Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Sci Transl Med ; 13(609): eabb3738, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34516823

ABSTRACT

The clinical efficacy of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)­targeted therapy in EGFR-mutant non­small cell lung cancer is limited by the development of drug resistance. One mechanism of EGFR inhibitor resistance occurs through amplification of the human growth factor receptor (MET) proto-oncogene, which bypasses EGFR to reactivate downstream signaling. Tumors exhibiting concurrent EGFR mutation and MET amplification are historically thought to be codependent on the activation of both oncogenes. Hence, patients whose tumors harbor both alterations are commonly treated with a combination of EGFR and MET tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Here, we identify and characterize six patient-derived models of EGFR-mutant, MET-amplified lung cancer that have switched oncogene dependence to rely exclusively on MET activation for survival. We demonstrate in this MET-driven subset of EGFR TKI-refractory cancers that canonical EGFR downstream signaling was governed by MET, even in the presence of sustained mutant EGFR expression and activation. In these models, combined EGFR and MET inhibition did not result in greater efficacy in vitro or in vivo compared to single-agent MET inhibition. We further identified a reduced EGFR:MET mRNA expression stoichiometry as associated with MET oncogene dependence and single-agent MET TKI sensitivity. Tumors from 10 of 11 EGFR inhibitor­resistant EGFR-mutant, MET-amplified patients also exhibited a reduced EGFR:MET mRNA ratio. Our findings reveal that a subset of EGFR-mutant, MET-amplified lung cancers develop dependence on MET activation alone, suggesting that such patients could be treated with a single-agent MET TKI rather than the current standard-of-care EGFR and MET inhibitor combination regimens.


Subject(s)
ErbB Receptors , Lung Neoplasms , Cell Line, Tumor , Drug Resistance, Neoplasm/genetics , ErbB Receptors/genetics , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Lung Neoplasms/genetics , Mutation/genetics , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/pharmacology , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use
2.
Cancer Discov ; 7(7): 736-749, 2017 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28411207

ABSTRACT

Current treatments for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) that target androgen receptor (AR) signaling improve patient survival, yet ultimately fail. Here, we provide novel insights into treatment response for the antiandrogen abiraterone by analyses of a genetically engineered mouse (GEM) model with combined inactivation of Trp53 and Pten, which are frequently comutated in human CRPC. These NPp53 mice fail to respond to abiraterone and display accelerated progression to tumors resembling treatment-related CRPC with neuroendocrine differentiation (CRPC-NE) in humans. Cross-species computational analyses identify master regulators of adverse response that are conserved with human CRPC-NE, including the neural differentiation factor SOX11, which promotes neuroendocrine differentiation in cells derived from NPp53 tumors. Furthermore, abiraterone-treated NPp53 prostate tumors contain regions of focal and/or overt neuroendocrine differentiation, distinguished by their proliferative potential. Notably, lineage tracing in vivo provides definitive and quantitative evidence that focal and overt neuroendocrine regions arise by transdifferentiation of luminal adenocarcinoma cells. These findings underscore principal roles for TP53 and PTEN inactivation in abiraterone resistance and progression from adenocarcinoma to CRPC-NE by transdifferentiation.Significance: Understanding adverse treatment response and identifying patients likely to fail treatment represent fundamental clinical challenges. By integrating analyses of GEM models and human clinical data, we provide direct genetic evidence for transdifferentiation as a mechanism of drug resistance as well as for stratifying patients for treatment with antiandrogens. Cancer Discov; 7(7); 736-49. ©2017 AACR.See related commentary by Sinha and Nelson, p. 673This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 653.


Subject(s)
Androstenes/administration & dosage , Neuroendocrine Tumors/drug therapy , PTEN Phosphohydrolase/genetics , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/drug therapy , Receptors, Androgen/genetics , Tumor Suppressor Protein p53/genetics , Androstenes/adverse effects , Animals , Cell Line, Tumor , Cell Transdifferentiation/drug effects , Cell Transdifferentiation/genetics , Disease Models, Animal , Drug Resistance, Neoplasm/genetics , Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic/drug effects , Humans , Male , Mice , Neuroendocrine Tumors/genetics , Neuroendocrine Tumors/pathology , Neurons/drug effects , Neurons/pathology , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/genetics , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant/pathology , Receptors, Androgen/drug effects , SOXC Transcription Factors/genetics , Signal Transduction/drug effects , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...