Computational modeling in melanoma for novel drug discovery

Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery

Volumn 11, Issue 6, 2016, Pages 609-621

  Pennisi, Marzio ^a   Russo, Giulia ^a   Di Salvatore, Valentina ^b   Candido, Saverio ^a   Libra, Massimo ^a   Pappalardo, Francesco ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CATANIA   (Italy)

^b INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL SCIENCES   (Italy)

Author keywords

Computational modeling; in silico drug discovery; melanoma; systems biology

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; DABRAFENIB; MELANIN; NEW DRUG; RAPAMYCIN; SUNITINIB; VEMURAFENIB;

CARCINOGENESIS; COMPUTER MODEL; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CUTANEOUS MELANOMA; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; HUMAN; MELANOMA; MELANOMA CELL; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION; SIMULATION; SYSTEMS BIOLOGY; ANIMAL; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; MOLECULARLY TARGETED THERAPY; PATHOLOGY; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE; PROCEDURES; SKIN NEOPLASMS; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ANIMALS; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DRUG DISCOVERY; HIGH-THROUGHPUT SCREENING ASSAYS; HUMANS; MELANOMA; MODELS, THEORETICAL; MOLECULAR TARGETED THERAPY; PRECISION MEDICINE; SKIN NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84964424263     PISSN: 17460441     EISSN: 1746045X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17460441.2016.1174688     Document Type: Review

References (86)

1. N.Kumar, B.S.Hendriks, K.A.Janes, et al. Applying computational modeling to drug discovery and development. Drug Discov Today. 2006;11(17–18):806–811. doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2006.07.010.
2. A.J.Miller, M.C.MihmJr. Melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(1):51–65. doi:10.1056/NEJMra052166.
3. J.D.Wolchok, J.Yuan, A.N.Houghton, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of tyrosinase DNA vaccines in patients with melanoma. Mol Ther. 2007;15(11):2044–2050. doi:10.1038/sj.mt.6300290.
4. V600E mutation in cutaneous melanoma patients with occupational sun exposure. Oncol Rep. 2014;31:1079–1082. doi:10.3892/or.2014.2977.
5. D.Schadendorf, E.F.Fisher, C.Garbe, et al. Melanoma. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2015;15003. doi:10.1038/nrdp.2015.3•• Describes in depth the fundamental biological processes in melanoma cancerous transformations.
6. C.M.Lovly, K.M.Dahlman, L.E.Fohm, et al. Routine multiplex mutational profiling of melanomas enables enrollment in genotype-driven therapeutic trials. Plos One. 2012;7(4):e35309. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0035309.
7. J.C.Rubinstein, M.Sznol, A.C.Pavlick, et al. Incidence of the V600K mutation among melanoma patients with B-RAF mutations, and potential therapeutic response to the specific B-RAF inhibitor PLX4032. J Transl Med. 2010;8:67. doi:10.1186/1479-5876-8-72.
8. M.Libra, G.Malaponte, P.M.Navolanic, et al. Analysis of B-RAF mutation in primary and metastatic melanoma. Cell Cycle. 2005 Oct;4(10):1382–1384.
9. M.J.Garnett, R.Marais Guilty as charged: B-RAF is a human oncogene. Cancer Cell. 2004;6:313–319. doi:10.1016/j.ccr.2004.09.022.• Highlights the activation of the MAPK pathway in melanoma.
10. V600E mutation in melanoma.
11. H.Tsao, V.Goel, H.Wu, et al. Genetic interaction between NRAS and B-RAF mutations and PTEN/MMAC1 inactivation in melanoma. J Invest Dermatol. 2004 Feb;122(2):337–341. doi:10.1046/j.0022-202X.2004.22243.x.
12. E.Aksamitiene, A.B.Kiyatkin, B.N.Kholodenko. Cross-talk between mitogenic Ras/MAPK and survival PI3K/AKT pathways: a fine balance. Biochem Soc Trans. 2012;40(1):139–146. doi:10.1042/BST20110609.
13. M.S.Perkinton, J.K.Ip, G.L.Wood, et al. Phosphatidylinositol 3‐kinase is a central mediator of NMDA receptor signalling to MAP kinase (ERK1/2), AKT/PKB and CREB in striatal neurones. J Neurochem. 2002;80(2):239–254.
14. R.D.York, D.C.Molliver, S.S.Grewal, et al. Role of phosphoinositide 3-kinase and endocytosis in nerve growth factor-induced extracellular signal-regulated kinase activation via Ras and Rap1. Mol Cell Biol. 2000;20(21):8069–8083.
15. Z.Y.Zhuang, H.Xu, D.E.Clapham, et al. Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase activates ERK in primary sensory neurons and mediates inflammatory heat hyperalgesia through TRPV1 sensitization. J Neurosci. 2004;24(38):8300–8309. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2893-04.2004.
16. A.Russo, B.Ficili, S.Candido, et al., et al. Emerging targeted therapies for melanoma treatment (review). Int J Oncol. 2014;45(2):516–524. doi:10.3892/ijo.2014.2481.
17. G.M.Nitulescu, D.Margina, P.Juzenas, et al. AKT inhibitors in cancer treatment: the long journey from drug discovery to clinical use (Review). Int J Oncol. 2015 Dec 24. doi:10.3892/ijo.2015.3306. [Epub ahead of print].
18. A.Hauschild, -J.-J.Grob, L.V.Demidov, et al. Dabrafenib in B-RAF mutated metastatic melanoma: a multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;380(9839):358–365. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60868-X.
19. V600E mutation. New England J Med. 2011;364(26):2507–2516. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1103782.
20. S.M.Wilhelm, L.Adnane, P.Newell, et al. Preclinical overview of sorafenib, a multikinase inhibitor that targets both RAF and VEGF and PDGF receptor tyrosine kinase signaling. Mol Cancer Ther. 2008;7(10):3129–3140. doi:10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-08-0013.
21. K.T.Flaherty, C.Robert, P.Hersey, et al. Improved survival with MEK inhibition in B-RAF mutated melanoma. New England J Med. 2012;367(2):107–114. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1203421.
22. S.A.Byron, D.C.Loch, C.L.Wellens, et al. Sensitivity to the MEK inhibitor E6201 in melanoma cells is associated with mutant B-RAF and wildtype PTEN status. Mol Cancer. 2012;11(1):1186. doi:10.1186/1476-4598-11-75.
23. C.D.Britten. PI3K and MEK inhibitor combinations: examining the evidence in selected tumor types. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2013;71(6):1395–1409. doi:10.1007/s00280-013-2121-1.
24. I.Brana, L.S.Lillian. Clinical development of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitors for cancer treatment. BMC Med. 2012;10:161. doi:10.1186/1741-7015-10-161.
25. P.Liu, H.Cheng, T.M.Roberts, et al. Targeting the phosphoinositide 3-kinase pathway in cancer. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2009;8(8):627–644. doi:10.1038/nrd2926.
26. B.Markman, R.Dienstmann, J.Tabernero. Targeting the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway – beyond rapalogs. Oncotarget. 2010;1(7):530–543. doi:10.18632/oncotarget.101012.
27. D.B.Johnson, R.J.Sullivan, P.A.Ott, et al. Ipilimumab therapy in patients with advanced melanoma and preexisting autoimmune isorders. JAMA Oncol. 2015;2(2):1–7.
28. J.Tímár, L.Vizkeleti, V.Doma, et al. Genetic progression of malignant melanoma. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2016;35(1):93–107. doi:10.1007/s10555-016-9613-5.
29. S.Hafsi, F.M.Pezzino, S.Candido, et al. Gene alterations in the PI3K/PTEN/AKT pathway as a mechanism of drug-resistance (review). Int J Oncol. 2012;40(3):639–644. doi:10.3892/ijo.2011.1312.
30. F.Castiglione, F.Pappalardo, C.Bianca, et al. Modeling biology spanning different scales: an open challenge. Biomed Res Int. 2014. Article ID 902545, 9. doi:10.1155/2014/902545
31. F.Gullo, M.van der Garde, G.Russo, et al. Computational modeling of the expansion of human cord blood CD133+ hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells with different cytokine combinations. Bioinformatics. 2015;31(15):2514–2522. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btv172.
32. F.Pappalardo, A.Palladini, M.Pennisi, et al. Mathematical and computational models in tumor immunology. Math Model Nat Phenom. 2012;7(3):186–203. doi:10.1051/mmnp/20127312.
33. H.Kitano. Computational systems biology. Nature. 2002;420(6912):206–210. doi:10.1038/nature01254.
34. E.Klipp, W.Liebermeister. Mathematical modeling of intracellular signaling pathways. BMC Neurosci. 2006;Suppl 7:S10. doi:10.1186/1471-2202-7-S1-S10.• This paper describes in detail the dynamic modeling and the simulation approaches of signal transduction pathways.
35. K.A.Ryall, A.C.Tan. Systems biology approaches for advancing the discovery of effective drug combinations. J Cheminform. 2015;7:7. doi:10.1186/s13321-015-0055-9.
36. C.Nikolai, G.Madey. Tools of the trade: A survey of various agent based modeling platforms. J Artif Societies Soc Simulation. 2009;12(2):2.
37. F.Pappalardo, I.M.Forero, M.Pennisi, et al. SimB16: Modeling induced immune system response against B16-melanoma. PLoS ONE. 2011;6(10). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0026523.•• The author has demonstrated the use of agent-based models for optimization of immunotherapy strategy against B16-melanoma in mice and tumor progression.
38. A.Palladini, G.Nicoletti, F.Pappalardo, et al. In silico modeling and in vivo efficacy of cancer-preventive vaccinations. Cancer Res. 2010;70(20):7755–7763. doi:10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-0701.
39. P.J.Goss, J.Peccoud. Quantitative modeling of stochastic systems in molecular biology by using stochastic Petri nets. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1998 Jun 9;95(12):6750–6755.
40. N.Jamshidi, B.Ø.Palsson. Mass action stoichiometric simulation models: incorporating kinetics and regulation into stoichiometric models. Biophys J. 2010;98(2):175–185. doi:10.1016/j.bpj.2009.09.064.
41. H.-C.Tang, Y.-C.Chen. Insight into molecular dynamics simulation of BRAF(V600E) and potent novel inhibitors for malignant melanoma. Int J Nanomed. 2015;10:3131–3146. doi:10.2147/IJN.S80150.
42. K.S.Brown, C.C.Hill, G.A.Calero, et al. The statistical mechanics of complex signaling networks: nerve growth factor signaling. Phys Biol. 2004;1(3–4):184–195. doi:10.1088/1478-3967/1/3/006.
43. M.B.Faura, S.Massen, C.S.Falk, et al. Data-derived modeling characterizes plasticity of MAPK signaling in melanoma. PLoS Comput Biol. 2014;10(9):e1003795. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003795.
44. Z.Huang, J.Hahn. Fuzzy modeling of signal transduction networks. Chem Eng Sci. 2009;64:2044–2056. doi:10.1016/j.ces.2009.01.041.•• This work proposes a fuzzy-modeling-based approach based upon qualitatively and quantitatively information to describe signal transduction networks.
45. Y.Reis, M.Bernardo-Faura, D.Richter, et al. Multi-parametric analysis and modeling of relationships between mitochondrial morphology and apoptosis. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(1):e28694. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0028694.
46. J.Wang, L.Zhang, C.Jing, et al. Multi-scale agent-based modeling on melanoma and its related angiogenesis analysis. Theor Biol Med Model. 2013;10(1):41. doi:10.1186/1742-4682-10-41.•• Multi-scale agent-based computational model used to study the response of melanoma cancer under combined drug treatment.
47. A.D.Schweitzer, V.Rakesh, E.Revskaya, et al. Computational model predicts effective delivery of 188-Re-labeled melanin-binding antibody to metastatic melanoma tumors with wide range of melanin concentrations. Melanoma Res. 2007;17(5):291–303. doi:10.1097/CMR.0b013e3282eeeae7.•• Use of a pharmacokinetic model to predict clinical outcomes.
48. M.Pennisi. A mathematical model of immune-system-melanoma competition. Comput Math Methods Med. 2012;850754. doi:10.1155/2012/850754.• Description of a model that reproduces the immune response entitled with combined administration of specific lymphocytes and specific antibodies.
49. A.L.Hopkins. Network pharmacology: the next paradigm in drug discovery. Nat Chem Biol. 2008;4:682–690. doi:10.1038/nchembio.118.
50. R.B.Altman. PharmGKB: a logical home for knowledge relating genotype to drug response phenotype. Nat Genet. 2007;39:426–426. doi:10.1038/ng0407-426.
51. I.M.Klotz. Physicochemical aspects of drug-protein interactions: a general perspective. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1973;226:18–35. doi:10.1111/nyas.1973.226.issue-1.
52. A.Bordbar, J.M.Monk, Z.A.King, et al. Constraint-based models predict metabolic and associated cellular functions. Nat Rev Genet. 2014;15(2):107–120. doi:10.1038/nrg3643.
53. L.Xie, L.Xie, S.L.Kinnings, et al. Novel computational approaches to polypharmacology as a means to define responses to individual drugs. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 2012;52:361–379. doi:10.1146/annurev-pharmtox-010611-134630.
54. J.M.Haile. Molecular dynamics simulation. New York: Wiley; 1992.
55. S.Lukman, Y.He, S.C.Hui. Computational methods for traditional Chinese medicine: a survey. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2007;88(3):283–294. doi:10.1016/j.cmpb.2007.09.004.
56. F.Svensson, A.Karlén, C.Sköld. Virtual screening data fusion using both structure- and ligand-based methods. J Chem Inf Model. 2012;52(1):225–232. doi:10.1021/ci2004835.
57. C.Nantasenamat, C.Isarankura-Na-Ayudhya, V.Prachayasittikul. Advances in computational methods to predict the biological activity of compounds. Expert Opin Drug Discov. 2010;5(7):633–654. doi:10.1517/17460441.2010.492827.
58. J.G.Santos, M.Vömel, R.Struck, et al. Neuroarchitecture of peptidergic systems in the larval ventral ganglion of drosophila melanogaster. PLoS ONE. 2007;2(8):e695. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000695.
59. S.Sasagawa, Y.Ozaki, K.Fujita, et al. Prediction and validation of the distinct dynamics of transient and sustained ERK activation. Nat Cell Biol. 2005;7(4):365–373. doi:10.1038/ncb1233.
60. W.J.Bosl. Systems biology by the rules: hybrid intelligent systems for pathway modeling and discovery. BMC Syst Biol. 2007;1(1):13. doi:10.1186/1752-0509-1-13.
61. C.Bianca, M.Pennisi. Immune system modelling by top-down and bottom-up approaches. Int Math Forum. 2012;7(3):109–128.• A survey of immune system computational modeling that compares and analyzes some existing approaches and models.
62. M.Pennisi, F.Pappalardo, S.Motta. Agent based modeling of lung metastasis-immune system competition. Lecture Notes Comput Sci. 2009;5666:1–3.
63. F.Pappalardo, A.Cincotti, A.Motta, et al. Agent based modeling of atherosclerosis: A concrete help in personalized treatments. Lecture Notes Comput Sci. 2009;5755:386–396.
64. M.Pennisi, F.Pappalardo, A.Palladini, et al. Modeling the competition between lung metastases and the immune system using agents. BMC Bioinform. 2010;11(Suppl 7):S13. doi:10.1186/1471-2105-11-S7-S13.
65. P.Zhang, V.Brusic. Mathematical modeling for novel cancer drug discovery and development. Expert Opin Drug Discov. 2014;9(10):1133–1150. doi:10.1517/17460441.2014.941351.
66. M.F.McGuire, H.Enderling, D.I.Wallace, et al. Formalizing an integrative, multidisciplinary cancer therapy discovery workflow. Cancer Res. 2013;73(20):6111–6117. doi:10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-13-0310.
67. J.Yang, H.Zhao, C.Garnett, et al. The combination of exposure-response and case-control analyses in regulatory decision making. J Clin Pharmacol. 2013;53:160–166. doi:10.1177/0091270012445206.
68. B.A.Akhoon, S.K.Gupta, V.Verma, et al. In silico designing and optimization of anti-breast cancer antibody mimetic oligopeptide targeting HER-2 in women. J Mol Graph Model. 2010;28(7):664–669. doi:10.1016/j.jmgm.2010.01.002.
69. B.Gorelik, I.Ziv, R.Shohat, et al. Efficacy of weekly docetaxel and bevacizumab in mesenchymal chondrosarcoma: a new theranostic method combining xenografted biopsies with a mathematical model. Cancer Res. 2008;68:9033–9040. doi:10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-1723.
70. A.Sokolov, C.Funk, K.Graim, et al. Combining heterogeneous data sources for accurate functional annotation of proteins. BMC Bioinform. 2013;14(Suppl 3):S10.
71. S.Mostafavi, Q.Morris. Fast integration of heterogeneous data sources for predicting gene function with limited annotation. Bioinformatics. 2010;26(14):1759–1765. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btq262.
72. M.Pennisi, G.Russo, S.Motta, et al. Agent based modeling of the effects of potential treatments over the blood-brain barrier in multiple sclerosis. J Immunol Methods. 2015;427:6–12. doi:10.1016/j.jim.2015.08.014.
73. W.E.Evans, M.V.Relling. Moving towards individualized medicine with pharmacogenomics. Nature. 2004;429(6990):464–468. doi:10.1038/nature02626.
74. K.K.Jain. Role of pharmacoproteomics in the development of personalized medicine. Pharmacogenomics. 2004;5(3):331–336. doi:10.1517/phgs.5.3.331.29830.
75. Y.Guo, P.Xiao, S.Lei, et al. Howis mRNA expression predictive for protein expression? A correlation study on human circulating monocytes. Acta Biochim Biophys Sin (Shanghai). 2008;40(5):426–436.
76. D.Howe, M.Costanzo, P.Fey, et al. Big data: the future of biocuration. Nature. 2008;455(7209):47–50. doi:10.1038/455047a.
77. F.F.Costa. Big data in biomedicine. Drug Discov Today. 2014;19(4):433–440. doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2013.10.012.
78. S.Motta, F.Pappalardo. Mathematical modeling of biological systems. Brief Bioinform. 2013;14(4):411–422. doi:10.1093/bib/bbs061•• This work gives a good overview of mathematical/computational modeling approaches in systems biology.
79. F.Pappalardo, M.Pennisi, A.Ricupito, et al. Induction of T cell memory by a dendritic cell vaccine: a computational model. Bioinformatics. 2014;30(13):1884–1891. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btu059.
80. F.Pappalardo, D.Flower, G.Russo, et al. Computational modelling approaches to vaccinology. Pharmacol Res. 2015;92:40–45. doi:10.1016/j.phrs.2014.08.006.
81. H.-Y.Chuang, E.Lee, Y.-T.Liu, et al. Network-based classification of breast cancer metastasis. Mol Syst Biol. 2007;3:140. doi:10.1038/msb4100180.
82. S.Tagore, N.Chowdhury, R.K.De. Analyzing methods for path mining with applications in metabolomics. Gene. 2014;534(2):125–138. doi:10.1016/j.gene.2013.10.056.
83. T.S.Deisboeck, Z.Wang, P.Macklin, et al. Multiscale cancer modeling. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2011;13:127–155. doi:10.1146/annurev-bioeng-071910-124729.
84. R.A.Ramos, J.Zapata, C.A.Condat, et al. Modeling cancer immunotherapy: assessing the effects of lymphocytes on cancer cell growth and motility. Physica A. 2013;392:2415–2425. doi:10.1016/j.physa.2013.01.047.
85. D.Alemani, F.Pappalardo, M.Pennisi, et al. Combining cellular automata and lattice Boltzmann method to model multiscale avascular tumor growth coupled with nutrient diffusion and immune competition. J Immunol Methods. 2012;376(1–2):55–68. doi:10.1016/j.jim.2011.11.009.
86. F.Castiglione, F.Pappalardo, C.Bianca, et al. Modeling biology spanning different scales: an open challenge. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014. doi:10.1155/2014/902545.