4.6 Article

Vitamin D3 Metabolites Demonstrate Prognostic Value in EGFR-Mutant Lung Adenocarcinoma and Can be Deployed to Oppose Acquired Therapeutic Resistance

期刊

CANCERS
卷 12, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cancers12030675

关键词

lung cancer; EGFR; tyrosine kinase inhibitor; vitamin D; epithelial-mesenchymal transition

类别

资金

  1. Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center National Cancer Institute [P30CA016056]
  2. Herd of Hope Award from the Roswell Park Alliance Foundation
  3. NIH [R03 CA249411, R01 DE024595]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR TKIs) are the standard of care treatment for patients with EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). Although initially effective, EGFR TKIs are not curative. Disease inevitably relapses due to acquired drug resistance. We hypothesized that vitamin D metabolites could be used with EGFR TKIs to prevent therapeutic failure. To test this idea, we investigated the link between serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 (25(OH)D3) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patientswith EGFR-mutant LUAD that received EGFR TKIs (erlotinib n = 20 and afatinib n = 1). Patientswhowere 25(OH)D3-sufficient experienced significantly longer benefit fromEGFR TKI therapy (mean 14.5 months) than those with 25(OH)D3 insufficiency (mean 10.6 months, p = 0.026). In contrast, 25(OH)D3 had no prognostic value in patients with KRAS-mutant LUAD that received cytotoxic chemotherapy. To gain mechanistic insights, we tested 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 (1,25(OH)2D3) activity in vitro. 1,25(OH)2D3 promoted epithelial differentiation and restored EGFR TKI sensitivity in models of EGFR TKI resistance that were associated with epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT). 1,25(OH)2D3 was ineffective in a non-EMTmodel of resistance. We conclude that vitamin D sufficiency portends increased PFS among EGFR-mutant LUAD patients that receive EGFR TKIs, and that vitamin D signaling maintains drug efficacy in this specific patient subset by opposing EMT.

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

4.6
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