S S Kumar1,2, Y Tomita2,3, J Wrin1,2, M Bruhn1, A Swalling4, M Mohammed4, T J Price2,5, J E Hardingham6,7. 1. Basil Hetzel Institute, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, 28 Woodville Road, Woodville, SA, 5011, Australia. 2. School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, 5005, Australia. 3. Basil Hetzel Institute and Department of Medical Oncology, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, 28 Woodville Road, Woodville, SA, 5011, Australia. 4. Department of Anatomical Pathology, SA Pathology, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, 28 Woodville Road, Woodville, SA, 5011, Australia. 5. Department of Medical Oncology, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, 28 Woodville Road, Woodville, SA, 5011, Australia. 6. Basil Hetzel Institute, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, 28 Woodville Road, Woodville, SA, 5011, Australia. Jennifer.hardingham@adelaide.edu.au. 7. School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, 5005, Australia. Jennifer.hardingham@adelaide.edu.au.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Biomarkers, such as mutant RAS, predict resistance to anti-EGFR therapy in only a proportion of patients, and hence, other predictive biomarkers are needed. The aims were to identify candidate genes upregulated in colorectal cancer cell lines resistant to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody treatment, to knockdown (KD) these genes in the resistant cell lines to determine if sensitivity to anti-EGFR antibody was restored, and finally to perform a pilot correlative study of EGR1 expression and outcomes in a cohort of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients given cetuximab therapy. METHODS: Comparative expression array analysis of resistant cell lines (SW48, COLO-320DM, and SNU-C1) vs sensitive cell lines (LIM1215, CaCo2, and SW948) was performed. The highest up-regulated gene in each resistant cell line was knocked down (KD) using RNA interference, and effect on proliferation was assessed with and without anti-EGFR treatment. Expression of the candidate genes in patients' tumours treated with cetuximab was assessed by immunohistochemistry; survival analyses were performed comparing high vs low expression. RESULTS: Genes significantly upregulated in resistant cell lines were EGR1 (early growth response protein 1), HBEGF (heparin-binding epidermal growth factor-like growth factor), and AKT3 (AKT serine/threonine kinase 3). KD of each gene resulted in the respective cells being more sensitive to anti-EGFR treatment, suggesting that the resistant phenotype was reversed. In the pilot study of mCRC patients treated with cetuximab, both median PFS (1.38 months vs 6.79 months; HR 2.77 95% CI 1.2-19.4) and median OS (2.59 months vs 9.82 months; HR 3.0 95% CI 1.3-23.2) were significantly worse for those patients with high EGR1 expression. CONCLUSION: High EGR1 expression may be a candidate biomarker of resistance to anti-EGFR therapy.
PURPOSE: Biomarkers, such as mutant RAS, predict resistance to anti-EGFR therapy in only a proportion of patients, and hence, other predictive biomarkers are needed. The aims were to identify candidate genes upregulated in colorectal cancer cell lines resistant to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody treatment, to knockdown (KD) these genes in the resistant cell lines to determine if sensitivity to anti-EGFR antibody was restored, and finally to perform a pilot correlative study of EGR1 expression and outcomes in a cohort of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients given cetuximab therapy. METHODS: Comparative expression array analysis of resistant cell lines (SW48, COLO-320DM, and SNU-C1) vs sensitive cell lines (LIM1215, CaCo2, and SW948) was performed. The highest up-regulated gene in each resistant cell line was knocked down (KD) using RNA interference, and effect on proliferation was assessed with and without anti-EGFR treatment. Expression of the candidate genes in patients' tumours treated with cetuximab was assessed by immunohistochemistry; survival analyses were performed comparing high vs low expression. RESULTS: Genes significantly upregulated in resistant cell lines were EGR1 (early growth response protein 1), HBEGF (heparin-binding epidermal growth factor-like growth factor), and AKT3 (AKT serine/threonine kinase 3). KD of each gene resulted in the respective cells being more sensitive to anti-EGFR treatment, suggesting that the resistant phenotype was reversed. In the pilot study of mCRC patients treated with cetuximab, both median PFS (1.38 months vs 6.79 months; HR 2.77 95% CI 1.2-19.4) and median OS (2.59 months vs 9.82 months; HR 3.0 95% CI 1.3-23.2) were significantly worse for those patients with high EGR1 expression. CONCLUSION: High EGR1 expression may be a candidate biomarker of resistance to anti-EGFR therapy.
Authors: Stephen J Clarke; Christos S Karapetis; Peter Gibbs; Nick Pavlakis; Jayesh Desai; Michael Michael; Niall C Tebbutt; Tim J Price; Josep Tabernero Journal: Crit Rev Oncol Hematol Date: 2012-07-02 Impact factor: 6.312
Authors: Lillian L Siu; Jeremy D Shapiro; Derek J Jonker; Chris S Karapetis; John R Zalcberg; John Simes; Felix Couture; Malcolm J Moore; Timothy J Price; Jehan Siddiqui; Louise M Nott; Danielle Charpentier; Winston Liauw; Michael B Sawyer; Michael Jefford; Nadine M Magoski; Andrew Haydon; Ian Walters; Jolie Ringash; Dongsheng Tu; Chris J O'Callaghan Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-05-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Giuseppe Bronte; Nicola Silvestris; Marta Castiglia; Antonio Galvano; Francesco Passiglia; Giovanni Sortino; Giuseppe Cicero; Christian Rolfo; Marc Peeters; Viviana Bazan; Daniele Fanale; Antonio Giordano; Antonio Russo Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2015-09-22
Authors: Jonas N Conde; Santiago Sanchez-Vicente; Nicholas Saladino; Elena E Gorbunova; William R Schutt; Megan C Mladinich; Grace E Himmler; Jorge Benach; Hwan Keun Kim; Erich R Mackow Journal: J Virol Date: 2021-10-13 Impact factor: 6.549
Authors: Anne Monks; Yingdong Zhao; Curtis Hose; Hossein Hamed; Julia Krushkal; Jianwen Fang; Dmitriy Sonkin; Alida Palmisano; Eric C Polley; Laura K Fogli; Mariam M Konaté; Sarah B Miller; Melanie A Simpson; Andrea Regier Voth; Ming-Chung Li; Erik Harris; Xiaolin Wu; John W Connelly; Annamaria Rapisarda; Beverly A Teicher; Richard Simon; James H Doroshow Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2018-10-24 Impact factor: 12.701