Search

Simple Summary: Ten-eleven-translocation (TET) 2 is implicated in human cancers such as lung, breast, skin, and kidney cancers, T-cell lymphomas, and leukemia. It is unclear whether TET2 is involved in the re-expression of the p16 tumor suppressor, which was partially silenced by CDKN2A gene methylation. The effect of DNA methyltransferase (DNMT) 1 gene status on TET2 expression following DNMT inhibitor treatment remains unknown in cancer. We found that deleting the DNMT1 gene made cancer cells prone to increased TET2 expression and re-expression of p16 after drug treatment. TET2 is involved in the demethylation of the CDKN2A gene and activation of p16 expression, and concomitant resistance to DNMT inhibitors when DNMT1 is obliterated. The long-sought data for the first time revealed a link between TET2 expression and the activation of p16 expression. The findings should have an impact on reactivating tumor suppressors and cancer treatment. Background: Ten-eleven-translocation (TET) 2 is a member of the TET family of proteins (TET1-3). DNMT1 gene deletion confers resistance to DNA methyltransferase (DNMT) inhibitors in colorectal, breast, and ovarian cancer cells. Currently, the effect of DNMT1 gene status on TET2 phenotype following DNMT inhibitor treatment is unclear in human malignancies. Methods: Human colorectal carcinoma HCT116 cells (DNMT+/+) and their isogenic DNMT1 knockout (DNMT1–/–) counterpart were treated with DNMT inhibitors. Expression of TET2 and tumor suppressor (p16ink4A and p15ink4B) proteins were examined by Western blot. Apoptosis and CDKN2A promoter demethylation following drug treatment were detected by Annexin-V apoptosis assay and methylation-specific PCR. Results: TET2 expression was robustly increased in DNMT1−/− cells by 0.5 µM and 5 µM decitabine and azacitidine treatment. Augmentation of TET2 expression was accompanied by re-expression of p16ink4A and p15ink4B proteins and CDKN2A promoter demethylation. TET2 upregulation and tumor suppressor re-expression were associated with resistance conferred by DNMT1 deletion. Treatment with 5-aza-4′-thio-2′-deoxycytidine at a low 0.5 µM dose only upregulated TET2 and reduced CDKN2A promoter methylation, and re-expression of p16ink4A in DNMT1−/− cells. DNMT inhibitors showed minimal effects on TET2 upregulation and re-expression of tumor suppressor proteins in cells with intact DNMT1. Conclusions: DNMT1 gene deletion made cancer cells prone to TET2 upregulation and activation of tumor suppressor expression upon DNMT inhibitor challenge. TET2 augmentation is concomitant with resistance to DNMT inhibitors in a DNMT1-deleted state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PI3K/AKT signaling pathway plays an important role in tumorigenesis and regulates critical cellular functions including survival, proliferation and metabolism. PIK3CA mutations and AKT activation by phosphorylation (pAKT) are often detected in many cancers and especially at high frequencies in breast cancer. Mounting data suggest that PIK3CA mutations or pAKT are mostly associated with better or insignificant outcomes in estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) early stage breast cancer and tend to be with worse prognosis in ER- disease. pAKT expression has been identified to predict paclitaxel chemotherapy benefit in node-positive breast cancer. Preclinical and neoadjuvant trial data suggest that PIK3CA alterations confer resistance to HER2-targeted therapy and are associated with lower pathological complete response (pCR) rate in HER2-positive breast cancer. However, recent results from randomized clinical trials of adjuvant and metastatic settings show that patients with mutant and wildtype PIK3CA tumors derived similar benefit from anti-HER2 therapy. This article, with our new insights, aims to decipher the mixed data and discusses the influence of the potential confounding factors in the assessments. We also share our views for validation of PI3K/AKT alterations in relation to clinical outcome in the context of specific breast cancer subtypes and treatment modalities towards further advance of the precision medicine for breast cancer treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Notch1 transmembrane receptor is activated through ligand-binding-triggered proteolytic cleavages and, upon release, the intracellular domain (N1-ICD) translocates into the nucleus and modulates target gene transcriptions. Notch activation has been implicated in tumorigenesis in an increasing number of human malignancies including non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, Notch1 in distinct expression patterns and activation status with tumor progression remains to be defined in NSCLC. Methods: Notch1 and activated Notch1, N1-ICD, were examined by immunohistochemistry in 58 cases of stage I to IV NSCLC tumors. Association between Notch1 or N1-ICD expression and clinicopathological factors was assessed via correlation coefficient r statistics. P-values are two-sided. Results: Detectable tumor Notch1, predominantly localized to the membrane and cytoplasm, was observed in 29 cases (50%, 95% Blyth-Still-Casella confidence interval 37 - 63%). It was negatively associated with stage (r = - 0.43, P < 0.001) and nodal status (r = - 0.33, P = 0.01), but not tumor size. In contrast, nuclear N1-ICD expression level was low and found in 12% of NSCLC patients, neither significantly associated with stage nor nodal status. Upon Notch1 activation in vitro, a mostly extra-nuclear staining was substantially turned into the nuclear signal in cancer cells. Conclusions: Notch1 in the largely inactivated phenotype is inversely associated with clinical stage progression in NSCLC. Notch1, rather than activated N1-ICD, may be a context-dependent restrictive factor to nodal metastasis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Phase 0 clinical trials, developed in response to the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s recent exploratory Investigational New Drug (IND) guidance, are intended to expedite the clinical evaluation of new molecular entities. The exploratory IND supports the performance of first-in-human testing of new investigational agents at subtherapeutic doses based on reduced manufacturing and toxicologic requirements, allowing the demonstration of drug-target effects and assessment of pharmacokinetic- pharmacodynamic relationships in humans earlier in clinical development. The objectives of a phase 0 cancer clinical trial are to establish at the very earliest opportunity--before large numbers of patients have been accrued and exposed to potential drug-associated toxicity--whether an agent is modulating its target in a tumor, and consequently whether further clinical development is warranted. We review here the fundamental requirements of clinical studies conducted under an exploratory lIND and address some common misconceptions regarding oncologic phase 0 trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]