Literature DB >> 28659148

PLX8394, a new generation BRAF inhibitor, selectively inhibits BRAF in colonic adenocarcinoma cells and prevents paradoxical MAPK pathway activation.

Candani S A Tutuka1, Miles C Andrews1,2,3, John M Mariadason1,3, Paul Ioannidis1, Christopher Hudson1, Jonathan Cebon1,2,3,4, Andreas Behren5,6.   

Abstract

BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) are standard of care for the treatment of BRAF V600 mutation-driven metastatic melanoma, but can lead to paradoxical activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signalling pathway. This can result in the promotion of precancerous lesions and secondary neoplasms, mainly (but not exclusively) associated with pre-existing mutations in RAS genes. We previously reported a patient with synchronous BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma and BRAF wt /KRAS G12D-metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), whose CRC relapsed and progressed when treated with the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib (GSK2118436). We used tissue from the resected CRC metastasis to derive a cell line, LM-COL-1, which directly and reliably mimicked the clinical scenario including paradoxical activation of the MAPK signalling pathway resulting in increased cell proliferation upon dabrafenib treatment. Novel BRAF inhibitors (PLX8394 and PLX7904), dubbed as "paradox breakers", were developed to inhibit V600 mutated oncogenic BRAF without causing paradoxical MAPK pathway activation. In this study we used our LM-COL-1 model alongside multiple other CRC cell lines with varying mutational backgrounds to demonstrate and confirm that the paradox breaker PLX8394 retains on-target inhibition of mutated BRAF V600 without paradoxically promoting MAPK signalling.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BRAF; Colorectal cancer; MAPK pathway; Melanoma; Paradoxical activation

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28659148      PMCID: PMC5490236          DOI: 10.1186/s12943-017-0684-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Cancer        ISSN: 1476-4598            Impact factor:   27.401


Introduction

A number of studies have demonstrated BRAFi-induced paradoxical activation, particularly when RAS is hyperactivated [1-4]. This is most commonly manifested as promotion of both benign and malignant hyperproliferative squamous cutaneous lesions in patients treated with BRAFi [5, 6]. Of greater concern is the increased incidence of secondary primary melanomas [7], and the reported emergence of RAS-driven cancers [8-10] including our own CRC case study in which combined treatment with dabrafenib and the MEK inhibitor trametinib (GSK 1120212, GlaxoSmithKline) was insufficient to block disease progression [11]. We subsequently established a cell line (LM-COL-1) from the colon cancer metastasis which was able to recapitulate what was observed in the patient during BRAFi treatment. The cell line provided us with a relevant model in which to investigate BRAFi and paradoxical MAPK activation. In view of the frequency of RAS mutations in CRC [12] and pancreatic cancer [13], and the unknown prevalence of occult MAPK activating mutations in the population at large, it is anticipated that drug-promoted cancers will continue to emerge as a serious clinical problem in patients receiving BRAFi [1]. Consequently, a new generation of BRAFi termed “paradox breakers”, such as PLX8394 and PLX7904 (Plexxikon), has been developed [14-16].

Findings

Firstly, we compared the on-target efficacy of PLX8394 (Plexxikon, Berkeley, CA) and the classical BRAFi, vemurafenib, by treating a BRAF melanoma cell line, LM-MEL-64, and a BRAF /RAS melanoma cell line, LM-MEL-39 with both drugs (Additional file 1: Material and Methods). Strong MAPK pathway inhibition in LM-MEL-64 was demonstrated by an 80.3 ± 2.4% (mean ± SD) reduction of pERK at the 1 μM dose relative to control, while little or no change in pERK was observed in LM-MEL-39 (Additional file 2: Figure S1). Since paradoxical activation of MAPK signalling appeared to have driven the growth of the colorectal cancer in our CRC case study [11], we examined whether this could be replicated in the LM-COL-1 cell line and additional colorectal cancer cell lines with varying mutational status, and whether this effect could be mitigated by use of PLX8394. The cell lines and their mutational status used in this study are shown in Table 1. Consistent with our previous findings, the BRAFi vemurafenib induced a dose-dependent paradoxical increase in the levels of pMEK and pERK in LM-COL-1 at the 1 μM dose of 72.1 ± 24.5% and 160.2 ± 18.0% (mean ± SD), respectively. In contrast, treatment with the paradox breaker PLX8394 had minimal effect on pMEK and pERK in this cell line (Fig. 1a, c, and e). Similar effects could be seen in the two additional BRAF / KRAS colon cancer cell lines, ALA and LS513 (Fig. 1a, c, and e), and were also observed when we applied the same treatments on the BRAF / KRAS colon cancer cell line HCT 116 (Additional file 3: Figure S2). Conversely, both vemurafenib and PLX8394 decreased MEK1/2 and ERK1/2 phosphorylation in the BRAF colon cancer cell lines LIM2405 and COLO 201 (Fig. 1b, d, and f).
Table 1

Mutational status of cell lines used

Cell LineTypeBRAFKRAS
LM-MEL-64MelanomaV600Ewt
LM-MEL-39Melanomawtwt
LM-COL-1Colorectal carcinomawtG12D
LS513 [21]Colorectal carcinomawtG12D
ALA [12]Colorectal carcinomawtG12D
LIM2405 [22]Colorectal carcinomaV600Ewt
COLO 201 [23]Colorectal carcinomaV600Ewt
HCT 116Colorectal carcinomawtG13D

wt wild type

Fig. 1

Effect of the BRAF inhibitors vemurafenib and PLX8394 on the MAPK pathway in colorectal cancer cell lines. Cells were treated with DMSO, vemurafenib at 1 μM, or PLX8394 at 1 μM for 6 h. a, b Representative Western blot of a panel of BRAF /KRAS (LM-COL-1, ALA, and LS513) and BRAF /KRAS (LIM2405 and COLO 201) colorectal cancer cell lines after treatment with DMSO control or BRAF inhibitors. Western blots were probed for total and phosphorylated MEK1/2 and ERK1/2. The blots are representative of three independent experiments. Total ERK served as a loading control. Western blot signal intensity was quantified and used to measure protein level relative to control. c, d Densitometry of MEK1/2 phosphorylation demonstrating paradoxical activation by vemurafenib in KRAS-mutated cell lines and BRAFi sensitivity in BRAF mutated cell lines LIM2405 and COLO 201. e, f Densitometry of ERK1/2 phosphorylation in the same cell lines as shown in c and d. In panels c–f the total protein:phosphorylated ratio is expressed as the mean ± SD of three independent replicates relative to DMSO-treated control

Mutational status of cell lines used wt wild type Effect of the BRAF inhibitors vemurafenib and PLX8394 on the MAPK pathway in colorectal cancer cell lines. Cells were treated with DMSO, vemurafenib at 1 μM, or PLX8394 at 1 μM for 6 h. a, b Representative Western blot of a panel of BRAF /KRAS (LM-COL-1, ALA, and LS513) and BRAF /KRAS (LIM2405 and COLO 201) colorectal cancer cell lines after treatment with DMSO control or BRAF inhibitors. Western blots were probed for total and phosphorylated MEK1/2 and ERK1/2. The blots are representative of three independent experiments. Total ERK served as a loading control. Western blot signal intensity was quantified and used to measure protein level relative to control. c, d Densitometry of MEK1/2 phosphorylation demonstrating paradoxical activation by vemurafenib in KRAS-mutated cell lines and BRAFi sensitivity in BRAF mutated cell lines LIM2405 and COLO 201. e, f Densitometry of ERK1/2 phosphorylation in the same cell lines as shown in c and d. In panels c–f the total protein:phosphorylated ratio is expressed as the mean ± SD of three independent replicates relative to DMSO-treated control To assess the functional effects of these inhibitors, proliferation assays were performed after 72 h treatment with either vemurafenib or PLX8394 across a range of concentrations. Consistent with the increase in MAPK signalling, proliferation of ALA, LS513, LM-COL-1, and HCT 116 was enhanced when treated with vemurafenib, but not with PLX8394 (Fig. 2a–c, and Additional file 3: Figure S2d). Notably, the largest effect on vemurafenib-induced cell proliferation was observed at the clinically achievable dose of 0.5 μM for ALA and LS513. Western blot inlays from signalling analysis of vemurafenib at concentrations that resulted in the greatest effect of increased proliferation, 0.5 μM for ALA and LS513, 1 μM for LM-COL-1, and 0.1 μM for HCT 116, demonstrate paradoxical increase of pERK in these cell lines (Fig. 2a–c, and Additional file 3: Figure S2a, b and c).
Fig. 2

The effect of vemurafenib and PLX8394 on proliferation and survival of BRAF / KRAS and BRAF / KRAS colorectal cancer cell lines. Inhibitors were used at 0 (DMSO control), 0.1, 0.5, and 1 μM. Cell proliferation was measured after 72 h of BRAFi treatment. a–c Proliferation of BRAF /KRAS colorectal cancer cell lines after treatment with vemurafenib or PLX8394 at the indicated concentrations. Relative cell numbers are normalized to DMSO-treated control and differences shown as %. The tinted area indicates increased proliferation after treatment with vemurafenib. The Western blot inlay demonstrates the amount of ERK1/2 phosphorylation relative to the DMSO control at the concentration of vemurafenib that resulted in the biggest increase in proliferation. Lines between lanes denote non-adjacent lanes from the same membrane. d–e Inhibition of proliferation in BRAF / KRAS colorectal cancer cell lines LIM2405 and COLO 201 after treatment with the indicated concentrations of vemurafenib or PLX8394. All data are shown as mean ± SD of independent triplicates relative to DMSO-treated controls

The effect of vemurafenib and PLX8394 on proliferation and survival of BRAF / KRAS and BRAF / KRAS colorectal cancer cell lines. Inhibitors were used at 0 (DMSO control), 0.1, 0.5, and 1 μM. Cell proliferation was measured after 72 h of BRAFi treatment. a–c Proliferation of BRAF /KRAS colorectal cancer cell lines after treatment with vemurafenib or PLX8394 at the indicated concentrations. Relative cell numbers are normalized to DMSO-treated control and differences shown as %. The tinted area indicates increased proliferation after treatment with vemurafenib. The Western blot inlay demonstrates the amount of ERK1/2 phosphorylation relative to the DMSO control at the concentration of vemurafenib that resulted in the biggest increase in proliferation. Lines between lanes denote non-adjacent lanes from the same membrane. d–e Inhibition of proliferation in BRAF / KRAS colorectal cancer cell lines LIM2405 and COLO 201 after treatment with the indicated concentrations of vemurafenib or PLX8394. All data are shown as mean ± SD of independent triplicates relative to DMSO-treated controls Conversely, BRAF colon cancer cell lines LIM2405 and COLO 201 showed a decrease in pMEK and pERK levels with treatment (Fig. 1b, d, and f), consistent with reduced proliferation with both inhibitors (Fig. 2d and e).

Conclusions

We demonstrate that paradoxical activation of MAPK signalling and the consequent promotion of proliferation of KRAS-mutated colon cancer cells is markedly reduced by newer-generation paradox-breaker BRAF inhibitors, while their capacity to inhibit mutant BRAF-driven signalling is not compromised. Mechanistically, it has been demonstrated that this may be a consequence of the minor structural changes between paradox breakers and vemurafenib which most likely avoid paradoxical activation of MAPK signalling by preventing RAF dimer formation [16]. Amaravadi et al. reported that long-term BRAFi treatment can enhance neoplastic growth in colonic cells harbouring mutations of the tumour suppressor gene, adenomatous polyposis coli (APC), even without KRAS mutations [17]. While patient numbers in this study were small, 4 out of the 14 patients treated with conventional BRAFi presented with 5 or more colonic polyps, significantly increasing the potential risk for progression to colon cancer [18, 19]. Furthermore, using the APC Min +/− model, the authors demonstrated an increased number and shorter time to appearance of polyps in mice treated with vemurafenib compared with control. Collectively, these data emphasize the risks associated with long-term BRAFi treatment, and the applicability of these risks even to those patients with no prior history of RAS mutated cancer. To sustain inhibition of MAPK signalling and to overcome paradoxical MAPK activation, BRAF inhibitors have been tested in combination with MEK inhibitors. Whilst this combination has been shown to improve survival times of patients with BRAF mutated melanoma [20], it is noteworthy that two of the cases of occult RAS mutated tumour progression on BRAFi therapy received, at least at some time-point, the BRAFi/MEKi combination [8, 11]. This suggests that the addition of a MEK inhibitor cannot completely abrogate BRAFi induced paradoxical MAPK activation. The mechanism of the paradox breaker’s ability to avoid paradoxical activation of the MAPK pathway has been previously demonstrated by Zhang et al. [16], using multiple cell lines including HCT 116. While the study showed similar paradoxical activation with vemurafenib in this cell line as demonstrated here, we extended these findings to additional colorectal carcinoma cell lines with different mutational backgrounds. Moreover, our study shows functional consequences of the paradoxical activation for the growth rate of the colorectal cancer cell lines, with a slight but consistent increase detected with vemurafenib treatment. Overall, our findings justify the evaluation of paradox breaker BRAF inhibitors as the next generation of therapeutics for the treatment of BRAF mutated cancers. It suggests that the new paradox breakers have the potential to mitigate the risk of promoting occult RAS activated tumour progression associated with the use of the first generation BRAFi, without compromising therapeutic efficacy or narrowing the therapeutic window. Currently, PLX8394 is undergoing a clinical trial in solid unresectable tumors (NCT02428712) with a completion date of 2018, at which time point the usefulness of these drugs in the clinical setting will become clear. Material and Methods. (DOCX 19 kb) The effect of vemurafenib and PLX8394 on the BRAF melanoma cell line LM-MEL-64 and the BRAF melanoma cell line LM-MEL-39. (A) LM-MEL-64 and (B) LM-MEL-39 were treated with the indicated concentrations of vemurafenib or PLX8394 and immunoblotting for total and phosphorylated ERK was performed. (C) pERK densitometry relative to control expressed as (%) ± SD for LM-MEL-64 and (D) for LM-MEL-39. Data are from three independent experiments. (TIFF 342 kb) The effect of BRAF inhibitors vemurafenib and PLX8394 on BRAF / KRAS cell line HCT 116. Cells were treated with DMSO, vemurafenib at 1 μM, or PLX8394 at 1 μM for 6 h. (A) Representative Western blot after treatment with DMSO control or BRAF inhibitors. Western blots were probed for total and phosphorylated MEK1/2 and ERK1/2. The blots are representative of three independent experiments. GAPDH served as a loading control. Western blot signal intensity was quantified and used to measure protein level relative to control. (B) Densitometry of MEK1/2 phosphorylation demonstrating paradoxical activation by vemurafenib in HCT 116. (C) Densitometry of ERK1/2 phosphorylation in the same cell line. Total protein:phosphorylated protein ratio is expressed as the mean ± SD of three independent replicates relative to DMSO-treated control. (D) Inhibitors were used at 0 (DMSO control), 0.1, 0.5, and 1 μM. Cell proliferation was measured after 72 h of BRAFi treatment. Relative cell numbers are normalized to DMSO-treated control and differences shown as percentage. The tinted area indicates increased proliferation after treatment with vemurafenib. The Western blot inlay demonstrates the difference in ERK1/2 phosphorylation at the concentration of vemurafenib that resulted in the biggest increase in proliferation. (TIFF 1052 kb)
  23 in total

1.  Responsiveness of three newly established human colorectal cancer cell lines to transforming growth factors beta 1 and beta 2.

Authors:  L Suardet; A C Gaide; J M Calmès; B Sordat; J C Givel; J F Eliason; N Odartchenko
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1992-07-01       Impact factor: 12.701

2.  BRAF inhibitor-driven tumor proliferation in a KRAS-mutated colon carcinoma is not overcome by MEK1/2 inhibition.

Authors:  Miles C Andrews; Andreas Behren; Fiona Chionh; John Mariadason; Laura J Vella; Hongdo Do; Alexander Dobrovic; Niall Tebbutt; Jonathan Cebon
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-11-04       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Colorectal cancer cell lines are representative models of the main molecular subtypes of primary cancer.

Authors:  Dmitri Mouradov; Clare Sloggett; Robert N Jorissen; Christopher G Love; Shan Li; Antony W Burgess; Diego Arango; Robert L Strausberg; Daniel Buchanan; Samuel Wormald; Liam O'Connor; Jennifer L Wilding; David Bicknell; Ian P M Tomlinson; Walter F Bodmer; John M Mariadason; Oliver M Sieber
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2014-04-22       Impact factor: 12.701

Review 4.  KRAS: feeding pancreatic cancer proliferation.

Authors:  Kirsten L Bryant; Joseph D Mancias; Alec C Kimmelman; Channing J Der
Journal:  Trends Biochem Sci       Date:  2014-01-02       Impact factor: 13.807

5.  Extensive characterization of genetic alterations in a series of human colorectal cancer cell lines.

Authors:  J Gayet; X P Zhou; A Duval; S Rolland; J M Hoang; P Cottu; R Hamelin
Journal:  Oncogene       Date:  2001-08-16       Impact factor: 9.867

6.  Multiple Gastrointestinal Polyps in Patients Treated with BRAF Inhibitors.

Authors:  Ravi K Amaravadi; Kathryn E Hamilton; Xiaohong Ma; Shengfu Piao; Armando Del Portillo; Katherine L Nathanson; Matteo S Carlino; Georgina V Long; Igor Puzanov; Xiaowei Xu; Jennifer J D Morrissette; Kenneth Y Tsai; Keith T Flaherty; Jeffrey A Sosman; Grant R Goodman; Grant A McArthur; Anil K Rustgi; David C Metz; Lynn M Schuchter; Paul B Chapman; Antonia R Sepulveda
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2015-07-22       Impact factor: 12.531

7.  Inhibition of mutant BRAF splice variant signaling by next-generation, selective RAF inhibitors.

Authors:  Kevin J Basile; Kaitlyn Le; Edward J Hartsough; Andrew E Aplin
Journal:  Pigment Cell Melanoma Res       Date:  2014-02-10       Impact factor: 4.693

8.  Retention of tissue-specific phenotype in a panel of colon carcinoma cell lines: relationship to clinical correlates.

Authors:  R H Whitehead; H H Zhang; I P Hayward
Journal:  Immunol Cell Biol       Date:  1992-08       Impact factor: 5.126

9.  RAS mutations in cutaneous squamous-cell carcinomas in patients treated with BRAF inhibitors.

Authors:  Fei Su; Amaya Viros; Carla Milagre; Kerstin Trunzer; Gideon Bollag; Olivia Spleiss; Jorge S Reis-Filho; Xiangju Kong; Richard C Koya; Keith T Flaherty; Paul B Chapman; Min Jung Kim; Robert Hayward; Matthew Martin; Hong Yang; Qiongqing Wang; Holly Hilton; Julie S Hang; Johannes Noe; Maryou Lambros; Felipe Geyer; Nathalie Dhomen; Ion Niculescu-Duvaz; Alfonso Zambon; Dan Niculescu-Duvaz; Natasha Preece; Lídia Robert; Nicholas J Otte; Stephen Mok; Damien Kee; Yan Ma; Chao Zhang; Gaston Habets; Elizabeth A Burton; Bernice Wong; Hoa Nguyen; Mark Kockx; Luc Andries; Brian Lestini; Keith B Nolop; Richard J Lee; Andrew K Joe; James L Troy; Rene Gonzalez; Thomas E Hutson; Igor Puzanov; Bartosz Chmielowski; Caroline J Springer; Grant A McArthur; Jeffrey A Sosman; Roger S Lo; Antoni Ribas; Richard Marais
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2012-01-19       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  RAF inhibitors transactivate RAF dimers and ERK signalling in cells with wild-type BRAF.

Authors:  Poulikos I Poulikakos; Chao Zhang; Gideon Bollag; Kevan M Shokat; Neal Rosen
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2010-03-18       Impact factor: 49.962

View more
  16 in total

Review 1.  Novel GLCCI1-BRAF fusion drives kinase signaling in a case of pheochromocytomatosis.

Authors:  Benjamin L Green; Robert R C Grant; Christopher T Richie; Bishwanath Chatterjee; Michelly Sampaio De Melo; Frederic G Barr; Karel Pacak; Sunita K Agarwal; Naris Nilubol
Journal:  Eur J Endocrinol       Date:  2022-07-01       Impact factor: 6.558

Review 2.  Development of encorafenib for BRAF-mutated advanced melanoma.

Authors:  Peter Koelblinger; Olaf Thuerigen; Reinhard Dummer
Journal:  Curr Opin Oncol       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 3.645

Review 3.  Receptor tyrosine kinases and downstream pathways as druggable targets for cancer treatment: the current arsenal of inhibitors.

Authors:  Wagner Ricardo Montor; Andrei Ronaldo Oliveira Silva Escartin Salas; Fabiana Henriques Machado de Melo
Journal:  Mol Cancer       Date:  2018-02-19       Impact factor: 27.401

Review 4.  Targeting KRAS in metastatic colorectal cancer: current strategies and emerging opportunities.

Authors:  Manuela Porru; Luca Pompili; Carla Caruso; Annamaria Biroccio; Carlo Leonetti
Journal:  J Exp Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2018-03-13

Review 5.  Development of small-molecule therapeutics and strategies for targeting RAF kinase in BRAF-mutant colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Jing-Hua Pan; Hong Zhou; Sheng-Bin Zhu; Jin-Lian Huang; Xiao-Xu Zhao; Hui Ding; Yun-Long Pan
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 3.989

6.  A CRAF/glutathione-S-transferase P1 complex sustains autocrine growth of cancers with KRAS and BRAF mutations.

Authors:  Yoshiro Niitsu; Yasushi Sato; Kunihiro Takanashi; Tsuyoshi Hayashi; Naoko Kubo-Birukawa; Fumiko Shimizu; Naoki Fujitani; Rai Shimoyama; Takehiro Kukitsu; Wataru Kurata; Yasuyuki Tashiro; Irving Listowsky
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-07-27       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  High Proportion of Potential Candidates for Immunotherapy in a Chilean Cohort of Gastric Cancer Patients: Results of the FORCE1 Study.

Authors:  Miguel Cordova-Delgado; Mauricio P Pinto; Ignacio N Retamal; Matías Muñoz-Medel; María Loreto Bravo; María F Fernández; Betzabé Cisternas; Sebastián Mondaca; César Sanchez; Hector Galindo; Bruno Nervi; Carolina Ibáñez; Francisco Acevedo; Jorge Madrid; José Peña; Erica Koch; Maria José Maturana; Diego Romero; Nathaly de la Jara; Javiera Torres; Manuel Espinoza; Carlos Balmaceda; Yuwei Liao; Zhiguang Li; Matías Freire; Valentina Gárate-Calderón; Javier Cáceres; Gonzalo Sepúlveda-Hermosilla; Rodrigo Lizana; Liliana Ramos; Rocío Artigas; Enrique Norero; Fernando Crovari; Ricardo Armisén; Alejandro H Corvalán; Gareth I Owen; Marcelo Garrido
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2019-08-30       Impact factor: 6.639

Review 8.  Pediatric low-grade glioma in the era of molecular diagnostics.

Authors:  Scott Ryall; Uri Tabori; Cynthia Hawkins
Journal:  Acta Neuropathol Commun       Date:  2020-03-12       Impact factor: 7.801

Review 9.  The MAPK and AMPK signalings: interplay and implication in targeted cancer therapy.

Authors:  Jimin Yuan; Xiaoduo Dong; Jiajun Yap; Jiancheng Hu
Journal:  J Hematol Oncol       Date:  2020-08-17       Impact factor: 17.388

Review 10.  Targeting Aberrant RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK Signaling for Cancer Therapy.

Authors:  Ufuk Degirmenci; Mei Wang; Jiancheng Hu
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2020-01-13       Impact factor: 6.600

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.