4.7 Article

Pharmacologic profiling of patient-derived xenograft models of primary treatment-naive triple-negative breast cancer

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-74882-4

关键词

-

资金

  1. MD Anderson Cancer Center Breast Cancer Moon Shot Program
  2. Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas [RP150148, RP160710, RP150578, RP170668]
  3. Susan G. Komen Organization [PDF16377811]
  4. National Cancer Institute Cancer Center Support Grant [CA016672]
  5. NIH [U54CA209978]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) accounts for 15-20% of breast cancer cases in the United States, lacks targeted therapeutic options, and is associated with a 40-80% risk of recurrence. Thus, identifying actionable targets in treatment-naive and chemoresistant TNBC is a critical unmet medical need. To address this need, we performed high-throughput drug viability screens on human tumor cells isolated from 16 patient-derived xenograft models of treatment-naive primary TNBC. The models span a range of TNBC subtypes and exhibit a diverse set of putative driver mutations, thus providing a unique patient-derived, molecularly annotated pharmacologic resource that is reflective of TNBC. We identified therapeutically actionable targets including kinesin spindle protein (KSP). The KSP inhibitor targets the mitotic spindle through mechanisms independent of microtubule stability and showed efficacy in models that were resistant to microtubule inhibitors used as part of the current standard of care for TNBC. We also observed subtype selectivity of Prima-1(Met), which showed higher levels of efficacy in the mesenchymal subtype. Coupling pharmacologic data with genomic and transcriptomic information, we showed that Prima-1(Met) activity was independent of its canonical target, mutant p53, and was better associated with glutathione metabolism, providing an alternate molecularly defined biomarker for this drug.

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

4.7
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