BACKGROUND: The treatment efficacy of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors like erlotinib has not met expectations for glioblastoma therapy, even for EGFR-overexpressing tumors. We determined possible mechanisms of therapy resistance using the unique BS153 glioblastoma cell line, which has retained amplification of the egfr gene and expression of EGFR variant (v)III. METHODS: Functional effects of erlotinib, gefitinib, and cetuximab on BS153 proliferation, migration, and EGFR-dependent signal transduction were systematically compared in vitro. The tumor-initiating capacity of parental and treatment-resistant BS153 was studied in Naval Medical Research Institute/Foxn1(nu) mice. Potential mediators of resistance were knocked down using small interfering (si)RNA. RESULTS: Erlotinib and gefitinib inhibited proliferation and migration of BS153 in a dose-dependent manner, whereas cetuximab had no effect. BS153 developed resistance to erlotinib (BS153(resE)) but not to gefitinib. Resistance was associated with strong upregulation of EGFRvIII and subsequent activation of the phosphatidylinositol-3-OH kinase (PI3K) pathway in BS153(resE) and an increased expression of the regulatory 110-kDa delta subunit of PI3K (p110δ). Knockdown of EGFRvIII in BS153(resE) largely restored sensitivity to erlotinib. Targeting PI3K pharmacologically caused a significant decrease in cell viability, and specifically targeting p110δ by siRNA partially restored erlotinib sensitivity in BS153(resE). In vivo, BS153 formed highly invasive tumors with an unusual growth pattern, displaying numerous satellites distant from the initial injection site. Erlotinib resistance led to delayed onset of tumor growth as well as prolonged overall survival of mice without changing tumor morphology. CONCLUSIONS: EGFRvIII can mediate resistance to erlotinib in EGFR-amplified glioblastoma via an increase in PI3Kp110δ. Interfering with PI3Kp110δ can restore sensitivity toward the tyrosine kinase inhibitor.
BACKGROUND: The treatment efficacy of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors like erlotinib has not met expectations for glioblastoma therapy, even for EGFR-overexpressing tumors. We determined possible mechanisms of therapy resistance using the unique BS153 glioblastoma cell line, which has retained amplification of the egfr gene and expression of EGFR variant (v)III. METHODS: Functional effects of erlotinib, gefitinib, and cetuximab on BS153 proliferation, migration, and EGFR-dependent signal transduction were systematically compared in vitro. The tumor-initiating capacity of parental and treatment-resistant BS153 was studied in Naval Medical Research Institute/Foxn1(nu) mice. Potential mediators of resistance were knocked down using small interfering (si)RNA. RESULTS:Erlotinib and gefitinib inhibited proliferation and migration of BS153 in a dose-dependent manner, whereas cetuximab had no effect. BS153 developed resistance to erlotinib (BS153(resE)) but not to gefitinib. Resistance was associated with strong upregulation of EGFRvIII and subsequent activation of the phosphatidylinositol-3-OH kinase (PI3K) pathway in BS153(resE) and an increased expression of the regulatory 110-kDa delta subunit of PI3K (p110δ). Knockdown of EGFRvIII in BS153(resE) largely restored sensitivity to erlotinib. Targeting PI3K pharmacologically caused a significant decrease in cell viability, and specifically targeting p110δ by siRNA partially restored erlotinib sensitivity in BS153(resE). In vivo, BS153 formed highly invasive tumors with an unusual growth pattern, displaying numerous satellites distant from the initial injection site. Erlotinib resistance led to delayed onset of tumor growth as well as prolonged overall survival of mice without changing tumor morphology. CONCLUSIONS: EGFRvIII can mediate resistance to erlotinib in EGFR-amplified glioblastoma via an increase in PI3Kp110δ. Interfering with PI3Kp110δ can restore sensitivity toward the tyrosine kinase inhibitor.
Authors: Sarah E M Herman; Rosa Lapalombella; Amber L Gordon; Asha Ramanunni; Kristie A Blum; Jeffrey Jones; Xiaoli Zhang; Brian J Lannutti; Kamal D Puri; Natarajan Muthusamy; John C Byrd; Amy J Johnson Journal: Blood Date: 2011-03-04 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: T A Libermann; H R Nusbaum; N Razon; R Kris; I Lax; H Soreq; N Whittle; M D Waterfield; A Ullrich; J Schlessinger Journal: Nature Date: 1985 Jan 10-18 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Y Marie; A F Carpentier; A M P Omuro; M Sanson; J Thillet; K Hoang-Xuan; J-Y Delattre Journal: Neurology Date: 2005-04-26 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Roberto Bianco; Incheol Shin; Christoph A Ritter; F Michael Yakes; Andrea Basso; Neal Rosen; Junji Tsurutani; Phillip A Dennis; Gordon B Mills; Carlos L Arteaga Journal: Oncogene Date: 2003-05-08 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: Julie M Roda; Trupti Joshi; Jonathan P Butchar; Jaclyn W McAlees; Amy Lehman; Susheela Tridandapani; William E Carson Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2007-10-25 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Ajay Pandita; Kenneth D Aldape; Gelareh Zadeh; Abhijit Guha; C David James Journal: Genes Chromosomes Cancer Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 5.006
Authors: De-Chen Lin; Liang Xu; Ye Chen; Haiyan Yan; Masaharu Hazawa; Ngan Doan; Jonathan W Said; Ling-Wen Ding; Li-Zhen Liu; Henry Yang; Shizhu Yu; Michael Kahn; Dong Yin; H Phillip Koeffler Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2015-04-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Michael D Prados; Sara A Byron; Nhan L Tran; Joanna J Phillips; Annette M Molinaro; Keith L Ligon; Patrick Y Wen; John G Kuhn; Ingo K Mellinghoff; John F de Groot; Howard Colman; Timothy F Cloughesy; Susan M Chang; Timothy C Ryken; Waibhav D Tembe; Jeffrey A Kiefer; Michael E Berens; David W Craig; John D Carpten; Jeffrey M Trent Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2015-05-01 Impact factor: 12.300