1
|
Zamora PO, Altay G, Santamaria U, Dwarshuis N, Donthi H, Moon CI, Bakalar D, Zamora M. Drug Responses in Plexiform Neurofibroma Type I (PNF1) Cell Lines Using High-Throughput Data and Combined Effectiveness and Potency. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:5811. [PMID: 38136356 PMCID: PMC10742026 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15245811] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2023] [Revised: 12/05/2023] [Accepted: 12/08/2023] [Indexed: 12/24/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is a genetic disorder characterized by heterozygous germline NF1 gene mutations that predispose patients to developing plexiform neurofibromas, which are benign but often disfiguring tumors of the peripheral nerve sheath induced by loss of heterozygosity at the NF1 locus. These can progress to malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNSTs). There are no approved drug treatments for adults with NF1-related inoperable plexiform neurofibromas, and only one drug (selumetinib), which is an FDA-approved targeted therapy for the treatment of symptomatic pediatric plexiform neurofibromas, highlighting the need for additional drug screening and development. In high-throughput screening, the effectiveness of drugs against cell lines is often assessed by measuring in vitro potency (AC50) or the area under the curve (AUC). However, the variability of dose-response curves across drugs and cell lines and the frequency of partial effectiveness suggest that these measures alone fail to provide a full picture of overall efficacy. Methods: Using concentration-response data, we combined response effectiveness (EFF) and potency (AC50) into (a) a score characterizing the effect of a compound on a single cell line, S = log[EFF/AC50], and (b) a relative score, ΔS, characterizing the relative difference between a reference (e.g., non-tumor) and test (tumor) cell line. ΔS was applied to data from high-throughput screening (HTS) of a drug panel tested on NF1-/- tumor cells, using immortalized non-tumor NF1+/- cells as a reference. Results: We identified drugs with sensitivity, targeting expected pathways, such as MAPK-ERK and PI3K-AKT, as well as serotonin-related targets, among others. The ΔS technique used here, in tandem with a supplemental ΔS web tool, simplifies HTS analysis and may provide a springboard for further investigations into drug response in NF1-related cancers. The tool may also prove useful for drug development in a variety of other cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Chang In Moon
- Dan L. Duncan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030, USA
- Lester and Sue Smith Breast Center, Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Dana Bakalar
- National Institute of Neurological Diseases and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Høland M, Berg KCG, Eilertsen IA, Bjerkehagen B, Kolberg M, Boye K, Lingjærde OC, Guren TK, Mandahl N, van den Berg E, Palmerini E, Smeland S, Picci P, Mertens F, Sveen A, Lothe RA. Transcriptomic subtyping of malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumours highlights immune signatures, genomic profiles, patient survival and therapeutic targets. EBioMedicine 2023; 97:104829. [PMID: 37837931 PMCID: PMC10585232 DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2023.104829] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2023] [Revised: 09/26/2023] [Accepted: 09/26/2023] [Indexed: 10/16/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumour (MPNST) is an aggressive orphan disease commonly affecting adolescents or young adults. Current knowledge of molecular tumour biology has been insufficient for development of rational treatment strategies. We aimed to discover molecular subtypes of potential clinical relevance. METHODS Fresh frozen samples of MPNSTs (n = 94) and benign neurofibromas (n = 28) from 115 patients in a European multicentre study were analysed by DNA copy number and/or transcriptomic profiling. Unsupervised transcriptomic subtyping was performed and the subtypes characterized for genomic aberrations, clinicopathological associations and patient survival. FINDINGS MPNSTs were classified into two transcriptomic subtypes defined primarily by immune signatures and proliferative processes. "Immune active" MPNSTs (44%) had sustained immune signals relative to neurofibromas, were more frequently low-grade (P = 0.01) and had favourable prognostic associations in a multivariable model of disease-specific survival with clinicopathological factors (hazard ratio 0.25, P = 0.003). "Immune deficient" MPNSTs were more aggressive and characterized by proliferative signatures, high genomic complexity, aberrant TP53 and PRC2 loss, as well as high relative expression of several potential actionable targets (EGFR, ERBB2, EZH2, KIF11, PLK1, RRM2). Integrated gene-wise analyses suggested a DNA copy number-basis for proliferative transcriptomic signatures in particular, and the tumour copy number burden further stratified the transcriptomic subtypes according to patient prognosis (P < 0.01). INTERPRETATION Approximately half of MPNSTs belong to an "immune deficient" transcriptomic subtype associated with an aggressive disease course, PRC2 loss and expression of several potential therapeutic targets, providing a rationale for molecularly-guided intervention trials. FUNDING Research grants from non-profit organizations, as stated in the Acknowledgements.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maren Høland
- Department of Molecular Oncology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Institute for Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Kaja C G Berg
- Department of Molecular Oncology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Ina A Eilertsen
- Department of Molecular Oncology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Bodil Bjerkehagen
- Institute for Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Division of Laboratory Medicine, Department of Pathology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Matthias Kolberg
- Department of Molecular Oncology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Kjetil Boye
- Division of Cancer Medicine, Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Ole Christian Lingjærde
- Department of Informatics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Tormod K Guren
- Division of Cancer Medicine, Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Nils Mandahl
- Department of Clinical Genetics, University and Regional Laboratories, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
| | - Eva van den Berg
- Department of Genetics, The University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Emanuela Palmerini
- Osteoncology, Bone and Soft Tissue Sarcomas and Innovative Therapies, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy
| | - Sigbjørn Smeland
- Institute for Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Division of Cancer Medicine, Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Piero Picci
- Laboratory of Experimental Oncology, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy
| | - Fredrik Mertens
- Department of Clinical Genetics, University and Regional Laboratories, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
| | - Anita Sveen
- Department of Molecular Oncology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Institute for Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Ragnhild A Lothe
- Department of Molecular Oncology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Institute for Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
| |
Collapse
|