| Literature DB >> 31398711 |
Maria Cristina De Martino1,2, Richard A Feelders1, Claudia Pivonello2, Chiara Simeoli2, Fortuna Papa2, Annamaria Colao2, Rosario Pivonello2, Leo J Hofland1.
Abstract
Adrenocortical carcinomas (ACCs) are rare tumors with scant treatment options for which new treatments are required. The mTOR pathway mediates the intracellular signals of several growth factors, including the insulin-like growth factors (IGFs), and therefore represents a potential attractive pathway for the treatment of several malignancies including ACCs. Several mTOR inhibitors, including sirolimus, temsirolimus and everolimus, have been clinically developed. This review summarizes the results of the studies evaluating the expression of the mTOR pathway components in ACCs, the effects of the mTOR inhibitors alone or in combination with other drugs in preclinical models of ACCs and the early experience with the use of these compounds in the clinical setting. The mTOR pathway seems a potential target for treatment of patients with ACC, but further investigation is still required to define the potential role of mTOR inhibitors alone or in combination with other drugs in the treatment of ACC patients.Entities:
Keywords: adrenal; endocrine cancers; growth factors; neuroendocrinology
Year: 2019 PMID: 31398711 PMCID: PMC6733361 DOI: 10.1530/EC-19-0224
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Endocr Connect ISSN: 2049-3614 Impact factor: 3.335
Figure 1Schematic representation of the potential molecular pathways representing potential targets for treatment in patients with ACC, based on the results presented in the current review. GFs, growth factors; GFR, growth factor receptor. Brown lines show two potential escape pathways to the treatment with mTOR inhibitors: AKT and ERK activation.
Studies reporting the protein expression (evaluated by immunohistochemistry) of the main components of the mTOR pathway in adrenocortical tumors. ACA, adrenocortical adenomas; ACC, adrenocortical carcinomas; IHC, immunohistochemistry; NA, normal adrenals.
| Author | Number of ACCs | Methodology | Type of antibodies | Phospho-Akt: positive ACC cases (%) | mTOR: positive ACC cases (%) | Phospho-mTOR: positive ACC cases (%) | p70 S6 Kinase: positive ACC cases (%) | Phoapho-p70 S6 Kinase: positive ACC cases (%) | Phospho-S6 Ribosomal Protein: positive ACC cases (%) | 4E-BP1: positive ACC cases (%) | Phospho-4E-BP1: positive ACC cases (%) | Phospho-Raptor: positive ACC cases (%) | Comparison with ACA | Comparison with NA | Consideration on prognosis | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nakamura | 41 | Standard IHC procedure. Specimens were categorized into | Phospho-Akt (Ser473) monoclonal; phospho-mTOR (Ser2448) polyclonal; Phoapho-p70 S6 Kinase (Thr389) monoclonal; Phospho-S6 Ribosomal Protein (Ser240/244) polyclonal; Phospho-4E-BP1(Thr70) polyclonal | Not reported | Not evaluated | Not reported | Not evaluated | Not reported | Not reported | Not evaluated | Not reported | Not evaluated | With the exception of phospho-Akt, all the evaluated proteins were found to have a mean expression tendentially lower in ACC than in ACA, although the significance is not reported | All the evaluated proteins were found to have a mean expression tendentially lower in ACC than in NA, although the significance is not reported | Not reported | |
| De Martino | 20 | Standard IHC procedure. The score was calculated by the sum of the intensity score and the proportion of the stained cells; this provided a score between 0 and 6. The proportion score was as follows: 0 = no positivity (or <10%); +1 ≤ 1/3 tumor cell positivity; +2 = 1/3–2/3 tumor cell positivity; and +3 = more than 2/3 tumor cell positivity. The intensity score was as follows: +1 weak staining; +2 intermediate staining; and +3 strong staining. The score 0 was considered as negative, 2–3 as low, 4–5 as intermediate, and 6 as high. Finally, adrenocortical tumors were dichotomously grouped as having intermediate to high expression of the evaluated protein and phosphoproteins (IHC score ≥4) or not (IHC score <4). The reported percentages of positive ACC cases refer to the percentage of cases having intermediate to high expression of the evaluated proteins. | mTOR monoclonal; Phospho-mTOR (Ser2448) monoclonal; p70 S6 Kinase monoclonal; Phoapho-p70 S6 Kinase (Thr389) monoclonal; 4E-BPl monoclonal; Phospho-4E-BPl(Ser65) monoclonal | Not evaluated | 60 | 10 | 25 | 30 | Not evaluated | 75 | 60 | Not evaluated | All the evaluated proteins were found to have a mean expression tendentially lower in ACC than in ACA. This difference was significant only for p70 S6 Kinase ( | Not evaluated | In ACC group, a higher p70 S6 Kinase ( | |
| Germano | 58 | Tissue microarrays. Staining was assessed for all but one antibodies, using a binary scoring system based on the evaluation of cytoplasmic/membrane staining: score 0 = no staining, score 1 = positive staining. | Phospho-Akt (Ser473) polyclonal; phospho-mTOR (Ser2448) monoclonal; phospho-p70 S6K (Thr389) monoclonal; phospho-4EBP1 (Thr37/46) polyclonal; phospho-Raptor (Ser792) polyclonal | 55 | Not evaluated | 32 | Not evaluated | 59 | Not evaluated | Not evaluated | 40 | 29 | Not evaluated | Not evaluated | Phosho-mTOR expression was negative in tumors with high Weiss score ( |
Studies evaluating the effects of different mTOR inhibitors in adrenocortical carcinoma cell lines.
| Author | Type of cells | mTOR inhibitor used | Methodology to evaluate inhibition of cell proliferation | Inhibition of cell proliferation | Type of drug combination | Methodology to evaluate effects of drug combination | Effects of drug combination | Confirmation in xenografts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Doghman | H295R; SW13; primary pediatric ACT cells | Everolimus | Cells were counted after 6 days of culture in the presence of the drug | Inhibition of cell proliferation | Not evaluated | Not evaluated | Not evaluated | H295R xenograft growth in NOD/SCID/yc null mice treated with placebo or with RAD001 (10/mg/kg/day). Tumor growth was significantly different in animals treated with the drug ( |
| De Martino | H295R; HAC15; SW13 | Sirolimus or evemsirolimus | After 24 h, 3, 6, and 9 days of treatment, the cells were harvested for DNA measurement | Sirolimus and temsirolimus significantly suppressed the cell growth in a doseand time-dependent manner | Anti-IGF2-neutralizing antibody | Cell viability assay (WST-1) | 72 h treatment with sirolimus combined with anti-IGF2 Abs almost totally blocked H295R cell proliferation (90% inhibition); sirolimus or anti-IGF2 antibody alone induced an inhibition in H295R cell proliferation of 64 and 42% respectively | Not evaluated |
| Mariniello | H295R; SW13; primary cells cultures | Everolimus | After 2 days of culture, cells were maintained overnight in low serum medium and drug incubation was started. Cell viability studies employing the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5 diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay were performed after 24 and 72 hours of treatment | Dose-dependent cytotoxicity on SW13 and H295R. In primary adrenocortical cell cultures, a significant growth inhibitory response to the tested drugs was found in 3 of 5 cases | Sorafenib | MTT assay | The combination of everolimus with sorafenib produced a further reduction of SW13 cell viability, but not in H295R | Sorafenib monotherapy showed no significant activity on either SW13 and H295R xenografts, whereas administration of everolimus alone delayed SW13 tumor growth but was ineffective against H295R xenografts. Combination therapy produced remarkable tumor growth inhibitory effects on both SW13 and H295R xenografts; pharmacological treatments affected median survival of SW13 and H295R treated xenografts |
| De Martino | Human primary cultures | Sirolimus | The effects of sirolimus on cell survival in 7 human primary cultures of adrenocortical cancel were harvested for DNA measurement | Only one of 7 ACC primary culture showed a significant cell number reduction after sirolimus treatment | Not evaluated | Not evaluated | Not evaluated | Not evaluated |
| De Martino | H295R and SW13 | Sirolimus | After 6 days of treatment, the cells were harvested for DNA measurement | In both H295 and SW13, the selected concentrations of sirolimus significantly inhibited cell proliferation | Mitotane | DNA measurement | When mitotane was used at low concentrations (between 10−7 and 5 × 10−6 Μ), sirolimus had a statistically significant additive effect, when compared with mitotane alone | Not evaluated |
| Germano | SW13 and H295R | Everolimus | After 72 h treatment a cell viability assay (WST-1) was performed | Everolimus induced a dose-dependent decrease of cell viability in the two adrenal cancer cell | Pasireotide and mitotane | Cell viability assay (WST-1) | In the association of mitotane with everolimus, mitotane blocked everolimus activity in both SW-13 and H295R cell lines, independently of their responsiveness to mitotane, indicating an antagonistic effect of the two drugs, the combination of pasireotide and everolimus determined a synergistic cytotoxic effect in SW-13 cells and an antagonistic effect on cell growth in H295R cells | Not evaluated |
| De Martino | H295R and HAC15 | Sirolimus or everolimus | After 6 days of treatment in high or low serum concentration medium, the cells were harvested for DNA measurement | Sirolumus and everolimus inhibited cell proliferation in H295R and HAC15 cells in a dose dependent manner | Linsitinib | DNA measurement | Selected doses of sirolimus or everolimus combined with linsitinib 5 × 10−8 M had statistically significant additive effect on cell proliferation at some but not all the conditions tested | Not evaluated |
ACT, adrenocortical tumors.
ACC samples characterized for protein expression of the main components of both the mTOR and IGF pathways.
| Pt N | IGFII protein expression | IGFIR protein expression | IGFIIR protein expression | mTOR protein expression | Phospho mTOR protein expression | 4EBP1 protein expression | Phospho-4EBP1 protein expression | S6K protein expression | Phospho S6K protein expression | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score | Considerable expression* | Score | Considerable expression* | Score | Considerable expression* | Score | Considerable expression* | Score | Considerable expression* | Score | Considerable expression* | Score | Considerable expression* | Score | Considerable expression* | Score | Considerable expression* | |
| 1 | 4 | Yes | 5 | Yes | 4 | Yes | 4 | Yes | 2 | No | 4 | Yes | 4 | Yes | 0 | No | 0 | No |
| 2 | 6 | Yes | 4 | Yes | 5 | Yes | 3 | No | 0 | No | 4 | Yes | 3 | No | 0 | No | 4 | Yes |
| 3 | 6 | Yes | 3 | No | 4 | Yes | 0 | No | 0 | No | 4 | Yes | 4 | Yes | 2 | No | 4 | Yes |
| 4 | 3 | No | 6 | Yes | 5 | Yes | 5 | Yes | 0 | No | 4 | Yes | 4 | Yes | 4 | Yes | 0 | No |
| 5 | 5 | Yes | 5 | Yes | 5 | Yes | 6 | Yes | 0 | No | 2 | No | 4 | Yes | 2 | No | 0 | No |
| 6 | 6 | Yes | 6 | Yes | 5 | Yes | 5 | Yes | 0 | No | 4 | Yes | 3 | No | 0 | No | 2 | No |
| 7 | 4 | Yes | 5 | Yes | 6 | Yes | 6 | Yes | 4 | Yes | 6 | Yes | 5 | Yes | 3 | No | 0 | No |
| 8 | 6 | Yes | 3 | No | 5 | Yes | 2 | No | 0 | No | 3 | No | 4 | Yes | 3 | No | 2 | No |
| 9 | 4 | Yes | 3 | No | 5 | Yes | 5 | Yes | 0 | No | 4 | Yes | 3 | No | 4 | Yes | 0 | No |
| 10 | 3 | No | 4 | Yes | 5 | Yes | 4 | Yes | 0 | No | 4 | Yes | 2 | No | 0 | No | 4 | Yes |
| 11 | 6 | Yes | 4 | Yes | 5 | Yes | 3 | No | 0 | No | 4 | Yes | 2 | No | 3 | No | 4 | Yes |
| 12 | 5 | Yes | 6 | Yes | 6 | Yes | 6 | Yes | 2 | No | 4 | Yes | 5 | Yes | 4 | Yes | 2 | No |
| 13 | 4 | yes | 3 | No | 4 | Yes | 3 | No | 0 | No | 5 | Yes | 4 | Yes | 2 | No | 4 | Yes |
| 14 | 6 | Yes | 3 | No | 5 | Yes | 2 | No | 0 | No | 5 | Yes | 3 | No | 3 | No | NA | NA |
| 15 | 6 | Yes | 4 | Yes | 6 | Yes | 5 | Yes | 0 | No | 0 | No | 2 | No | 0 | No | 0 | No |
| 16 | 6 | Yes | 2 | No | 5 | Yes | 2 | No | 0 | No | 2 | No | 5 | Yes | 3 | No | 4 | Yes |
*Considerable expression defined as an intermediate to high expression as reported in De Martino et al. (28).
NA, not available.