Identification of selective cytotoxic and synthetic lethal drug responses in triple negative breast cancer cells

Molecular Cancer

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2016, Pages

  Gautam, Prson ^a   Karhinen, Leena ^a   Szwajda, Agnieszka ^a   Jha, Sawan Kumar ^a   Yadav, Bhagwan ^a   Aittokallio, Tero ^a   Wennerberg, Krister ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

Author keywords

Antagonism; Chemosensitivity; Cytotoxicity; DSRT; DSS; Heterogeneity; Synergy; TNBC; Viability

Indexed keywords

2 AMINO 6 CHLORO 9 [(4 METHOXY 3,5 DIMETHYL 2 PYRIDINYL)METHYL]PURINE; 2 AMINO 8 [4 (2 HYDROXYETHOXY)CYCLOHEXYL] 6 (6 METHOXY 3 PYRIDINYL) 4 METHYLPYRIDO[2,3 D]PYRIMIDIN 7(8H) ONE; 7 HYDROXYSTAUROSPORINE; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; AVN 944; AZD 8055; BOSUTINIB; BUPARLISIB; DACTINOMYCIN; DACTOLISIB; DAPORINAD; DOCETAXEL; EVEROLIMUS; FLAVOPIRIDOL; HOMOHARRINGTONINE; INIPARIB; METHOTREXATE; MOCETINOSTAT; N [5 (5 TERT BUTYL 2 OXAZOLYLMETHYLTHIO) 2 THIAZOLYL]ISONIPECOTAMIDE; NINTEDANIB; OLAPARIB; OMIPALISIB; PICTILISIB; PONATINIB; PRAVASTATIN; RUBOXISTAURIN; SEPANTRONIUM BROMIDE; TANESPIMYCIN; TRAMETINIB; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; UNINDEXED DRUG; BIOLOGICAL MARKER; PROTEIN KINASE INHIBITOR; TARGET OF RAPAMYCIN KINASE; TRANSCRIPTOME; TUMOR MARKER;

ARTICLE; CANCER CELL; CELL DEATH; CELL GROWTH; CELL VIABILITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CYTOTOXICITY; DRUG ANTAGONISM; DRUG RESPONSE; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; LETHALITY; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; TRIPLE NEGATIVE BREAST CANCER; ANTAGONISTS AND INHIBITORS; BIOLOGY; CELL CYCLE CHECKPOINT; CELL SURVIVAL; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; DRUG EFFECTS; DRUG RESISTANCE; DRUG SCREENING; FEMALE; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION; GENETICS; LETHAL MUTATION; TRIPLE NEGATIVE BREAST NEOPLASMS; TUMOR CELL LINE;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; BIOMARKERS; BIOMARKERS, TUMOR; CELL CYCLE CHECKPOINTS; CELL LINE, TUMOR; CELL SURVIVAL; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; DRUG DISCOVERY; DRUG RESISTANCE, NEOPLASM; DRUG SCREENING ASSAYS, ANTITUMOR; FEMALE; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION, NEOPLASTIC; HUMANS; PROTEIN KINASE INHIBITORS; SYNTHETIC LETHAL MUTATIONS; TOR SERINE-THREONINE KINASES; TRANSCRIPTOME; TRIPLE NEGATIVE BREAST NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84969256252     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14764598     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12943-016-0517-3     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Kreike B et al. Gene expression profiling and histopathological characterization of triple-negative/basal-like breast carcinomas. Breast Cancer Res. 2007;9(5):R65.
2. Pal SK, Childs BH, Pegram M. Triple negative breast cancer: unmet medical needs. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011;125(3):627-36.
3. Bauer KR et al. Descriptive analysis of estrogen receptor (ER)-negative, progesterone receptor (PR)-negative, and HER2-negative invasive breast cancer, the so-called triple-negative phenotype: a population-based study from the California cancer Registry. Cancer. 2007;109(9):1721-8.
4. Lehmann BD et al. Identification of human triple-negative breast cancer subtypes and preclinical models for selection of targeted therapies. J Clin Invest. 2011;121(7):2750-67.
5. Burstein MD et al. Comprehensive genomic analysis identifies novel subtypes and targets of triple-negative breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21(7):1688-98.
6. Elsawaf Z et al. Biological subtypes of triple-negative breast cancer are associated with distinct morphological changes and clinical behaviour. Breast. 2013;22(5):98692.
7. Lehmann BD, Pietenpol JA. Identification and use of biomarkers in treatment strategies for triple-negative breast cancer subtypes. J Pathol. 2014;232(2):142-50.
8. Mayer IA et al. New strategies for triple-negative breast cancer--deciphering the heterogeneity. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20(4):782-90.
9. Cancer Genome Atlas, N. Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature. 2012;490(7418):61-70.
10. Shah SP et al. The clonal and mutational evolution spectrum of primary triplenegative breast cancers. Nature. 2012;486(7403):395-9.
11. Audeh MW. Novel treatment strategies in triple-negative breast cancer: specific role of poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibition. Pharmgenomics Pers Med. 2014;7:307-16.
12. Barretina J et al. The Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia enables predictive modelling of anticancer drug sensitivity. Nature. 2012;483(7391):603-7.
13. Garnett MJ et al. Systematic identification of genomic markers of drug sensitivity in cancer cells. Nature. 2012;483(7391):570-5.
14. Heiser LM et al. Subtype and pathway specific responses to anticancer compounds in breast cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109(8):2724-9.
15. Daemen A et al. Modeling precision treatment of breast cancer. Genome Biol. 2013;14(10):R110.
16. Lawrence RT et al. The proteomic landscape of triple-negative breast cancer. Cell Rep. 2015;11(4):630-44.
17. Muellner MK et al. Targeting a cell state common to triple-negative breast cancers. Mol Syst Biol. 2015;11(1):789.
18. Haibe-Kains B et al. Inconsistency in large pharmacogenomic studies. Nature. 2013;504(7480):389-93.
19. Pemovska T et al. Individualized systems medicine strategy to tailor treatments for patients with chemorefractory acute myeloid leukemia. Cancer Discov. 2013;3(12):1416-29.
20. Yadav B et al. Quantitative scoring of differential drug sensitivity for individually optimized anticancer therapies. Sci Rep. 2014;4:5193.
21. Chiaraviglio L, Kirby JE. Evaluation of impermeant, DNA-binding dye fluorescence as a real-time readout of eukaryotic cell toxicity in a high throughput screening format. Assay Drug Dev Technol. 2014;12(4):219-28.
22. Barton VN et al. Multiple molecular subtypes of triple-negative breast cancer critically rely on androgen receptor and respond to enzalutamide in vivo. Mol Cancer Ther. 2015;14(3):769-78.
23. Duncan JS et al. Dynamic reprogramming of the kinome in response to targeted MEK inhibition in triple-negative breast cancer. Cell. 2012;149(2):307-21.
24. Carracedo A et al. Inhibition of mTORC1 leads to MAPK pathway activation through a PI3K-dependent feedback loop in human cancer. J Clin Invest. 2008;118(9):3065-74.
25. Ocana A et al. Activation of the PI3K/mTOR/AKT pathway and survival in solid tumors: systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9(4), e95219.
26. Ali K et al. Inactivation of PI(3)K p110delta breaks regulatory T-cell-mediated immune tolerance to cancer. Nature. 2014;510(7505):407-11.
27. Spencer A et al. The novel AKT inhibitor afuresertib shows favorable safety, pharmacokinetics, and clinical activity in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2014;124(14):2190-5.
28. Reyland ME. Protein kinase C isoforms: Multi-functional regulators of cell life and death. Front Biosci. 2009;14:2386-99.
29. Lee CW et al. Molecular dependence of estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer on a notch-survivin signaling axis. Cancer Res. 2008;68(13):5273-81.
30. Yamaguchi N et al. NOTCH3 signaling pathway plays crucial roles in the proliferation of ErbB2-negative human breast cancer cells. Cancer Res. 2008;68(6):1881-8.
31. Cheng KW et al. The RAB25 small GTPase determines aggressiveness of ovarian and breast cancers. Nat Med. 2004;10(11):1251-6.
32. Real PJ et al. Resistance to chemotherapy via Stat3-dependent overexpression of Bcl-2 in metastatic breast cancer cells. Oncogene. 2002;21(50):7611-8.
33. Tabuchi Y et al. Resistance to paclitaxel therapy is related with Bcl-2 expression through an estrogen receptor mediated pathway in breast cancer. Int J Oncol. 2009;34(2):313-9.
34. Barre B et al. The STAT3 oncogene as a predictive marker of drug resistance. Trends Mol Med. 2007;13(1):4-11.
35. Yu D. Mechanisms of ErbB2-mediated paclitaxel resistance and trastuzumab-mediated paclitaxel sensitization in ErbB2-overexpressing breast cancers. Semin Oncol. 2001;28(5 Suppl 16):12-7.
36. Dai Z et al. Prediction of anticancer drug potency from expression of genes involved in growth factor signaling. Pharm Res. 2006;23(2):336-49.
37. Dees EC, Orlowski RZ. Targeting the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway in breast cancer therapy. Future Oncol. 2006;2(1):121-35.
38. Prechtl A et al. Tumor-biological factors uPA and PAI-1 as stratification criteria of a multicenter adjuvant chemotherapy trial in node-negative breast cancer. Int J Biol Markers. 2000;15(1):73-8.
39. Small GW et al. Repression of mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) phosphatase-1 by anthracyclines contributes to their antiapoptotic activation of p44/42MAPK. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2003;307(3):861-9.
40. Bostner J et al. Amplification of CCND1 and PAK1 as predictors of recurrence and tamoxifen resistance in postmenopausal breast cancer. Oncogene. 2007;26(49):6997-7005.
41. Noel EE et al. The association of CCND1 overexpression and cisplatin resistance in testicular germ cell tumors and other cancers. Am J Pathol. 2010;176(6):2607-15.
42. Shi YY, Small GW, Orlowski RZ. Proteasome inhibitors induce a p38 mitogenactivated protein kinase (MAPK)-dependent anti-apoptotic program involving MAPK phosphatase-1 and Akt in models of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006;100(1):33-47.
43. Small GW et al. Mitogen-activated protein kinase phosphatase-1 is a mediator of breast cancer chemoresistance. Cancer Res. 2007;67(9):4459-66.
44. Steelman LS et al. Suppression of PTEN function increases breast cancer chemotherapeutic drug resistance while conferring sensitivity to mTOR inhibitors. Oncogene. 2008;27(29):4086-95.
45. Fatehullah A, Tan SH, Barker N. Organoids as an in vitro model of human development and disease. Nat Cell Biol. 2016;18(3):246-54.
46. Campbell JJ et al. A multifunctional 3D co-culture system for studies of mammary tissue morphogenesis and stem cell biology. PLoS One. 2011;6(9), e25661.
47. Walsh AJ et al. Quantitative optical imaging of primary tumor organoid metabolism predicts drug response in breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2014;74(18):5184-94.
48. Chapman S et al. Human keratinocytes are efficiently immortalized by a Rho kinase inhibitor. J Clin Invest. 2010;120(7):2619-26.
49. Brown DD et al. Developing in vitro models of human ductal carcinoma in situ from primary tissue explants. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2015;153(2):311-21.
50. Yu M et al. Cancer therapy. Ex vivo culture of circulating breast tumor cells for individualized testing of drug susceptibility. Science. 2014;345(6193):216-20.
51. Crystal AS et al. Patient-derived models of acquired resistance can identify effective drug combinations for cancer. Science. 2014;346(6216):1480-6.
52. Bliss CI. The toxicity of poisons applied jointly1. Ann Appl Biol. 1939;26(3):585-615.
53. Zhao W et al. A New Bliss Independence Model to Analyze Drug Combination Data. J Biomol Screen. 2014;19(5):817-21.
54. Yadav B et al. Searching for Drug Synergy in Complex Dose-response Landscapes Using an Interaction Potency Model. Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2015;13:504-13.