CONTEXT: Mutually exclusive mutations of RET, RAS, or BRAF are present in about 70% of papillary thyroid carcinomas, whereas only the latter two are seen in poorly differentiated and anaplastic cancers. Although the signal output common to these oncoproteins is ERK, a recent report showed that only BRAF mutations consistently predicted responsiveness to MAPK kinase (MEK) inhibitors. OBJECTIVES: Here we investigated whether sensitivity to MEK inhibition was determined by oncogene status in 13 human thyroid cancer cell lines: four with BRAF mutations, four RAS, one RET/PTC1, and four wild type. RESULTS: Growth of BRAF (+) cells was inhibited by the MEK antagonist PD0325901 with an IC(50) of less than 5 nm. By contrast, RAS, RET/PTC1, or wild-type cells had IC(50) of 4 nm to greater than 1000 nm. Sensitivity was not predicted by coexisting mutations in PIK3CA or by PTEN status. Similar effects were obtained with the MEK inhibitor AZD6244. PD0325901 induced a sustained G1/S arrest in BRAF (+) but not BRAF (-) lines. PD0325901 was equipotent at inhibiting pERK1/2 after 2 h, regardless of genetic background, but pERK rebounded at 24 h in most lines. MEK inhibitor resistance was associated with partial refractoriness of pERK to further inhibition by the compounds. AZD6244 was more potent at inhibiting growth of NPA (BRAF +) than Cal62 (KRAS +) xenografts. CONCLUSION: Thyroid cancers with BRAF mutation are preferentially sensitive to MEK inhibitors, whereas tumors with other MEK-ERK effector pathway gene mutations have variable responses, either because they are only partially dependent on ERK and/or because feedback responses elicit partial refractoriness to MEK inhibition.
CONTEXT: Mutually exclusive mutations of RET, RAS, or BRAF are present in about 70% of papillary thyroid carcinomas, whereas only the latter two are seen in poorly differentiated and anaplastic cancers. Although the signal output common to these oncoproteins is ERK, a recent report showed that only BRAF mutations consistently predicted responsiveness to MAPK kinase (MEK) inhibitors. OBJECTIVES: Here we investigated whether sensitivity to MEK inhibition was determined by oncogene status in 13 humanthyroid cancer cell lines: four with BRAF mutations, four RAS, one RET/PTC1, and four wild type. RESULTS: Growth of BRAF (+) cells was inhibited by the MEK antagonist PD0325901 with an IC(50) of less than 5 nm. By contrast, RAS, RET/PTC1, or wild-type cells had IC(50) of 4 nm to greater than 1000 nm. Sensitivity was not predicted by coexisting mutations in PIK3CA or by PTEN status. Similar effects were obtained with the MEK inhibitor AZD6244. PD0325901 induced a sustained G1/S arrest in BRAF (+) but not BRAF (-) lines. PD0325901 was equipotent at inhibiting pERK1/2 after 2 h, regardless of genetic background, but pERK rebounded at 24 h in most lines. MEK inhibitor resistance was associated with partial refractoriness of pERK to further inhibition by the compounds. AZD6244 was more potent at inhibiting growth of NPA (BRAF +) than Cal62 (KRAS +) xenografts. CONCLUSION:Thyroid cancers with BRAF mutation are preferentially sensitive to MEK inhibitors, whereas tumors with other MEK-ERK effector pathway gene mutations have variable responses, either because they are only partially dependent on ERK and/or because feedback responses elicit partial refractoriness to MEK inhibition.
Authors: Edna T Kimura; Marina N Nikiforova; Zhaowen Zhu; Jeffrey A Knauf; Yuri E Nikiforov; James A Fagin Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2003-04-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Zhaowen Zhu; Manoj Gandhi; Marina N Nikiforova; Andrew H Fischer; Yuri E Nikiforov Journal: Am J Clin Pathol Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 2.493
Authors: Yoram Cohen; Mingzhao Xing; Elizabeth Mambo; Zhongmin Guo; Guogun Wu; Barry Trink; Uziel Beller; William H Westra; Paul W Ladenson; David Sidransky Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2003-04-16 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Jay Patrick Lopez; Jessica Wang-Rodriguez; Catherine Chang; Jocelyn S Chen; Francisco S Pardo; Joseph Aguilera; Weg M Ongkeko Journal: Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2007-10
Authors: Laura D Wood; D Williams Parsons; Siân Jones; Jimmy Lin; Tobias Sjöblom; Rebecca J Leary; Dong Shen; Simina M Boca; Thomas Barber; Janine Ptak; Natalie Silliman; Steve Szabo; Zoltan Dezso; Vadim Ustyanksky; Tatiana Nikolskaya; Yuri Nikolsky; Rachel Karchin; Paul A Wilson; Joshua S Kaminker; Zemin Zhang; Randal Croshaw; Joseph Willis; Dawn Dawson; Michail Shipitsin; James K V Willson; Saraswati Sukumar; Kornelia Polyak; Ben Ho Park; Charit L Pethiyagoda; P V Krishna Pant; Dennis G Ballinger; Andrew B Sparks; James Hartigan; Douglas R Smith; Erick Suh; Nickolas Papadopoulos; Phillip Buckhaults; Sanford D Markowitz; Giovanni Parmigiani; Kenneth W Kinzler; Victor E Velculescu; Bert Vogelstein Journal: Science Date: 2007-10-11 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Helen Davies; Graham R Bignell; Charles Cox; Philip Stephens; Sarah Edkins; Sheila Clegg; Jon Teague; Hayley Woffendin; Mathew J Garnett; William Bottomley; Neil Davis; Ed Dicks; Rebecca Ewing; Yvonne Floyd; Kristian Gray; Sarah Hall; Rachel Hawes; Jaime Hughes; Vivian Kosmidou; Andrew Menzies; Catherine Mould; Adrian Parker; Claire Stevens; Stephen Watt; Steven Hooper; Rebecca Wilson; Hiran Jayatilake; Barry A Gusterson; Colin Cooper; Janet Shipley; Darren Hargrave; Katherine Pritchard-Jones; Norman Maitland; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Gregory J Riggins; Darell D Bigner; Giuseppe Palmieri; Antonio Cossu; Adrienne Flanagan; Andrew Nicholson; Judy W C Ho; Suet Y Leung; Siu T Yuen; Barbara L Weber; Hilliard F Seigler; Timothy L Darrow; Hugh Paterson; Richard Marais; Christopher J Marshall; Richard Wooster; Michael R Stratton; P Andrew Futreal Journal: Nature Date: 2002-06-09 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Linda A Dultz; Shumon Dhar; Jennifer B Ogilvie; Keith S Heller; Dafna Bar-Sagi; Kepal N Patel Journal: Surgery Date: 2013-10-02 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Rebecca E Schweppe; Anna A Kerege; Jena D French; Vibha Sharma; Rachel L Grzywa; Bryan R Haugen Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2009-03-17 Impact factor: 5.958