4.8 Article

ATM Loss Confers Greater Sensitivity to ATR Inhibition Than PARP Inhibition in Prostate Cancer

期刊

CANCER RESEARCH
卷 80, 期 11, 页码 2094-2100

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-19-3126

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. DF/HCC Prostate SPORE
  2. PCF Young Investigator Award [5K08CA219504]
  3. NCI PCF-V Foundation Challenge Award [U01 CA233100, U01 CA176058]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Alterations in DNA damage response (DDR) genes are common in advanced prostate tumors and are associated with unique genomic and clinical features. ATM is a DDR kinase that has a central role in coordinating DNA repair and cell-cycle response following DNA damage, and ATM alterations are present in approximately 5% of advanced prostate tumors. Recently, inhibitors of PARP have demonstrated activity in advanced prostate tumors harboring DDR gene alterations, particularly in tumors with BRCA1/2 alterations. However, the role of alterations in DDR genes beyond BRCA1/2 in mediating PARP inhibitor sensitivity is poorly understood. To define the role of ATM loss in prostate tumor DDR function and sensitivity to DDR-directed agents, we created a series of ATM-deficient preclinical prostate cancer models and tested the impact of ATM loss on DNA repair function and therapeutic sensitivities. ATM loss altered DDR signaling, but did not directly impact homologous recombination function. Furthermore, ATM loss did not significantly impact sensitivity to PARP inhibition but robustly sensitized to inhibitors of the related DDR kinase ATR. These results have important implications for planned and ongoing prostate cancer clinical trials and suggest that patients with tumor ATM alterations may be more likely to benefit from ATR inhibitor than PARP inhibitor therapy. Significance: ATM loss occurs in a subset of prostate tumors. This study shows that deleting ATM in prostate cancer models does not significantly increase sensitivity to PARP inhibition but does sensitize to ATR inhibition.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据