4.6 Article

A functional CRISPR/Cas9 screen identifies kinases that modulate FGFR inhibitor response in gastric cancer

Journal

ONCOGENESIS
Volume 8, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41389-019-0145-z

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. American Cancer Society [RSG-13-297-01-TBG]
  2. Gastric Cancer Foundation
  3. National Institutes of Health Grants Digestive Disease Center [DK56339]
  4. NHGRI [R01 HG006137]
  5. [P01 HG000205]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Some gastric cancers have FGFR2 amplifications, making them sensitive to FGFR inhibitors. However, cancer cells inevitably develop resistance despite initial response. The underlying resistance mechanism to FGFR inhibition is unclear. In this study, we applied a kinome-wide CRISPR/Cas9 screen to systematically identify kinases that are determinants of sensitivity to a potent FGFR inhibitor AZD4547 in KatoIII cells, a gastric cancer cell line with FGFR2 amplification. In total, we identified 20 kinases, involved in ILK, SRC, and EGFR signaling pathways, as determinants that alter cell sensitivity to FGFR inhibition. We functionally validated the top negatively selected and positively selected kinases, ILK and CSK, from the CRISPR/Cas9 screen using RNA interference. We observed synergistic effects on KatoIII cells as well as three additional gastric cancer cell lines with FGFR2 amplification when AZD4547 was combined with small molecular inhibitors Cpd22 and lapatinib targeting ILK and EGFR/HER2, respectively. Furthermore, we demonstrated that GSK3b is one of the downstream effectors of ILK upon FGFR inhibition. In summary, our study systematically evaluated the kinases and associated signaling pathways modulating cell response to FGFR inhibition, and for the first time, demonstrated that targeting ILK would enhance the effectiveness of AZD4547 treatment of gastric tumors with amplifications of FGFR2.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available