Literature DB >> 16288556

Inhibition of EGFR signaling: all mutations are not created equal.

Adi F Gazdar1, John D Minna.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16288556      PMCID: PMC1479603          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020377

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS Med        ISSN: 1549-1277            Impact factor:   11.069


× No keyword cloud information.
Tyrosine kinases (TKs) are found only in metazoans, where they regulate multiple critical multicellular functions, including growth, differentiation, apoptosis, adhesion, and mobility [ 1]. As these functions also play critical roles in tumorigenesis, TKs are the prototypical class of oncogenes involved in many human malignancies. Of the 90 TKs, 58 are receptor TKs grouped into 20 subfamilies, while the others are non-receptor TKs grouped into ten subfamilies.

EGFRs and Cancer

The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) family is subclass I of the receptor TK superfamily, and consists of four members, EGFR (ErbB1), HER2 (ErbB2), EGFR3 (ErbB3), and EGFR4 (ErbB4). Ligand binding results in homo- or heterodimerization and activation of the highly conserved intracellular kinase domain, resulting in phosphorylation of specific tyrosine residues that serve as docking sites of proteins whose recruitment activates a multitude of downstream signaling pathways [ 2]. Adenosine triphosphate (ATP), the phosphate donor, lodges in a cleft between the two roughly globular lobes of the TK domain. Deranged family member signaling in tumors often involves EGFR and HER2. Increased activity of EGFR signaling, often associated with adverse prognosis, has been detected in many tumors, a finding that resulted in the selection of this molecule as one of the first targets for designed therapies [ 3]. Deranged signaling may result from activating mutations, increased gene copy number, or autocrine loops. Targeted therapies that have undergone extensive clinical trials fall into two major categories: humanized forms of monoclonal antibodies that prevent ligand–receptor interaction, and small molecule inhibitors (tyrosine kinase inhibitors [TKIs]) such as erlotinib or gefitinib, which reversibly bind to the ATP binding cleft ( Figure 1A), preventing phosphorylation and subsequent downstream signaling. While antibody administration has been disappointing as a therapy for lung cancer, treatment with TKIs is associated with responses, occasionally dramatic, in highly select patient subpopulations. Less than 18 months ago, it was found that activating mutations in the TK domain of the gene occurred in a subset of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), especially adenocarcinomas, and predicted, though not precisely, the response to small molecule inhibitors [ 4–6]. In this issue of PLoS Medicine, Heidi Greulich and colleagues [ 7] suggest that all EGFR mutations are not created equal, and that different mutation classes respond differently to specific inhibitors.
Figure 1

Schematic of the EGFR Gene with Locations of the Mutation Types

(A) Mutations are limited to the first four exons (exons 18–21) of the tyrosine kinase (TK) domain encompassing all of the N lobe and part of the C lobe. The three major types of mutations, accounting for about 94% of all mutations, and their approximate frequencies are indicated by the larger arrows. The locations of most of the described rarer point mutations are indicated by smaller arrows. The mutations target regions critical for phosphorylation events (the A-loop, P-loop, and the αC helix). Data from Shigematsu and colleagues [ 8].

(B) Schematic of exon 20 of the EGFR and HER2 genes, indicating the location of the described in-frame insertions/duplications (arrowheads), the T790M mutation (large arrow) and rarer point mutations (small arrows).

Schematic of the EGFR Gene with Locations of the Mutation Types

(A) Mutations are limited to the first four exons (exons 18–21) of the tyrosine kinase (TK) domain encompassing all of the N lobe and part of the C lobe. The three major types of mutations, accounting for about 94% of all mutations, and their approximate frequencies are indicated by the larger arrows. The locations of most of the described rarer point mutations are indicated by smaller arrows. The mutations target regions critical for phosphorylation events (the A-loop, P-loop, and the αC helix). Data from Shigematsu and colleagues [ 8]. (B) Schematic of exon 20 of the EGFR and HER2 genes, indicating the location of the described in-frame insertions/duplications (arrowheads), the T790M mutation (large arrow) and rarer point mutations (small arrows).

Kinase-Activating Mutations in Lung Cancer

TK domains are highly conserved and consist of two approximately globular structures, a smaller N lobe and a larger C lobe ( Figure 1A). Activating mutations in the TK domain of EGFR are limited to the first four exons, and show a remarkable structural diversity, including point mutations, deletions, and insertions. Mutations are largely, if not entirely, confined to NSCLC (reports of occasional mutations in other tumor types await confirmation). Two types, deletions in exon 19 and a single point mutation in exon 21, L858R ( Figure 1A), account for about 85% of all mutations [ 8]. A modest number of insertions/duplications are found in exon 20. Occasional point mutations may occur at multiple other sites and account for the remainder. Activating mutations confer ligand independence, and selectively mobilize Akt and STAT signaling pathways, which promote cell survival, but have little effect on MAP kinase regulated signaling, which induces proliferation. These mutations induce a dependency on or “addiction” to EGFR survival signals, especially when combined with allele-specific amplification, and inhibition of those signals by TKIs may contribute to the drugs' efficacy [ 9]. Some evidence existed prior to the report by Greulich et al. [ 7] that the different classes of specific mutations may vary in their clinicopathological correlations, downstream signaling events, or responsiveness to TKIs. The two major classes of mutations, deletions in exon 19 or the L858R point mutation in exon 21, may result in differential autophosphorylation of specific phosphate residues, resulting in differences in downstream signaling [ 10]. A point mutation has been described in exon 20, T790M, that is associated with resistance to TKIs (most tumors that respond to TKIs eventually recur) [ 11, 12]. Some preliminary evidence suggest that patients whose NSCLC tumors harbor the L858R mutation have a better prognosis than those with exon 19 deletions [ 8].

Characterizing Specific Mutations

Using two in vitro model systems, an immortalized bronchial epithelial line and a mouse fibroblast line, Greulich and collaborators demonstrated the transforming abilities of mutant forms of EGFR (the G719S point mutation in exon 18, the L858R point mutation in exon 21, a representative deletion mutant in exon 19, and a representative insertion mutant in exon 20), but not of the wild-type EGFR after transfer by retroviral vector [ 7]. Transformation was accompanied by phopshorylation and activation of the appropriate downstream signaling pathways. Thus, representative mutations in all four affected exons of EGFR demonstrated in vitro transforming activity. However, while the wild-type form of the receptor requires ligand activation, cells with the mutant form demonstrated constitutive activation. These findings may explain why the monoclonal antibody cetuximab has little effect on lung cancer cells with activating mutations, but seems to inhibit other tumors (such as colorectal carcinomas) that overexpress wild-type EGFR. While all of the mutant forms tested demonstrated transforming activity, they showed marked differences in their responses to TKIs. As previously demonstrated [ 4, 5, 12], cells with the deletion mutant and the point mutation L858R were inhibited by the TKIs gefitinib and erlotinib, while the exon 20 insertion mutation was resistant. Three patients with lung adenocarcinoma and with exon 20 deletion mutants of EGFR failed to show a clinical response (contrary to the expectation that, since the general response rate of tumors with EGFR mutations to TKIs is about 80%, two or all three of these particular ones would be responsive). However, the cells with the insertion mutation demonstrated increased sensitivity to the irreversible inhibitor CL-387,785, previously demonstrated to be active against cells with both an activating mutation and the resistance-associated point mutation T790M on exon 20 [ 11]. Thus, two very different forms of mutations in exon 20, a point mutation and an insertion, demonstrated relative resistance to the clinically widely used reversible TKIs, but exhibited sensitivity to the experimental drug Cl-387,785.

Implications for Treatment of Lung Cancer Patients

What lessons can we learn from the report by Greulich and colleagues? First, we have confirmation that all of the recognized classes of EGFR TK domain mutations described in lung cancers are activating; and second, cells (and perhaps tumors) with mutations involving exon 20 demonstrate a very different pattern of response to TKIs than those harboring other mutations. There are important clinical implications from these and related findings. While CL-387,785 is not currently approved for clinical use, it or related compounds may be useful for overcoming resistance in the future. However, not all cases of resistant tumors have an identified molecular basis. Multiple other factors may modulate the response to TKIs, including deregulation of downstream pathways, amplification of target or related genes, heterodimerization with other gene family members, and autocrine loops. On a related note, mutations of HER2 have been described in a small percentage of NSCLC tumors [ 13]. Of interest, all described mutations to date are insertion/duplications in exon 20 in a region homologous to the site of insertions in the EGFR gene ( Figure 1B). We predict that NSCLC cells harboring HER2 mutations will prove resistant to the reversible TKIs, but will be sensitive to CL-387,785 (or a similar irreversible inhibitor with HER2 specificity). The multiple mechanisms, actual or hypothetical, that can result in resistance to targeted therapies [ 14] make it unlikely that a single agent will suffice for tumor control in all cases. As stated in a recent review, “TKs are now regarded as excellent targets for cancer chemotherapy, but reality lies somewhere between the extremes of triumph and tribulation” [ 14]. Overcoming resistance by presently identified and by as yet unknown mechanisms presents many challenges to physicians, scientists, and pharmaceutical and biomedical industries.
  14 in total

Review 1.  Antibody-mediated EGF receptor blockade as an anticancer therapy: from the laboratory to the clinic.

Authors:  John Mendelsohn
Journal:  Cancer Immunol Immunother       Date:  2003-03-14       Impact factor: 6.968

Review 2.  ERBB receptors and cancer: the complexity of targeted inhibitors.

Authors:  Nancy E Hynes; Heidi A Lane
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 60.716

Review 3.  The protein tyrosine kinase family of the human genome.

Authors:  D R Robinson; Y M Wu; S F Lin
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  2000-11-20       Impact factor: 9.867

4.  Clinical and biological features associated with epidermal growth factor receptor gene mutations in lung cancers.

Authors:  Hisayuki Shigematsu; Li Lin; Takao Takahashi; Masaharu Nomura; Makoto Suzuki; Ignacio I Wistuba; Kwun M Fong; Huei Lee; Shinichi Toyooka; Nobuyoshi Shimizu; Takehiko Fujisawa; Ziding Feng; Jack A Roth; Joachim Herz; John D Minna; Adi F Gazdar
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-03-02       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Somatic mutations of the HER2 kinase domain in lung adenocarcinomas.

Authors:  Hisayuki Shigematsu; Takao Takahashi; Masaharu Nomura; Kuntal Majmudar; Makoto Suzuki; Huei Lee; Ignacio I Wistuba; Kwun M Fong; Shinichi Toyooka; Nobuyoshi Shimizu; Takehiko Fujisawa; John D Minna; Adi F Gazdar
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2005-03-01       Impact factor: 12.701

6.  EGFR mutations in lung cancer: correlation with clinical response to gefitinib therapy.

Authors:  J Guillermo Paez; Pasi A Jänne; Jeffrey C Lee; Sean Tracy; Heidi Greulich; Stacey Gabriel; Paula Herman; Frederic J Kaye; Neal Lindeman; Titus J Boggon; Katsuhiko Naoki; Hidefumi Sasaki; Yoshitaka Fujii; Michael J Eck; William R Sellers; Bruce E Johnson; Matthew Meyerson
Journal:  Science       Date:  2004-04-29       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor underlying responsiveness of non-small-cell lung cancer to gefitinib.

Authors:  Thomas J Lynch; Daphne W Bell; Raffaella Sordella; Sarada Gurubhagavatula; Ross A Okimoto; Brian W Brannigan; Patricia L Harris; Sara M Haserlat; Jeffrey G Supko; Frank G Haluska; David N Louis; David C Christiani; Jeff Settleman; Daniel A Haber
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-04-29       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Gefitinib-sensitizing EGFR mutations in lung cancer activate anti-apoptotic pathways.

Authors:  Raffaella Sordella; Daphne W Bell; Daniel A Haber; Jeffrey Settleman
Journal:  Science       Date:  2004-07-29       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 9.  Mutations and addiction to EGFR: the Achilles 'heal' of lung cancers?

Authors:  Adi F Gazdar; Hisayuki Shigematsu; Joachim Herz; John D Minna
Journal:  Trends Mol Med       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 11.951

10.  Oncogenic transformation by inhibitor-sensitive and -resistant EGFR mutants.

Authors:  Heidi Greulich; Tzu-Hsiu Chen; Whei Feng; Pasi A Jänne; James V Alvarez; Mauro Zappaterra; Sara E Bulmer; David A Frank; William C Hahn; William R Sellers; Matthew Meyerson
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2005-10-04       Impact factor: 11.069

View more
  16 in total

1.  Noncovalent wild-type-sparing inhibitors of EGFR T790M.

Authors:  Ho-June Lee; Gabriele Schaefer; Timothy P Heffron; Lily Shao; Xiaofen Ye; Steve Sideris; Shiva Malek; Emily Chan; Mark Merchant; Hank La; Savita Ubhayakar; Robert L Yauch; Valentina Pirazzoli; Katerina Politi; Jeff Settleman
Journal:  Cancer Discov       Date:  2012-12-10       Impact factor: 39.397

2.  EGFR and K-RAS mutations and ERCC1, TUBB3, TYMS, RRM1 and EGFR mRNA expression in non-small cell lung cancer: Correlation with clinical response to gefitinib or chemotherapy.

Authors:  Nannan Guo; Wen Zhang; Baoshi Zhang; Yingjie Li; Jian Tang; Shaojun Li; Yingnan Zhao; Yunlong Zhao; Hui Xia; Changhai Yu
Journal:  Mol Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-07-21

3.  Mutation abundance affects the therapeutic efficacy of EGFR-TKI in patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma: A retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Huijuan Wang; Mina Zhang; Wanyu Tang; Jie Ma; Bing Wei; Yuanyuan Niu; Guowei Zhang; Peng Li; Xiangtao Yan; Zhiyong Ma
Journal:  Cancer Biol Ther       Date:  2018-04-13       Impact factor: 4.742

Review 4.  Activating and resistance mutations of EGFR in non-small-cell lung cancer: role in clinical response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

Authors:  A F Gazdar
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 9.867

Review 5.  A Review of the Correlation Between Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutation Status and 18F-FDG Metabolic Activity in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Maoqing Jiang; Xiaohui Zhang; Yan Chen; Ping Chen; Xiuyu Guo; Lijuan Ma; Qiaoling Gao; Weiqi Mei; Jingfeng Zhang; Jianjun Zheng
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-04-20       Impact factor: 5.738

6.  Gene expression patterns that predict sensitivity to epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors in lung cancer cell lines and human lung tumors.

Authors:  Justin M Balko; Anil Potti; Christopher Saunders; Arnold Stromberg; Eric B Haura; Esther P Black
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2006-11-10       Impact factor: 3.969

7.  Discovery of selective and noncovalent diaminopyrimidine-based inhibitors of epidermal growth factor receptor containing the T790M resistance mutation.

Authors:  Emily J Hanan; Charles Eigenbrot; Marian C Bryan; Daniel J Burdick; Bryan K Chan; Yuan Chen; Jennafer Dotson; Robert A Heald; Philip S Jackson; Hank La; Michael D Lainchbury; Shiva Malek; Hans E Purkey; Gabriele Schaefer; Stephen Schmidt; Eileen M Seward; Steve Sideris; Christine Tam; Shumei Wang; Siew Kuen Yeap; Ivana Yen; Jianping Yin; Christine Yu; Inna Zilberleyb; Timothy P Heffron
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2014-11-20       Impact factor: 7.446

8.  Phosphorylated EGFR expression may predict outcome of EGFR-TKIs therapy for the advanced NSCLC patients with wild-type EGFR.

Authors:  Fen Wang; Shuhang Wang; Zhijie Wang; Jianchun Duan; Tongtong An; Jun Zhao; Hua Bai; Jie Wang
Journal:  J Exp Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-08-18

9.  Comparison of EGFR and K-RAS gene status between primary tumours and corresponding metastases in NSCLC.

Authors:  A Kalikaki; A Koutsopoulos; M Trypaki; J Souglakos; E Stathopoulos; V Georgoulias; D Mavroudis; A Voutsina
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2008-09-16       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Functional analysis of cancer-associated EGFR mutants using a cellular assay with YFP-tagged EGFR intracellular domain.

Authors:  Matheus M de Gunst; Marielle I Gallegos-Ruiz; Giuseppe Giaccone; Jose Antonio Rodriguez
Journal:  Mol Cancer       Date:  2007-09-18       Impact factor: 27.401

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.