Ultimate Precision: Targeting Cancer but Not Normal Self-replication

Oncotherapy resistance explained by Darwinian and Lamarckian models

Cell and antibody therapies directed against surface molecules on B cells, e.g., CD19-targeting chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CD19 CAR-T), are now standard for patients with chemorefractory B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemias and other B cell malignancies. However, early relapse rates remain high. In this issue of the JCI, Aminov, Giricz, and colleagues revealed that leukemia cells resisting CD19-targeted therapy had reduced CD19 but also low CD22 expression and were sensitive to Bruton's tyrosine kinase and/or MEK inhibition. Overall, their observations support the evolution of resistance following a Lamarckian model: the oncotherapy directly elicits adaptive, resistance-conferring reconfigurations, which are then inherited by daughter cells as epigenetic changes. The findings prompt reflection also on the broader role of epigenetics in decoupling of replication from lineage differentiation activation by the B cell lineage master transcription factor hub. Such oncogenesis and resistance mechanisms, being predictable and epigenetic, offer practical opportunities for intervention, potentially non-cross-resistant and safe vis-à-vis present cytotoxic and CAR-T treatments.

Changing paradigms in oncology: Toward noncytotoxic treatments for advanced gliomas

Glial-lineage malignancies (gliomas) recurrently mutate and/or delete the master regulators of apoptosis p53 and/or p16/CDKN2A, undermining apoptosis-intending (cytotoxic) treatments. By contrast to disrupted p53/p16, glioma cells are live-wired with the master transcription factor circuits that specify and drive glial lineage fates: these transcription factors activate early-glial and replication programs as expected, but fail in their other usual function of forcing onward glial lineage-maturation-late-glial genes have constitutively "closed" chromatin requiring chromatin-remodeling for activation-glioma-genesis disrupts several epigenetic components needed to perform this work, and simultaneously amplifies repressing epigenetic machinery instead. Pharmacologic inhibition of repressing epigenetic enzymes thus allows activation of late-glial genes and terminates glioma self-replication (self-replication = replication without lineage-maturation), independent of p53/p16/apoptosis. Lineage-specifying master transcription factors therefore contrast with p53/p16 in being enriched in self-replicating glioma cells, reveal a cause-effect relationship between aberrant epigenetic repression of late-lineage programs and malignant self-replication, and point to specific epigenetic targets for noncytotoxic glioma-therapy.

Clinical Trials Assessing Hypomethylating Agents Combined with Other Therapies: Causes for Failure and Potential Solutions

PURPOSE

Azacitidine and decitabine are hypomethylating agents (HMA), that is, both inhibit and deplete DNA methyltransferase 1 (DNMT1). HMAs are standard single-agent therapies for myelodysplastic syndromes and acute myelogenous leukemias. Several attempts to improve outcomes by combining HMAs with investigational agents, excepting with the BCL2-inhibitor venetoclax, have failed in randomized clinical trial (RCT) evaluations. We extract lessons from decades of clinical trials to thereby inform future work.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Serial single-agent clinical trials were analyzed for mechanism and pathway properties of HMAs underpinning their success, and for rules for dose and schedule selection. RCTs were studied for principles, dos and don'ts for productive combination therapy.

RESULTS

Single-agent HMA trial results encourage dose and schedule selection to increase S-phase-dependent DNMT1 targeting, and discourage doses that cause indiscriminate antimetabolite effects/cytotoxicity, because these attrit myelopoiesis reserves needed for clinical response. Treatment-related myelosuppression should prompt dose/frequency reductions of less active investigational agents rather than more active HMA. Administering cytostatic agents concurrently with HMA can antagonize S-phase-dependent DNMT1 targeting. Supportive care that enables on-time administration of S-phase (exposure-time)-dependent HMA could be useful. Agents that manipulate pyrimidine metabolism to increase HMA pro-drug processing into DNMT1-depleting nucleotide, and/or inhibit other epigenetic enzymes implicated in oncogenic silencing of lineage differentiation, could be productive, but doses and schedules should adhere to therapeutic index/molecular-targeted principles already learned.

CONCLUSIONS

More than 40 years of clinical trial history indicates mechanism, pathway, and therapeutic index properties of HMAs that underpin their almost exclusive success and teaches lessons for selection and design of combinations aiming to build on this treatment foundation.

PBRM1 loss in kidney cancer unbalances the proximal tubule master transcription factor hub to repress proximal tubule differentiation

PBRM1, a subunit of the PBAF coactivator complex that transcription factors use to activate target genes, is genetically inactivated in almost all clear cell renal cell cancers (RCCs). Using unbiased proteomic analyses, we find that PAX8, a master transcription factor driver of proximal tubule epithelial fates, recruits PBRM1/PBAF. Reverse analyses of the PAX8 interactome confirm recruitment specifically of PBRM1/PBAF and not functionally similar BAF. More conspicuous in the PAX8 hub in RCC cells, however, are corepressors, which functionally oppose coactivators. Accordingly, key PAX8 target genes are repressed in RCC versus normal kidneys, with the loss of histone lysine-27 acetylation, but intact lysine-4 trimethylation, activation marks. Re-introduction of PBRM1, or depletion of opposing corepressors using siRNA or drugs, redress coregulator imbalance and release RCC cells to terminal epithelial fates. These mechanisms thus explain RCC resemblance to the proximal tubule lineage but with suppression of the late-epithelial program that normally terminates lineage-precursor proliferation.

Gu et al. identify that transcription factor PAX8 needs the PBRM1/PBAF coactivator to activate proximal tubule genes. PBRM1 mutation/deletion thus explains the resemblance of clear cell kidney cancer to proximal tubule tissue but with suppressed terminal epithelial markers. This oncogenic mechanism could be repaired using drugs to inhibit corepressors.

Decitabine- and 5-azacytidine resistance emerges from adaptive responses of the pyrimidine metabolism network

Mechanisms-of-resistance to decitabine and 5-azacytidine, mainstay treatments for myeloid malignancies, require investigation and countermeasures. Both are nucleoside analog pro-drugs processed by pyrimidine metabolism into a deoxynucleotide analog that depletes the key epigenetic regulator DNA methyltranseferase 1 (DNMT1). Here, upon serial analyses of DNMT1 levels in patients' bone marrows on-therapy, we found DNMT1 was not depleted at relapse. Showing why, bone marrows at relapse exhibited shifts in expression of key pyrimidine metabolism enzymes in directions adverse to pro-drug activation. Further investigation revealed the origin of these shifts. Pyrimidine metabolism is a network that senses and regulates deoxynucleotide amounts. Deoxynucleotide amounts were disturbed by single exposures to decitabine or 5-azacytidine, via off-target depletion of thymidylate synthase and ribonucleotide reductase respectively. Compensating pyrimidine metabolism shifts peaked 72-96 h later. Continuous pro-drug exposures stabilized these adaptive metabolic responses to thereby prevent DNMT1-depletion and permit exponential leukemia out-growth as soon as day 40. The consistency of the acute metabolic responses enabled exploitation: simple treatment modifications in xenotransplant models of chemorefractory leukemia extended noncytotoxic DNMT1-depletion and leukemia control by several months. In sum, resistance to decitabine and 5-azacytidine originates from adaptive responses of the pyrimidine metabolism network; these responses can be anticipated and thus exploited.

A pilot clinical trial of oral tetrahydrouridine/decitabine for noncytotoxic epigenetic therapy of chemoresistant lymphoid malignancies

One mechanism by which lymphoid malignancies resist standard apoptosis-intending (cytotoxic) treatments is genetic attenuation of the p53/p16-CDKN2A apoptosis axis. Depletion of the epigenetic protein DNA methyltransferase 1 (DNMT1) using the deoxycytidine analog decitabine is a validated approach to cytoreduce malignancy independent of p53/p16. In vivo decitabine activity, however, is restricted by rapid catabolism by cytidine deaminase (CDA). We, therefore, combined decitabine with the CDA-inhibitor tetrahydrouridine and conducted a pilot clinical trial in patients with relapsed lymphoid malignancies: the doses of tetrahydrouridine/decitabine used (∼10/0.2 mg/kg orally (PO) 2×/week) were selected for the molecular pharmacodynamic objective of non-cytotoxic, S-phase dependent, DNMT1-depletion, guided by previous Phase 1 studies. Patients with relapsed/refractory B- or T-cell malignancies (n = 7) were treated for up to 18 weeks. Neutropenia without concurrent thrombocytopenia is an expected toxicity of DNMT1-depletion and occurred in all patients (Grade 3/4). Subjective and objective clinical improvements occurred in 4 of 7 patients, but these responses were lost upon treatment interruptions and reductions to manage neutropenia. We thus performed parallel experiments in a preclinical in vivo model of lymphoma to identify regimen refinements that might sustain DNMT1-targeting in malignant cells but limit neutropenia. We found that timed-alternation of decitabine with the related molecule 5-azacytidine, and combination with inhibitors of CDA and de novo pyrimidine synthesis could leverage feedback responses of pyrimidine metabolism to substantially increase lymphoma cytoreduction but with less neutropenia. In sum, regimen innovations beyond incorporation of a CDA-inhibitor are needed to sustain decitabine DNMT1-targeting and efficacy against chemo-resistant lymphoid malignancy. Such potential solutions were explored in preclinical in vivo studies.

Epigenetic modifier directed therapeutics to unleash healthy genes in unhealthy cells

A common thread through malignant and nonmalignant diseases alerts us to a therapeutic opportunity to seize: disease may originate from genetic mutations, but resulting maladaptive/unhealthy cell fates and functions are mediated by epigenetic enzymes, that are druggable. Epigenetic enzymes modify DNA, and/or the histones around which DNA is organized, to regulate access to genes by the basal transcription factor machinery that transcribes genes. Epigenetic enzymes can be divided usefully into those that facilitate gene transcription ("on" enzymes or coactivators) and those that favor gene repression ("off" enzymes or corepressors). DNA-binding master transcription factors cooperate to recruit coactivators, and repulse corepressors, from thousands of genes, to thereby activate the gene expression programs that define cell fates and functions. In malignancy, this usual exchange of corepressors for coactivators fails, because of mutations to master transcription factors or the coactivators they recruit. Inhibiting corepressor enzymes using small molecules uses pharmacology to redress this coactivator/corepressor imbalance that originates from genetics, to in this way release cancer cells to the terminal lineage-fates intended by their master transcription factor content. Similarly, in nonmalignant β-hemoglobinopathies, inhibiting corepressors exploits transcription factor and lineage-context to activate unmutated fetal over mutated adult globin genes, to thereby treat these nonmalignant genetic diseases. Master transcription factors then are the "natural forces" in the Hippocratic dictum "Natural forces within us are the true healers of disease," and drugging epigenetic enzymes (corepressors) a way to harness these forces to heal.

From Bench to Bedside and Beyond: Therapeutic Scenario in Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a heterogeneous group of clonal disorders characterized by abnormal proliferation of undifferentiated myeloid progenitors, impaired hematopoiesis, and variable response to therapy. To date, only about 30% of adult patients with AML become long-term survivors and relapse and/or disease refractoriness are the major cause of treatment failure. Thus, this is an urgent unmet clinical need and new drugs are envisaged in order to ameliorate disease survival outcomes. Here, we review the latest therapeutic approaches (investigational and approved agents) for AML treatment. A specific focus will be given to molecularly targeted therapies for AML as a representation of possible agents for precision medicine. We will discuss experimental and preclinical data for FLT3, IDH1, BCL-2, Hedgehog pathway inhibitors, and epitherapy.

Extended experience with a non-cytotoxic DNMT1-targeting regimen of decitabine to treat myeloid malignancies

The nucleoside analogue decitabine can deplete the epigenetic regulator DNA methyltransferase 1 (DNMT1), an effect that occurs, and is saturated at, low concentrations/doses. A reason to pursue this molecular-targeted effect instead of the DNA damage/cytotoxicity produced with high concentrations/doses, is that non-cytotoxic DNMT1-depletion can cytoreduce even p53-null myeloid malignancies while sparing normal haematopoiesis. We thus identified minimum doses of decitabine (0·1-0·2 mg/kg) that deplete DNMT1 without off-target anti-metabolite effects/cytotoxicity, and then administered these well-tolerated doses frequently 1-2X/week to increase S-phase dependent DNMT1-depletion, and used a Myeloid Malignancy Registry to evaluate long-term outcomes in 69 patients treated this way. Consistent with the scientific rationale, treatment was well-tolerated and durable responses were produced (~40%) in genetically heterogeneous disease and the very elderly.

Targeting sickle cell disease root-cause pathophysiology with small molecules

The complex, frequently devastating, multi-organ pathophysiology of sickle cell disease has a single root cause: polymerization of deoxygenated sickle hemoglobin. A logical approach to disease modification is, therefore, to interdict this root cause. Ideally, such interdiction would utilize small molecules that are practical and accessible for worldwide application. Two types of such small molecule strategies are actively being evaluated in the clinic. The first strategy intends to shift red blood cell precursor hemoglobin manufacturing away from sickle hemoglobin and towards fetal hemoglobin, which inhibits sickle hemoglobin polymerization by a number of mechanisms. The second strategy intends to chemically modify sickle hemoglobin directly in order to inhibit its polymerization. Important lessons have been learnt from the pre-clinical and clinical evaluations to date. Open questions remain, but this review summarizes the valuable experience and knowledge already gained, which can guide ongoing and future efforts for molecular mechanism-based, practical and accessible disease modification of sickle cell disease.

EZH2 Inhibitors: Take It EZy, It Is All About Context

Even in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), a cancer of professional antigen-presenting cells, response rates to immune checkpoint blockade therapy have been limited. One reason for DLBCL immune evasion is epigenetic repression instead of activation of the antigen-presenting MHC-a dissection of mechanisms underlying this repression suggests an opening for restoring B-cell maturation and, along the way, MHC expression as a novel modality of cytoreducing DLBCL and simultaneously augmenting possibilities for immunotherapy.See related article by Ennishi et al., p. 546.