these phenotypically pure luminal-like cells generated larger and more invasive tumors than their basal-like counterparts. The tumorigenicity and invasive potential of the luminal-like cancer cells relied strongly on the expression of the gene GCNT1, which encodes a key glycosyltransferase controlling O-glycan branching. These findings demonstrate that basal-like cells, as defined currently, are not a requirement for breast tumor aggressiveness, and that within a single tumor there are multiple "stem-like" cells with tumorigenic potential casting some doubt on the hypothesis of hierarchical or differentiative loss of tumorigenicity.

Are breast cancers driven by fusion genes?

For many years, it was assumed that gene fusions were a type of mutation confined largely to leukemias and sarcomas. However, fusion genes are now known to be important in several epithelial cancers and a number have been described in breast cancers. In the December 2011 issue of Nature Medicine, Robinson and colleagues reported many more gene fusions -including the first recurrent fusion, SEC16A-NOTCH1 - in breast cancers. Several genes, including members of the MAST (microtubule-associated serine threonine) kinase and Notch gene families, are fused more than once. This finding supports an emerging story that most breast cancers express a number of fusion genes.

Estimation of rearrangement phylogeny for cancer genomes.

Cancer genomes are complex, carrying thousands of somatic mutations including base substitutions, insertions and deletions, rearrangements, and copy number changes that have been acquired over decades. Recently, technologies have been introduced that allow generation of high-resolution, comprehensive catalogs of somatic alterations in cancer genomes. However, analyses of these data sets generally do not indicate the order in which mutations have occurred, or the resulting karyotype. Here, we introduce a mathematical framework that begins to address this problem. By using samples with accurate data sets, we can reconstruct relatively complex temporal sequences of rearrangements and provide an assembly of genomic segments into digital karyotypes. For cancer genes mutated in rearranged regions, this information can provide a chronological examination of the selective events that have taken place.

The role of tandem duplicator phenotype in tumour evolution in high-grade serous ovarian cancer.

High-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC) is characterized by genomic instability, ubiquitous TP53 loss, and frequent development of platinum resistance. Loss of homologous recombination (HR) is a mutator phenotype present in 50% of HGSOCs and confers hypersensitivity to platinum treatment. We asked which other mutator phenotypes are present in HGSOC and how they drive the emergence of platinum resistance. We performed whole-genome paired-end sequencing on a model of two HGSOC cases, each consisting of a pair of cell lines established before and after clinical resistance emerged, to describe their structural variants (SVs) and to infer their ancestral genomes as the SVs present within each pair. The first case (PEO1/PEO4), with HR deficiency, acquired translocations and small deletions through its early evolution, but a revertant BRCA2 mutation restoring HR function in the resistant lineage re-stabilized its genome and reduced platinum sensitivity. The second case (PEO14/PEO23) had 216 tandem duplications and did not show evidence of HR or mismatch repair deficiency. By comparing the cell lines to the tissues from which they originated, we showed that the tandem duplicator mutator phenotype arose early in progression in vivo and persisted throughout evolution in vivo and in vitro, which may have enabled continual evolution. From the analysis of SNP array data from 454 HGSOC cases in The Cancer Genome Atlas series, we estimate that 12.8% of cases show patterns of aberrations similar to the tandem duplicator, and this phenotype is mutually exclusive with BRCA1/2 carrier mutations.

A correction to the research article titled: "Amplification of the driving oncogene, KRAS or BRAF, underpins acquired resistance to MEK1/2 inhibitors in colorectal cancer cells" by A. S. Little, K. Balmanno, M. J. Sale, S. Newman, J. R. Dry, M. Hampson, P. A. W. Edwards, P. D. Smith, S. J. Cook.

The acquisition of resistance to protein kinase inhibitors is a growing problem in cancer treatment. We modeled acquired resistance to the MEK1/2 (mitogen-activated or extracellular signal­regulated protein kinase kinases 1 and 2) inhibitor selumetinib (AZD6244) in colorectal cancer cell lines harboring mutations in BRAF (COLO205 and HT29 lines) or KRAS (HCT116 and LoVo lines). AZD6244-resistant derivatives were refractory to AZD6244-induced cell cycle arrest and death and exhibited a marked increase in ERK1/2 (extracellular signal­regulated kinases 1 and 2) pathway signaling and cyclin D1 abundance when assessed in the absence of inhibitor. Genomic sequencing revealed no acquired mutations in MEK1 or MEK2, the primary target of AZD6244. Rather, resistant lines showed a marked up-regulation of their respective driving oncogenes, BRAF600E or KRAS13D, due to intrachromosomal amplification. Inhibition of BRAF reversed resistance to AZD6244 in COLO205 cells, which suggested that combined inhibition of MEK1/2 and BRAF may reduce the likelihood of acquired resistance in tumors with BRAF600E. Knockdown of KRAS reversed AZD6244 resistance in HCT116 cells as well as reduced the activation of ERK1/2 and protein kinase B; however, the combined inhibition of ERK1/2 and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase signaling had little effect on AZD6244 resistance, suggesting that additional KRAS effector pathways contribute to this process. Microarray analysis identified increased expression of an 18-gene signature previously identified as reflecting MEK1/2 pathway output in resistant cells. Thus, amplification of the driving oncogene (BRAF600E or KRAS13D) can drive acquired resistance to MEK1/2 inhibitors by increasing signaling through the ERK1/2 pathway. However, up-regulation of KRAS13D leads to activation of multiple KRAS effector pathways, underlining the therapeutic challenge posed by KRAS mutations. These results may have implications for the use of combination therapies.

Single-molecule analysis of genome rearrangements in cancer.

Rearrangements of the genome can be detected by microarray methods and massively parallel sequencing, which identify copy-number alterations and breakpoint junctions, but these techniques are poorly suited to reconstructing the long-range organization of rearranged chromosomes, for example, to distinguish between translocations and insertions. The single-DNA-molecule technique HAPPY mapping is a method for mapping normal genomes that should be able to analyse genome rearrangements, i.e. deviations from a known genome map, to assemble rearrangements into a long-range map. We applied HAPPY mapping to cancer cell lines to show that it could identify rearrangement of genomic segments, even in the presence of normal copies of the genome. We could distinguish a simple interstitial deletion from a copy-number loss at an inversion junction, and detect a known translocation. We could determine whether junctions detected by sequencing were on the same chromosome, by measuring their linkage to each other, and hence map the rearrangement. Finally, we mapped an uncharacterized reciprocal translocation in the T-47D breast cancer cell line to about 2 kb and hence cloned the translocation junctions. We conclude that HAPPY mapping is a versatile tool for determining the structure of rearrangements in the human genome.

Amplification of the driving oncogene, KRAS or BRAF, underpins acquired resistance to MEK1/2 inhibitors in colorectal cancer cells.

The acquisition of resistance to protein kinase inhibitors is a growing problem in cancer treatment. We modeled acquired resistance to the MEK1/2 (mitogen-activated or extracellular signal-regulated protein kinase kinases 1 and 2) inhibitor selumetinib (AZD6244) in colorectal cancer cell lines harboring mutations in BRAF (COLO205 and HT29 lines) or KRAS (HCT116 and LoVo lines). AZD6244-resistant derivatives were refractory to AZD6244-induced cell cycle arrest and death and exhibited a marked increase in ERK1/2 (extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1 and 2) pathway signaling and cyclin D1 abundance when assessed in the absence of inhibitor. Genomic sequencing revealed no acquired mutations in MEK1 or MEK2, the primary target of AZD6244. Rather, resistant lines showed a marked up-regulation of their respective driving oncogenes, BRAF(600E) or KRAS(13D), due to intrachromosomal amplification. Inhibition of BRAF reversed resistance to AZD6244 in COLO205 cells, which suggested that combined inhibition of MEK1/2 and BRAF may reduce the likelihood of acquired resistance in tumors with BRAF(600E). Knockdown of KRAS reversed AZD6244 resistance in HCT116 cells as well as reduced the activation of ERK1/2 and protein kinase B; however, the combined inhibition of ERK1/2 and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase signaling had little effect on AZD6244 resistance, suggesting that additional KRAS effector pathways contribute to this process. Microarray analysis identified increased expression of an 18-gene signature previously identified as reflecting MEK1/2 pathway output in resistant cells. Thus, amplification of the driving oncogene (BRAF(600E) or KRAS(13D)) can drive acquired resistance to MEK1/2 inhibitors by increasing signaling through the ERK1/2 pathway. However, up-regulation of KRAS(13D) leads to activation of multiple KRAS effector pathways, underlining the therapeutic challenge posed by KRAS mutations. These results may have implications for the use of combination therapies.