Selinexor, a selective inhibitor of nuclear export, enhances the anti-tumor activity of olaparib in triple negative breast cancer regardless of BRCA1 mutation status

Novel-and Not So Novel-Inhibitors of the Multifunctional CRM1 Protein

Chromosome Region Maintenance 1 (CRM1), also known as Exportin 1 (XPO1), is a protein that is critical for transport of proteins and RNA to the cytoplasm through the nuclear pore complex. CRM1 inhibition with small molecule inhibitors is currently being studied in many cancers, including leukemias, solid organ malignancies and brain tumors. We review the structure of CRM1, its role in nuclear export, the current availability of CRM1 inhibitors, and the role of CRM1 in a number of distinct cellular processes. A deeper understanding of how CRM1 functions in nuclear export as well as other cellular processes may allow for the development of additional novel CRM1 inhibitors.

Small Molecule Therapeutics in the Pipeline Targeting for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Origin, Challenges, Opportunities, and Mechanisms of Action

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) cells are devoid of estrogen receptors (ERs), progesterone receptor (PRs), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), and it (TNBC) counts for about 10-15% of all breast cancers. TNBC is highly invasive, having a faster growth rate and a higher risk of metastasis and recurrence. Still, chemotherapy is one of the widely used options for treating TNBC. This study reviewed the histological and molecular characterization of TNBC subtypes, signaling pathways that are aberrantly expressed, and small molecules targeting these pathways, as either single agents or in combination with other therapeutic agents like chemotherapeutics, immunotherapeutics, and antibody-drug conjugates; their mechanisms of action, challenges, and future perspectives were also reviewed. A detailed analytical review was carried out using the literature collected from the SciFinder, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, ACS, Springer, and Wiley databases. Several small molecule inhibitors were found to be therapeutics for treating TNBC. The mechanism of action and the different signaling pathways through which the small molecules exert their effects were studied, including clinical trials, if reported. These small molecule inhibitors include buparlisib, everolimus, vandetanib, apatinib, olaparib, salidroside, etc. Some of the signaling pathways involved in TNBC, including the VEGF, PARP, STAT3, MAPK, EGFR, P13K, and SRC pathways, were discussed. Due to the absence of these biomarkers, drug development for treating TNBC is challenging, with chemotherapy being the main therapeutic agent. However, chemotherapy is associated with chemoresistance and a high toxicity to healthy cells as side effects. Hence, there is a continuous demand for small-molecule inhibitors that specifically target several signaling pathways that are abnormally expressed in TNBC. We attempted to include all the recent developments in this field. Any omission is truly unintentional.

The nuclear export protein exportin-1 in solid malignant tumours: From biology to clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Exportin-1 (XPO1), a crucial protein regulating nuclear-cytoplasmic transport, is frequently overexpressed in various cancers, driving tumor progression and drug resistance. This makes XPO1 an attractive therapeutic target. Over the past few decades, the number of available nuclear export-selective inhibitors has been increasing. Only KPT-330 (selinexor) has been successfully used for treating haematological malignancies, and KPT-8602 (eltanexor) has been used for treating haematologic tumours in clinical trials. However, the use of nuclear export-selective inhibitors for the inhibition of XPO1 expression has yet to be thoroughly investigated in clinical studies and therapeutic outcomes for solid tumours.

METHODS

We collected numerous literatures to explain the efficacy of XPO1 Inhibitors in preclinical and clinical studies of a wide range of solid tumours.

RESULTS

In this review, we focus on the nuclear export function of XPO1 and results from clinical trials of its inhibitors in solid malignant tumours. We summarized the mechanism of action and therapeutic potential of XPO1 inhibitors, as well as adverse effects and response biomarkers.

CONCLUSION

XPO1 inhibition has emerged as a promising therapeutic strategy in the fight against cancer, offering a novel approach to targeting tumorigenic processes and overcoming drug resistance. SINE compounds have demonstrated efficacy in a wide range of solid tumours, and ongoing research is focused on optimizing their use, identifying response biomarkers, and developing effective combination therapies.

KEY POINTS

Exportin-1 (XPO1) plays a critical role in mediating nucleocytoplasmic transport and cell cycle. XPO1 dysfunction promotes tumourigenesis and drug resistance within solid tumours. The therapeutic potential and ongoing researches on XPO1 inhibitors in the treatment of solid tumours. Additional researches are essential to address safety concerns and identify biomarkers for predicting patient response to XPO1 inhibitors.

Small molecule agents for triple negative breast cancer: Current status and future prospects

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a subtype of breast cancer with poor prognosis. The number of cases increased by 2.26 million in 2020, making it the most commonly diagnosed cancer type in the world. TNBCs lack hormone receptor (HR) and human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2), which limits treatment options. Currently, paclitaxel-based drugs combined with other chemotherapeutics remain the main treatment for TNBC. There is currently no consensus on the best therapeutic regimen for TNBC. However, there have been successful clinical trials exploring large-molecule monoclonal antibodies, small-molecule targeted drugs, and novel antibody-drug conjugate (ADC). Although monoclonal antibodies have produced clinical success, their large molecular weight can limit therapeutic benefits. It is worth noting that in the past 30 years, the FDA has approved small molecule drugs for HER2-positive breast cancers. The lack of effective targets and the occurrence of drug resistance pose significant challenges in the treatment of TNBC. To improve the prognosis of TNBC, it is crucial to search for effective targets and to overcome drug resistance. This review examines the clinical efficacy, adverse effects, resistance mechanisms, and potential solutions of targeted small molecule drugs in both monotherapies and combination therapies. New therapeutic targets, including nuclear export protein 1 (XPO1) and hedgehog (Hh), are emerging as potential options for researchers and become integrated into clinical trials for TNBC. Additionally, there is growing interest in the potential of targeted protein degradation chimeras (PROTACs), degraders of rogue proteins, as a future therapy direction. This review provides potentially valuable insights with clinical implications.

XPO1 Enables Adaptive Regulation of mRNA Export Required for Genotoxic Stress Tolerance in Cancer Cells

Exportin-1 (XPO1), the main soluble nuclear export receptor in eukaryotic cells, is frequently overexpressed in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). A selective XPO1 inhibitor, selinexor, received approval as single agent for relapsed or refractory (R/R) DLBCL. Elucidating the mechanisms by which XPO1 overexpression supports cancer cells could facilitate further clinical development of XPO1 inhibitors. We uncovered here that XPO1 overexpression increases tolerance to genotoxic stress, leading to a poor response to chemoimmunotherapy. Upon DNA damage induced by MYC expression or exogenous compounds, XPO1 bound and exported EIF4E and THOC4 carrying DNA damage repair mRNAs, thereby increasing synthesis of DNA damage repair proteins under conditions of increased turnover. Consequently, XPO1 inhibition decreased the capacity of lymphoma cells to repair DNA damage and ultimately resulted in increased cytotoxicity. In a phase I clinical trial conducted in R/R DLBCL, the combination of selinexor with second-line chemoimmunotherapy was tolerated with early indication of efficacy. Overall, this study reveals that XPO1 overexpression plays a critical role in the increased tolerance of cancer cells to DNA damage while providing new insights to optimize the clinical development of XPO1 inhibitors.

SIGNIFICANCE

XPO1 regulates the dynamic ribonucleoprotein nuclear export in response to genotoxic stress to support tolerance and can be targeted to enhance the sensitivity of cancer cells to endogenous and exogenous DNA damage. See related commentary by Knittel and Reinhardt, p. 3.

Therapeutic targeting of nuclear export and import receptors in cancer and their potential in combination chemotherapy

Systemic modalities are crucial in the management of disseminated malignancies and liquid tumours. However, patient responses and tolerability to treatment are generally poor and those that enter remission often return with refractory disease. Combination therapies provide a methodology to overcome chemoresistance mechanisms and address dose-limiting toxicities. A deeper understanding of tumorigenic processes at the molecular level has brought a targeted therapy approach to the forefront of cancer research, and novel cancer biomarkers are being identified at a rapid rate, with some showing potential therapeutic benefits. The Karyopherin superfamily of proteins is soluble receptors that mediate nucleocytoplasmic shuttling of proteins and RNAs, and recently, nuclear transport receptors have been recognized as novel anticancer targets. Inhibitors against nuclear export have been approved for clinical use against certain cancer types, whereas inhibitors against nuclear import are in preclinical stages of investigation. Mechanistically, targeting nucleocytoplasmic shuttling has shown to abrogate oncogenic signalling and restore tumour suppressor functions through nuclear sequestration of relevant proteins and mRNAs. Hence, nuclear transport inhibitors display broad spectrum anticancer activity and harbour potential to engage in synergistic interactions with a wide array of cytotoxic agents and other targeted agents. This review is focussed on the most researched nuclear transport receptors in the context of cancer, XPO1 and KPNB1, and highlights how inhibitors targeting these receptors can enhance the therapeutic efficacy of standard of care therapies and novel targeted agents in a combination therapy approach. Furthermore, an updated review on the therapeutic targeting of lesser characterized karyopherin proteins is provided and resistance to clinically approved nuclear export inhibitors is discussed.

Selinexor in patients with advanced and recurrent endometrial cancer

Selinexor is an oral inhibitor of the nuclear export protein called Exportin 1 (XPO1) with demonstrated antitumor activity in hematological and solid tumors. Selinexor, blocking XPO1, induces nuclear localization of tumor suppressor proteins (including p53, p73, BRCA1, and pRB), leading to the selective induction of apoptosis, and inhibition of DNA damage repair proteins. XPO1 overexpression is common in endometrial cancers. Phase I and II trials reported the antitumor activity of selinexor in patients with endometrial carcinoma. The preliminary results of the phase III Selinexor in ENDOmetrial Cancer (SIENDO/ENGOT-EN5/GOG-3055) trial supported the use of selinexor as maintenance therapy in advanced endometrial cancer patients achieving at least partial response after a minimum of 12 weeks of first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Selinexor maintenance resulted in a (nonsignificant) 30% reduction in the risk of disease progression or death. Looking at the endometrial cancer molecular subgroup characterized by TP53 wild type, the antitumor activity of selinexor seemed more pronounced, resulting in approximately a 60% reduction in the risk of disease progression or death. The SIENDO and the XPORT-EC trials will clarify the benefits and risks of adding selinexor as a first-line chemotherapy maintenance treatment in all-comer and TP53 wild-type endometrial cancers. Preclinical data highlights the potential for selinexor to be synthetically lethal with PARP inhibitors and may also plan a role in overcoming acquired resistance to those therapies. Therefore, new possible combinations with PARP inhibitors and should be evaluated. Furthermore, the combination of selinexor plus immune checkpoint inhibitors deserves further investigation in clinical trials.

Selinexor for the treatment of recurrent or metastatic salivary gland tumors: Results from the GEMS-001 clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the activity of selinexor, an oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export, in patients with recurrent or metastatic salivary gland tumors (SGT).

METHODS

GEMS-001 is an open-label Phase 2 study for patients with recurrent or metastatic SGT with two parts. In Part 1 of the protocol, patients had tumor samples profiled with targeted next generation sequencing as well as immunohistochemistry for androgen receptor, HER-2 and ALK. For Part 2, patients with no targeted therapies available were eligible to receive selinexor 60 mg given twice weekly every 28 days. The primary endpoint was objective response rate. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and prevalence of druggable alterations across SGT.

RESULTS

One hundred patients were enrolled in GEMS-001 and underwent genomic and immunohistochemistry profiling. A total of 21 patients who lacked available matched therapies were treated with selinexor. SGT subtypes (WHO classification) included adenoid cystic carcinoma (n = 10), salivary duct carcinoma (n = 3), acinic cell carcinoma (n = 2), myoepithelial carcinoma (n = 2), carcinoma ex pleomorphic adenoma (n = 2) and other (n = 2). Of 18 evaluable patients, stable disease (SD) was observed in 17 patients (94%) (SD ≥6 months in 7 patients (39%)). However, no objective responses were observed. The median PFS was 4.9 months (95% confidence interval, 3.4-10). The most common treatment-related Grade 1-2 adverse events were nausea [17 patients (81%)], fatigue [16 patients (76%)], and dysgeusia [12 patients (57%)]. Most common treatment-related Grade 3-4 adverse events were hyponatremia [3 patients (14%)], neutrophil count decrease [3 patients (14%)] and cataracts [2 patients (10%)]. No treatment-related deaths were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Although tumor reduction was observed across participants, single agent selinexor anti-tumor activity was limited.

XPO1 intensifies sorafenib resistance by stabilizing acetylation of NPM1 and enhancing epithelial-mesenchymal transition in hepatocellular carcinoma

Emerging studies have suggested that exportin-1 (XPO1) plays a pivotal role in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the underlying mechanism of XPO1 in HCC sorafenib resistance remains enigmatic. The expression of XPO1 in HCC tumor tissues and sorafenib-resistant (SR) cells were analyzed by bioinformatics analysis, immunohistochemistry (IHC) and Western blotting. The interaction mechanism between XPO1 and Nucleophosmin (NPM1) was investigated by immunoprecipitation (IP), Mass-spectrometric (MS) analysis, immunofluorescence colocalization, CRISPR/CAS9 technology and RNA-seq. Analyses were also conducted on KPT-8602 and sorafenib's combined therapeutic effect. Our findings unraveled that the XPO1 overexpression was observed in HCC, and correlated with poorer survival. Knockdown of XPO1 inhibited the migration and proliferation of HCC cells, and also reduced the resistance of HCC cells to sorafenib. Mechanistically, XPO1 interacted with the C-terminus of NPM1 and mediated the acetylation of NPM1 at lysine 54 to maintain sorafenib resistance. XPO1 was bound to Vimentin, resulting in the epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) progression in sorafenib-resistant cells. KPT-8602 in combination with sorafenib suppressed the tumor growth. These results highlighted the therapeutic value of targeting XPO1 in overcoming sorafenib resistance. The combinational treatment of KPT-8602 and sorafenib might be an improved therapeutic option.

E3 ubiquitin ligase ASB8 promotes selinexor-induced proteasomal degradation of XPO1

Selinexor (KPT-330), a small-molecule inhibitor of exportin-1 (XPO1, CRM1) with potent anticancer activity, has recently been granted FDA approval for treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), with a number of additional indications currently under clinical investigation. Since selinexor has often demonstrated synergy when used in combination with other drugs, notably bortezomib and dexamethasone, a more comprehensive approach to uncover new beneficial interactions would be of great value. Moreover, stratifying patients, personalizing therapeutics and improving clinical outcomes requires a better understanding of the genetic vulnerabilities and resistance mechanisms underlying drug response. Here, we used CRISPR-Cas9 loss-of-function chemogenetic screening to identify drug-gene interactions with selinexor in chronic myeloid leukemia, multiple myeloma and DLBCL cell lines. We identified the TGFβ-SMAD4 pathway as an important mediator of resistance to selinexor in multiple myeloma cells. Moreover, higher activity of this pathway correlated with prolonged progression-free survival in multiple myeloma patients treated with selinexor, indicating that the TGFβ-SMAD4 pathway is a potential biomarker predictive of therapeutic outcome. In addition, we identified ASB8 (ankyrin repeat and SOCS box containing 8) as a shared modulator of selinexor sensitivity across all tested cancer types, with both ASB8 knockout and overexpression resulting in selinexor hypersensitivity. Mechanistically, we showed that ASB8 promotes selinexor-induced proteasomal degradation of XPO1. This study provides insight into the genetic factors that influence response to selinexor treatment and could support both the development of predictive biomarkers as well as new drug combinations.

Upregulation of PARG in prostate cancer cells suppresses their malignant behavior and downregulates tumor-promoting genes

Post-translational modification of nuclear proteins through the addition of poly(ADP-ribose) (pADPr) moieties is upregulated in many metastatic cancers, where the high levels of pADPr have often been associated with poor cancer prognosis. Although the inhibitors of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerases (PARPs) have been utilized as potent anti-cancer agents, their efficacy in clinical trials varied among patient groups and has often been unpredictable. Such outcome cannot be interpreted solely by the inability to keep PARP-driven DNA repair in check. The focus of studies on PARP-driven tumorigenesis have recently been shifted toward PARP-dependent regulation of transcription. Here we utilized the controlled overexpression of poly(ADP-ribose) glycohydrolase (PARG), a sole pADPr-degrading enzyme, to investigate pADPr-dependent gene regulation in prostate cancer PC-3 cells. We demonstrated that PARG upregulation reduces pADPr levels and inhibits the expression of genes in key tumor-promoted pathways, including TNFα/NF-kB, IL6/STAT3, MYC, and KRAS signaling, the genes involved in inflammation response, especially chemokines, and endothelial-mesenchymal transition. The observed effect of PARG on transcription was consistent across all tested prostate cancer cell lines and correlates with PARG-induced reduction of clonogenic potential of PC-3 cells in vitro and a significant growth inhibition of PC-3-derived tumors in nude mice in vivo.

The efficacy of selinexor (KPT-330), an XPO1 inhibitor, on non-hematologic cancers: a comprehensive review

PURPOSE

Selinexor is a novel XPO1 inhibitor which inhibits the export of tumor suppressor proteins and oncoprotein mRNAs, leading to cell-cycle arrest and apoptosis in cancer cells. While selinexor is currently FDA approved to treat multiple myeloma, compelling preclinical and early clinical studies reveal selinexor's efficacy in treating hematologic and non-hematologic malignancies, including sarcoma, gastric, bladder, prostate, breast, ovarian, skin, lung, and brain cancers. Current reviews of selinexor primarily highlight its use in hematologic malignancies; however, this review seeks to summarize the recent evidence of selinexor treatment in solid tumors.

METHODS

Pertinent literature searches in PubMed and the Karyopharm Therapeutics website for selinexor and non-hematologic malignancies preclinical and clinical trials.

RESULTS

This review provides evidence that selinexor is a promising agent used alone or in combination with other anticancer medications in non-hematologic malignancies.

CONCLUSION

Further clinical investigation of selinexor treatment for solid malignancies is warranted.