DOCSLIB.ORG

BREAST CANCER METASTATIC DORMANCY and EMERGENCE, a ROLE for ADJUVANT STATIN THERAPY by Colin Henry Beckwitt Bachelor of Science

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
BREAST CANCER METASTATIC DORMANCY and EMERGENCE, a ROLE for ADJUVANT STATIN THERAPY by Colin Henry Beckwitt Bachelor of Science BREAST CANCER METASTATIC DORMANCY AND EMERGENCE, A ROLE FOR ADJUVANT STATIN THERAPY by Colin Henry Beckwitt Bachelor of Science in Biological Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2013 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The School of Medicine in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Pittsburgh 2018 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE This dissertation was presented by Colin Henry Beckwitt It was defended on May 22, 2018 and approved by Chairperson: Donna Beer Stolz, PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Cell Biology Zoltán N. Oltvai, MD, Associate Professor, Department of Pathology Partha Roy, PhD, Associate Professor, Departments of Bioengineering and Pathology Kari N. Nejak-Bowen, MBA, PhD, Assistant Professor, Department of Pathology Linda G. Griffith, PhD, School of Engineering Teaching Innovation Professor, Departments of Biological and Mechanical Engineering Dissertation Advisor: Alan Wells, MD, DMSc, Thomas J. Gill III Professor, Department of Pathology ii Copyright © by Colin Henry Beckwitt 2018 iii BREAST CANCER METASTATIC DORMANCY AND EMERGENCE, A ROLE FOR ADJUVANT STATIN THERAPY Colin Henry Beckwitt University of Pittsburgh, 2018 Breast cancer is responsible for the most new cancer cases and is the second highest cause of cancer related deaths among women. Localized breast cancer is effectively treated surgically. In contrast, metastatic cancers often remain undetected as dormant micrometastases for years to decades after primary surgery. Emergence of micrometastases to form clinically evident metastases complicates therapeutic intervention, making survival rates poor. The often long lag time between primary tumor diagnosis and emergence of metastatic disease motivates the development or repurposing of agents to act as safe, long term adjuvants to prevent disease progression. The statin drugs have been FDA approved for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia for three decades. Despite their well-studied effects on lipid homeostasis, statins feature beneficial pleiotropic effects on other organ systems and pathologies. Several epidemiological studies have demonstrated statins do not affect cancer incidence but do reduce breast cancer mortality. Previous in vitro work has demonstrated growth-suppressive and apoptosis-inducing effects of statins in tumor cell lines. However, the mechanisms and markers that contribute to statin’s suppressive effects on tumor cells remain unclear. We hypothesize that statins benefit cancer mortality by directly suppressing the outgrowth of dormant metastatic disease. The data presented herein demonstrate that statins reduce tumor cell growth and survival, in part due to suppression of Ras and Akt signaling. Importantly, these effects are limited to the membrane-permeant lipophilic statins. In ex vivo and in vivo models of metastatic breast cancer, iv statins reduce the proliferation at the site of metastasis but not the primary tumor. Tumor cells expressing membrane E-cadherin are relatively more resistant to statin therapy, which implies that the clinical cancer mortality benefit observed is due to decreased outgrowth of dormant epithelial micrometastases into clinically evident mesenchymal macrometastases. These data motivate the further study of statins as safe, long term adjuvants to prevent emergent breast cancer. Moreover, these data recommend a therapeutic switch to lipophilic statins in breast cancer patients taking statins for other diseases. That statins selectively suppress metastatic but not primary tumor growth is promising for their use as safe, long term adjuvants to reduce recurrence and mortality from metastatic breast cancer. v TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ................................................................................................................................. XIX 1.0 BREAST CANCER PATHOPHYSIOLOGY AND THERAPY ............................. 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1 1.2 CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY .......................................................................... 1 1.3 DEVELOPMENT, ANATOMY, AND PHYSIOLOGY .................................. 7 1.4 DISEASE PROGRESSION ................................................................................ 9 1.5 CLINICAL AND MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY ......................................... 14 1.5.1 Histologic Classification of Breast Cancer .................................................. 14 1.5.2 Clinical Classification of Breast Cancer ...................................................... 16 1.5.3 Molecular Classification of Breast Cancer .................................................. 19 1.6 CELLULAR AND MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY ....................................... 22 1.6.1 The Estrogen Receptor .................................................................................. 22 1.6.1.1 History .................................................................................................. 22 1.6.1.2 Molecular Biology ............................................................................... 24 1.6.2 The Progesterone Receptor........................................................................... 26 1.6.3 The ErbB Receptor Family ........................................................................... 28 1.6.3.1 The Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) ........................... 28 1.6.3.2 The Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) .......... 30 1.6.3.3 The Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 3 (HER3) .......... 32 1.6.3.4 The Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 4 (HER4) .......... 33 1.6.3.5 ErbB Family Summary ...................................................................... 33 vi 1.6.4 Ras – MAPK Signaling.................................................................................. 34 1.6.5 PI3K – Akt Signaling ..................................................................................... 38 1.6.6 Ras – MAPK and PI3K – Akt Crosstalk ..................................................... 40 1.6.7 Tumor Heterogeneity .................................................................................... 41 1.7 SURGERY .......................................................................................................... 42 1.8 RADIATION THERAPY ................................................................................. 45 1.9 CHEMOTHERAPY .......................................................................................... 49 1.9.1 Anthracyclines ............................................................................................... 49 1.9.2 Alkylating Agents .......................................................................................... 52 1.9.2.1 Cyclophosphamide .............................................................................. 53 1.9.2.2 Platinum-containing drugs ................................................................. 54 1.9.3 Mitotic Inhibitors ........................................................................................... 55 1.9.3.1 Taxanes ................................................................................................ 56 1.9.3.2 Other Microtubule Inhibitors ............................................................ 58 1.9.4 Antimetabolite Drugs .................................................................................... 60 1.9.4.1 5-Fluorouracil and Capecitabine ....................................................... 60 1.9.4.2 Gemcitabine ......................................................................................... 62 1.10 BIOLOGICAL AGENTS .................................................................................. 63 1.10.1 Anti-Estrogen Therapies .............................................................................. 64 1.10.1.1 Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators (SERMs) ....................... 64 1.10.1.2 Selective Estrogen Receptor Degraders (SERDs) .......................... 67 1.10.1.3 Aromatase Inhibitors ........................................................................ 68 1.10.1.4 Luteinizing Hormone Releasing Hormone (LHRH) Analogues ... 71 vii 1.10.2 HER2 Targeted Therapies ........................................................................... 71 1.10.2.1 Trastuzumab and T-DM1 ................................................................ 72 1.10.2.2 Pertuzumab........................................................................................ 74 1.10.2.3 Lapatinib ............................................................................................ 74 1.10.3 EGFR Targeted Therapies .......................................................................... 75 1.10.4 CDK4/6 Targeted Therapies ....................................................................... 76 1.10.5 PARP Targeted Therapies ........................................................................... 77 1.10.6 PD-1 and PD-L1 Targeted Therapies ......................................................... 78 1.11 COMMON SYSTEMIC THERAPY REGIMENS ......................................... 79 1.12 CLINICAL NEED ............................................................................................. 80 2.0 STATIN PHARMACOLOGY .................................................................................. 82 2.1 DISCOVERY ..................................................................................................... 82 2.2 PHARMACODYNAMICS ..............................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Toxicogenomic Study of the Hepatocarcinogen Furan
    A Toxicogenomic Study of the Hepatocarcinogen Furan by Anna Francina Webster (Jackson) A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Biology Carleton University Ottawa, Ontario © 2015, Anna Francina Webster Abstract A major goal in human health risk assessment is the identification and management of chemicals that may cause cancer in human populations. The current gold- standard for assessing chemical carcinogenicity is the two-year rodent cancer bioassay, which is animal, time, and resource intensive. The use of toxicogenomics for chemical risk assessment was first proposed over 15 years ago because of its potential to produce toxicologically relevant data more quickly, using fewer animals, and at a lower cost than the two-year cancer bioassay. While the two-year cancer bioassay produces a detailed inventory of chemical-dependent lesions, toxicogenomics analyzes chemical-dependent changes to global gene expression. Moreover, toxicogenomics provides comprehensive mechanistic data that are not obtained using standard tests. In this thesis quantitative, predictive, and mechanistic approaches were applied to a toxicogenomic case study of the rodent hepatocarcinogen furan. Female B3C6F1 mice were exposed for three weeks to non-carcinogenic or carcinogenic doses of furan. The dose response of a variety of transcriptional endpoints produced benchmark doses (BMDs) similar to the furan- dependent cancer BMDs. Bioinformatic analysis of disease datasets showed strong similarity between global gene expression changes induced by furan and those associated with the appropriate hepatic pathologies. The molecular pathways that were enriched in the liver following furan exposure facilitated the development of a molecular mode of action (MoA) for furan-induced liver cancer.
    [Show full text]
  • Addition of Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor to Guinea Pig Hepatocytes Confers Increased Responsiveness to Peroxisome
    [CANCER RESEARCH 59, 4776–4780, October 1, 1999] Advances in Brief Addition of Peroxisome Proliferator-activated Receptor a to Guinea Pig Hepatocytes Confers Increased Responsiveness to Peroxisome Proliferators Neil Macdonald, Peter R. Holden, and Ruth A. Roberts1 AstraZeneca Central Toxicology Laboratory, Alderley Park, Macclesfield SK10 4TJ, United Kingdom Abstract humans are considered to be nonresponsive to the adverse effects of PPs associated with increased b-oxidation and peroxisome prolifera- The fibrate drugs, such as nafenopin and fenofibrate, show efficacy in tion (3, 7, 11, 12). In guinea pigs, there is no increased DNA synthesis hyperlipidemias but cause peroxisome proliferation and liver tumors in or liver enlargement and only a small increase in peroxisome prolif- rats and mice via nongenotoxic mechanisms. However, humans and b guinea pigs appear refractory to these adverse effects. The peroxisome eration, and peroxisomal -oxidation enzyme activity is weak (12) proliferator (PP)-activated receptor a (PPARa) mediates the effects of even at very high PP concentrations (13). Similarly, cultured human PPs by heterodimerizing with the retinoid X receptor (RXR) to bind to hepatocytes are refractory to the adverse effects of PPs (14) because DNA at PP response elements (PPREs) upstream of PP-regulated genes, the induction of peroxisomal b-oxidation by PPs weak (15) or absent such as acyl-CoA oxidase. Hepatic expression of PPARa in guinea pigs (15), and PPs cannot induce DNA synthesis (reviewed in Ref. 11) or and humans is low, suggesting that species differences in response to PPs suppress apoptosis (16). In addition, there appears to be no increased may be due at least in part to quantity of PPARa.
    [Show full text]
  • Elacestrant (RAD1901), a Selective Estrogen Receptor Degrader (SERD), Has Anti- Tumor Activity in Multiple ER+ Breast Cancer Patient-Derived Xenograft Models
    Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on May 4, 2017; DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-2561 Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. ORIGINAL RESEARCH Elacestrant (RAD1901), a selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD), has anti- tumor activity in multiple ER+ breast cancer patient-derived xenograft models Teeru Bihani1, Hitisha K. Patel1, Heike Arlt1, Nianjun Tao1, Hai Jiang1, Jeffrey L. Brown1, Dinesh M. Purandare1, Gary Hattersley1, and Fiona Garner1* 1Radius Health, Inc, Waltham, MA, USA Running Title: Elacestrant inhibits growth of ER+ breast cancer PDX models Key words: elacestrant, SERD, ESR1 mutations, CDK4/6, breast cancer, hormone signaling and inhibitors, preclinical studies of endocrine-related cancers, steroid hormones and receptors, xenograft models, novel antitumor agents. ABBREVIATIONS 17β-estradiol – E2 aromatase inhibitor – AI AUC – area under the curve estrogen receptor-alpha gene – ESR1 estrogen receptor – ER gene regulated by estrogen in breast cancer 1 – GREB1 human epidermal growth factor 2 - Her2 immunohistochemical, immunohistochemistry - IHC patient-derived xenograft – PDX progesterone receptor – PGR, PR 1 Downloaded from clincancerres.aacrjournals.org on September 27, 2021. © 2017 American Association for Cancer Research. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on May 4, 2017; DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-2561 Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction – RT-qPCR selective estrogen receptor degrader – SERD selective estrogen receptor modulator – SERM trefoil factor 1 – TFF1 percent tumor growth inhibition - %TGI Competing Interest and Financial Disclosures: All authors are employees of Radius Health, Inc. *Corresponding Author: Fiona Garner; Radius Health, 950 Winter Street, Waltham, MA, Phone: 617-551-4000, Fax: 617-551-4701, [email protected] 2 Downloaded from clincancerres.aacrjournals.org on September 27, 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • Clofibrate Causes an Upregulation of PPAR- Target Genes but Does Not
    tapraid4/zh6-areg/zh6-areg/zh600707/zh65828d07a xppws S� 1 4/20/07 9: 48 MS: R-00603-2006 Ini: 07/rgh/dh A " #h!si$l %egul Integr &$ ' #h!si$l 2%&' R000 (R000) 200!$ 3. Originalarbeiten *irst publis#ed "arc# + 5) 200! doi' + 0$ + + 52,a-pregu$ 0060&$ 2006$ Clofibrate causes an upregulation of PPAR-� target genes but does not alter AQ: 1 expression of SREBP target genes in liver and adipose tissue of pigs Sebastian Luci, Beatrice Giemsa, Holger Kluge, and Klaus Eder Institut fu¨r Agrar- und Erna¨hrungswissenschaften, Martin-Luther-Universita¨t Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Ger an! Submitted 25 August 2006 accepted in final form ! "arc# 200! AQ: 2 Luci S, Giemsa B, Kluge H, Eder K. Clofibrate causes an usuall0 increased 3#en baseline concentrations are lo3 1?62$ upregulation of PPAR-� target genes but does not alter expression of Effects of PPAR-� activation #ave been mostl0 studied in SREBP target genes in liver and adipose tissue of pigs$ A " #h!si$l rodents) 3#ic# ex#ibit a strong expression of PPAR-� in liver %egul Integr &$ ' #h!si$l 2%&' R000 (R000) 200!$ *irst publis#ed and s#o3 peroxisome proliferation in t#e liver in response to "arc# + 5) 200! doi' + 0$ + + 52,a-pregu$ 0060&$ 2006$ ./#is stud0 inves- PPAR-� activation 1&62$ Expression of PPAR-� and sensitivit0 tigated t#e effect of clofibrate treatment on expression of target genes of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor 1PPAR2-� and various to peroxisomal induction b0 PPAR-� agonists) #o3ever) var0 genes of t#e lipid metabolism in liver and adipose tissue of pigs$ An greatl0
    [Show full text]
  • A Phase 1B Study Evaluating the Effect of Elacestrant Treatment on Estrogen
    University of Groningen A phase 1b study evaluating the effect of elacestrant treatment on estrogen receptor availability and estradiol binding to the estrogen receptor in metastatic breast cancer lesions using 18F-FES PET/CT imaging Jager, Agnes; de Vries, Elisabeth G E; der Houven van Oordt, C Willemien Menke-van; Neven, Patrick; Venema, Clasina M; Glaudemans, Andor W J M; Wang, Yamei; Bagley, Rebecca G; Conlan, Maureen G; Aftimos, Philippe Published in: Breast cancer research DOI: 10.1186/s13058-020-01333-3 IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Publication date: 2020 Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database Citation for published version (APA): Jager, A., de Vries, E. G. E., der Houven van Oordt, C. W. M., Neven, P., Venema, C. M., Glaudemans, A. W. J. M., Wang, Y., Bagley, R. G., Conlan, M. G., & Aftimos, P. (2020). A phase 1b study evaluating the effect of elacestrant treatment on estrogen receptor availability and estradiol binding to the estrogen receptor in metastatic breast cancer lesions using 18F-FES PET/CT imaging. Breast cancer research, 22(1), [97]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13058-020-01333-3 Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).
    [Show full text]
  • Targeting Protein Quality Control Pathways in Breast Cancer Sara Sannino and Jeffrey L
    Sannino and Brodsky BMC Biology (2017) 15:109 DOI 10.1186/s12915-017-0449-4 REVIEW Open Access Targeting protein quality control pathways in breast cancer Sara Sannino and Jeffrey L. Brodsky* cancers. Finally, triple negative breast cancers (TNBC) Abstract are ER-, PR-, and HER2-negative [2, 3]. The efficient production, folding, and secretion of ER-positive breast cancer groups are especially preva- proteins is critical for cancer cell survival. However, lent and mainly afflict postmenopausal women because cancer cells thrive under stress conditions that luminal cells become more sensitive to estrogen (17β-es- damage proteins, so many cancer cells overexpress tradiol or E2) levels as a result of hormonal fluctuations molecular chaperones that facilitate protein folding [4]. Activation of the ER signaling cascade stimulates cell and target misfolded proteins for degradation via division, tumor growth, and metastasis. Therefore, ER- the ubiquitin-proteasome or autophagy pathway. positive patients are initially treated with anti-estrogen Stress response pathway induction is also important therapies [5] (Table 1). Tamoxifen was one of the first for cancer cell survival. Indeed, validated targets for FDA approved drugs used to treat these patients, is a anti-cancer treatments include molecular chaperones, non-steroid inhibitor of the receptor, and blocks down- components of the unfolded protein response, the stream signaling [6, 7]. However, in many tamoxifen ubiquitin-proteasome system, and autophagy. We treated patients, ER activation was still detected, will focus on links between breast cancer and highlighting the demand for improved compounds and these processes, as well as the development of new targets [8]. In fact, since tamoxifen was approved, drug resistance, relapse, and treatment.
    [Show full text]
  • Emtree Terms Changed in January 2017
    Emtree Terms Added and Changed (January 2017) This is an overview of new terms added and changes made in the first Emtree release in 2017. Overall, Emtree has grown by 782 preferred terms (269 drug terms and 513 non-drug terms) compared with the previous version released in September 2016. In total Emtree now counts 75,488 preferred terms. Because the terms added include replacements for existing preferred terms (which become synonyms of the new terms) as well as completely new concepts, the number of terms added exceeds the net growth in Emtree. Other changes could include the merging of two or more existing preferred terms into a single concept. The terms added and changed are summarized below and specified in detail on the following pages. Emtree Terms Added in January 2017 930 new terms (including 148 replacement terms and promoted synonyms) have been added to Emtree as preferred terms in version January 2017 (compared to September 2016): 308 drug terms (terms assigned to the Chemicals and Drugs facet). 622 non-drug terms (terms not assigned as Chemicals and Drugs). The new terms (including the replacement terms and the promoted synonyms) are listed as Terms Added on the following pages. Note that many of these terms will have been indexed prior to 2017 (typically as candidate terms), sometimes for several years, before they were added to Emtree. Emtree Terms Changed in January 2017 148 terms (39 drug terms and 109 non-drug terms) from Emtree September 2016 have been replaced by 148 different terms in January 2017 (39 drug terms and 109 non-drug terms).
    [Show full text]
  • Lipid Screening in Childhood and Adolescence For
    Supplementary Online Content Lozano P, Henrikson NB, Dunn J, et al. Lipid screening in childhood and adolescence for detection of familial hypercholesterolemia: evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.6176. eTable 1. Diagnostic Criteria for FH: MEDPED Criteria (U.S.) eTable 2. Diagnostic Criteria for FH: Simon Broome Criteria (U.K.) eTable 3. Diagnostic Criteria for FH: Dutch Criteria (The Netherlands) eTable 4. Quality Assessment Criteria eFigure. Literature Flow Diagram eTable 5. Adverse Effects Reported in Studies of Pravastatin (Key Question 7) eTable 6. Adverse Effects Reported in Studies of Other Statins (Key Question 7) eTable 7. Adverse Effects Reported in Studies of Bile Acid–Sequestering Agents and Other Drugs (Key Question 7) This supplementary material has been provided by the authors to give readers additional information about their work. © 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 10/01/2021 eMethods. Literature Search Strategies Search Strategy Sources searched: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, via Wiley Medline, via Ovid PubMed, publisher-supplied Key: / = MeSH subject heading $ = truncation ti = word in title ab = word in abstract adj# = adjacent within x number of words pt = publication type * = truncation ae = adverse effects ci = chemically induced de=drug effects mo=mortality nm = name of substance Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials #1 (hyperlipid*emia*:ti,ab,kw
    [Show full text]
  • ASCO 2017 WEBCAST Elacestrant (RAD1901) June, 4, 2017
    ASCO 2017 WEBCAST Elacestrant (RAD1901) June, 4, 2017 Disclaimer: RAD1901 is an investigational agent NASDAQ: RDUS Please refer to the ASCO 2017 poster for complete details Safe Harbor Any statements made in this presentation relating to future financial or business performance, conditions, plans, prospects, trends or strategies and other financial or business matters, including expectations regarding the development and potential commercialization of our product candidates, clinical trial results, regulatory actions, potential collaborations, future revenues and operating expenses, are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. In addition, when used in this presentation, the words “may,” “could,” “should,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “predict”, “target” and similar expressions and their variants, as they relate to Radius Health, Inc. (“Radius”) or its management, may identify forward-looking statements. Radius cautions that these forward-looking statements are subject to numerous assumptions, risks and uncertainties, which change over time. Important factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from the results discussed in the forward-looking statements or historical experience include, without limitation, risks and uncertainties regarding the progress of abaloparatide-SC in the regulatory process in Europe and the timing of potential regulatory actions; progress in the development of our product candidates; our failure to
    [Show full text]
  • Lipid Screening in Childhood and Adolescence for Detection of Multifactorial Dyslipidemia
    Supplementary Online Content Lozano P, Henrikson NB, Morrison CC, et al. Lipid screening in childhood and adolescence for detection of multifactorial dyslipidemia: evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.6423 eMethods. Literature Search Strategies eTable. Quality Assessment Criteria eFigure. Literature Flow Diagram This supplementary material has been provided by the authors to give readers additional information about their work. © 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 09/26/2021 eMethods. Literature Search Strategies Search Strategy Sources searched: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, via Wiley Medline, via Ovid PubMed, publisher-supplied Key: / = MeSH subject heading $ = truncation ti = word in title ab = word in abstract adj# = adjacent within x number of words pt = publication type * = truncation ae = adverse effects ci = chemically induced de=drug effects mo=mortality nm = name of substance Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials #1 (hyperlipid*emia*:ti,ab,kw or dyslipid*emia*:ti,ab,kw or hypercholesterol*emia*:ti,ab,kw or hyperlipoprotein*emia*:ti,ab,kw or hypertriglycerid*emia*:ti,ab,kw or dysbetalipoprotein*emia*:ti,ab,kw) #2 (familial next hypercholesterol*emi*):ti,ab,kw or (familial next hyperlipid*emi*):ti,ab,kw or (essential next hypercholesterol*emi*):ti,ab,kw or (familial near/3 apolipoprotein):ti,ab,kw #3 "heterozygous fh":ti,ab,kw or "homozygous fh":ti,ab,kw
    [Show full text]
  • SAR439859, a Novel Selective Estrogen Receptor Degrader (SERD)
    Published OnlineFirst December 11, 2020; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-20-0390 MOLECULAR CANCER THERAPEUTICS | SMALL MOLECULE THERAPEUTICS SAR439859, a Novel Selective Estrogen Receptor Degrader (SERD), Demonstrates Effective and Broad Antitumor Activity in Wild-Type and Mutant ER-Positive Breast Cancer Models A C Maysoun Shomali1, Jane Cheng1, Fangxian Sun1, Malvika Koundinya1, Zhuyan Guo1, Andrew T. Hebert1, Jessica McManus1, Mikhail N. Levit1, Dietmar Hoffmann1, Albane Courjaud2, Rosalia Arrebola2, Hui Cao1, Jack Pollard1, Joon Sang Lee1, Laurent Besret2, Anne Caron2, Dinesh S. Bangari3, Pierre-Yves Abecassis2, Laurent Schio2, Youssef El-Ahmad2, Frank Halley2, Michel Tabart2, Victor Certal2, Fabienne Thompson2, Gary McCort2, Bruno Filoche-Romme2, Hong Cheng1, Carlos Garcia-Echeverria2, Laurent Debussche2, and Monsif Bouaboula1 ABSTRACT ◥ Primary treatment for estrogen receptor-positive (ERþ) both wild-type and mutant Y537S ER. Driven by its fluoropro- breast cancer is endocrine therapy. However, substantial evi- pyl pyrrolidinyl side chain, SAR439859 has demonstrated dence indicates a continued role for ER signaling in tumor broader and superior ER antagonist and degrader activities progression. Selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERD), such across a large panel of ERþ cells, compared with other SERDs as fulvestrant, induce effective ER signaling inhibition, although characterized by a cinnamic acid side chain, including improved clinical studies with fulvestrant report insufficient blockade of inhibition of ER signaling and tumor cell growth. Similarly, ER signaling, possibly due to suboptimal pharmaceutical prop- in vivo treatment with SAR439859 demonstrated significant erties. Furthermore, activating mutations in the ER have tumorregressioninERþ breast cancer models, including emerged as a resistance mechanism to current endocrine ther- MCF7-ESR1 wild-type and mutant-Y537S mouse tumors, and apies.
    [Show full text]
  • The SERM/SERD Bazedoxifene Disrupts ESR1 Helix 12 to Overcome
    RESEARCH ARTICLE The SERM/SERD bazedoxifene disrupts ESR1 helix 12 to overcome acquired hormone resistance in breast cancer cells Sean W Fanning1, Rinath Jeselsohn2,3, Venkatasubramanian Dharmarajan4, Christopher G Mayne5, Mostafa Karimi6, Gilles Buchwalter2, Rene´ Houtman7, Weiyi Toy8, Colin E Fowler1, Ross Han1, Muriel Laine´ 1, Kathryn E Carlson9, Teresa A Martin9, Jason Nowak3, Jerome C Nwachukwu10, David J Hosfield1, Sarat Chandarlapaty8, Emad Tajkhorshid5, Kendall W Nettles4, Patrick R Griffin4, Yang Shen6, John A Katzenellenbogen9, Myles Brown2,3, Geoffrey L Greene1* 1Ben May Department for Cancer Research, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States; 2Center for Functional Cancer Epigenetics, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, United States; 3Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, United States; 4Department of Molecular Medicine, The Scripps Research Institute, Jupiter, United States; 5Department of Biochemistry, College of Medicine, Center for Biophysics and Computational Biology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, United States; 6Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, TEES-AgriLife Center for Bioinformatics and Genomic Systems Engineering, Texas A&M University, Texas, United States; 7PamGene International BV, ‘s-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands; 8Human Oncology and Pathogenesis Program, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States; 9Department of Chemistry, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, United States; 10Department of Integrative Structural and Computational Biology, The Scripps Research Institute, Jupiter, United States *For correspondence: [email protected] Abstract Acquired resistance to endocrine therapy remains a significant clinical burden for breast cancer patients. Somatic mutations in the ESR1 (estrogen receptor alpha (ERa)) gene ligand- Competing interest: See binding domain (LBD) represent a recognized mechanism of acquired resistance.
    [Show full text]