PURPOSE: Resistance is commonly acquired in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor who are treated with imatinib mesylate, often due to the development of secondary mutations in the KIT kinase domain. We sought to investigate the efficacy of second-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors, such as sorafenib, dasatinib, and nilotinib, against the commonly observed imatinib-resistant KIT mutations (KIT(V654A), KIT(T670I), KIT(D820Y), and KIT(N822K)) expressed in the Ba/F3 cellular system. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In vitro drug screening of stable Ba/F3 KIT mutants recapitulating the genotype of imatinib-resistant patients harboring primary and secondary KIT mutations was investigated. Comparison was made to imatinib-sensitive Ba/F3 KIT mutant cells as well as Ba/F3 cells expressing only secondary KIT mutations. The efficacy of drug treatment was evaluated by proliferation and apoptosis assays, in addition to biochemical inhibition of KIT activation. RESULTS: Sorafenib was potent against all imatinib-resistant Ba/F3 KIT double mutants tested, including the gatekeeper secondary mutation KIT(WK557-8del/T670I), which was resistant to other kinase inhibitors. Although all three drugs tested decreased cell proliferation and inhibited KIT activation against exon 13 (KIT(V560del/V654A)) and exon 17 (KIT(V559D/D820Y)) double mutants, nilotinib did so at lower concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: Our results emphasize the need for tailored salvage therapy in imatinib-refractory gastrointestinal stromal tumors according to individual molecular mechanisms of resistance. The Ba/F3 KIT(WK557-8del/T670I) cells were sensitive only to sorafenib inhibition, whereas nilotinib was more potent on imatinib-resistant KIT(V560del/V654A) and KIT(V559D/D820Y) mutant cells than dasatinib and sorafenib.
PURPOSE: Resistance is commonly acquired in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor who are treated with imatinib mesylate, often due to the development of secondary mutations in the KIT kinase domain. We sought to investigate the efficacy of second-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors, such as sorafenib, dasatinib, and nilotinib, against the commonly observed imatinib-resistant KIT mutations (KIT(V654A), KIT(T670I), KIT(D820Y), and KIT(N822K)) expressed in the Ba/F3 cellular system. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In vitro drug screening of stable Ba/F3 KIT mutants recapitulating the genotype of imatinib-resistant patients harboring primary and secondary KIT mutations was investigated. Comparison was made to imatinib-sensitive Ba/F3 KIT mutant cells as well as Ba/F3 cells expressing only secondary KIT mutations. The efficacy of drug treatment was evaluated by proliferation and apoptosis assays, in addition to biochemical inhibition of KIT activation. RESULTS: Sorafenib was potent against all imatinib-resistant Ba/F3 KIT double mutants tested, including the gatekeeper secondary mutation KIT(WK557-8del/T670I), which was resistant to other kinase inhibitors. Although all three drugs tested decreased cell proliferation and inhibited KIT activation against exon 13 (KIT(V560del/V654A)) and exon 17 (KIT(V559D/D820Y)) double mutants, nilotinib did so at lower concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: Our results emphasize the need for tailored salvage therapy in imatinib-refractory gastrointestinal stromal tumors according to individual molecular mechanisms of resistance. The Ba/F3 KIT(WK557-8del/T670I) cells were sensitive only to sorafenib inhibition, whereas nilotinib was more potent on imatinib-resistant KIT(V560del/V654A) and KIT(V559D/D820Y) mutant cells than dasatinib and sorafenib.
Authors: Michael C Heinrich; Adrian Marino-Enriquez; Ajia Presnell; Rachel S Donsky; Diana J Griffith; Arin McKinley; Janice Patterson; Takahiro Taguchi; Cher-Wei Liang; Jonathan A Fletcher Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2012-06-04 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Ellen Weisberg; Hwan Geun Choi; Arghya Ray; Rosemary Barrett; Jianming Zhang; Taebo Sim; Wenjun Zhou; Markus Seeliger; Michael Cameron; Mohammed Azam; Jonathan A Fletcher; Maria Debiec-Rychter; Mark Mayeda; Daisy Moreno; Andrew L Kung; Pasi Antero Janne; Roya Khosravi-Far; Junia V Melo; Paul W Manley; Sophia Adamia; Catherine Wu; Nathanael Gray; James D Griffin Journal: Blood Date: 2010-03-18 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: S H Park; M H Ryu; B Y Ryoo; S A Im; H C Kwon; S S Lee; S R Park; B Y Kang; Y K Kang Journal: Invest New Drugs Date: 2012-01-25 Impact factor: 3.850
Authors: Andrey V Reshetnyak; Bryce Nelson; Xiarong Shi; Titus J Boggon; Alevtina Pavlenco; Elizabeth M Mandel-Bausch; Francisco Tome; Yoshihisa Suzuki; Sachdev S Sidhu; Irit Lax; Joseph Schlessinger Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2013-10-14 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Atsushi Nonami; Martin Sattler; Ellen Weisberg; Qingsong Liu; Jianming Zhang; Matthew P Patricelli; Amanda L Christie; Amy M Saur; Nancy E Kohl; Andrew L Kung; Hojong Yoon; Taebo Sim; Nathanael S Gray; James D Griffin Journal: Blood Date: 2015-04-01 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Michael C Heinrich; Robert G Maki; Christopher L Corless; Cristina R Antonescu; Amy Harlow; Diana Griffith; Ajia Town; Arin McKinley; Wen-Bin Ou; Jonathan A Fletcher; Christopher D M Fletcher; Xin Huang; Darrel P Cohen; Charles M Baum; George D Demetri Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-10-27 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: D Handolias; A L Hamilton; R Salemi; A Tan; K Moodie; L Kerr; A Dobrovic; G A McArthur Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2010-04-06 Impact factor: 7.640