3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Microscaled proteogenomic methods for precision oncology

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Cancer proteogenomics promises new insights into cancer biology and treatment efficacy by integrating genomics, transcriptomics and protein profiling including modifications by mass spectrometry (MS). A critical limitation is sample input requirements that exceed many sources of clinically important material. Here we report a proteogenomics approach for core biopsies using tissue-sparing specimen processing and microscaled proteomics. As a demonstration, we analyze core needle biopsies from ERBB2 positive breast cancers before and 48–72 h after initiating neoadjuvant trastuzumab-based chemotherapy. We show greater suppression of ERBB2 protein and both ERBB2 and mTOR target phosphosite levels in cases associated with pathological complete response, and identify potential causes of treatment resistance including the absence of ERBB2 amplification, insufficient ERBB2 activity for therapeutic sensitivity despite ERBB2 amplification, and candidate resistance mechanisms including androgen receptor signaling, mucin overexpression and an inactive immune microenvironment. The clinical utility and discovery potential of proteogenomics at biopsy-scale warrants further investigation.

          Abstract

          Connecting genomics and proteomics allows the development of more efficient and specific treatments for cancer. Here, the authors develop proteogenomic methods to defining cancer signaling in-vivo starting from core needle biopsies and with application to a HER2 breast cancer focused clinical trial.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          An integrative genomic and proteomic analysis of PIK3CA, PTEN, and AKT mutations in breast cancer.

          Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT pathway aberrations are common in cancer. By applying mass spectroscopy-based sequencing and reverse-phase protein arrays to 547 human breast cancers and 41 cell lines, we determined the subtype specificity and signaling effects of PIK3CA, AKT, and PTEN mutations and the effects of PIK3CA mutations on responsiveness to PI3K inhibition in vitro and on outcome after adjuvant tamoxifen. PIK3CA mutations were more common in hormone receptor-positive (34.5%) and HER2-positive (22.7%) than in basal-like tumors (8.3%). AKT1 (1.4%) and PTEN (2.3%) mutations were restricted to hormone receptor-positive cancers. Unlike AKT1 mutations that were absent from cell lines, PIK3CA (39%) and PTEN (20%) mutations were more common in cell lines than tumors, suggesting a selection for these but not AKT1 mutations during adaptation to culture. PIK3CA mutations did not have a significant effect on outcome after adjuvant tamoxifen therapy in 157 hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients. PIK3CA mutations, in comparison with PTEN loss and AKT1 mutations, were associated with significantly less and inconsistent activation of AKT and of downstream PI3K/AKT signaling in tumors and cell lines. PTEN loss and PIK3CA mutation were frequently concordant, suggesting different contributions to pathophysiology. PTEN loss rendered cells significantly more sensitive to growth inhibition by the PI3K inhibitor LY294002 than did PIK3CA mutations. Thus, PI3K pathway aberrations likely play a distinct role in the pathogenesis of different breast cancer subtypes. The specific aberration present may have implications for the selection of PI3K-targeted therapies in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found
            Is Open Access

            Endocrine-therapy-resistant ESR1 variants revealed by genomic characterization of breast-cancer-derived xenografts.

            To characterize patient-derived xenografts (PDXs) for functional studies, we made whole-genome comparisons with originating breast cancers representative of the major intrinsic subtypes. Structural and copy number aberrations were found to be retained with high fidelity. However, at the single-nucleotide level, variable numbers of PDX-specific somatic events were documented, although they were only rarely functionally significant. Variant allele frequencies were often preserved in the PDXs, demonstrating that clonal representation can be transplantable. Estrogen-receptor-positive PDXs were associated with ESR1 ligand-binding-domain mutations, gene amplification, or an ESR1/YAP1 translocation. These events produced different endocrine-therapy-response phenotypes in human, cell line, and PDX endocrine-response studies. Hence, deeply sequenced PDX models are an important resource for the search for genome-forward treatment options and capture endocrine-drug-resistance etiologies that are not observed in standard cell lines. The originating tumor genome provides a benchmark for assessing genetic drift and clonal representation after transplantation. Copyright © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Everolimus for women with trastuzumab-resistant, HER2-positive, advanced breast cancer (BOLERO-3): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.

              Disease progression in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer receiving trastuzumab might be associated with activation of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR intracellular signalling pathway. We aimed to assess whether the addition of the mTOR inhibitor everolimus to trastuzumab might restore sensitivity to trastuzumab. In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we recruited women with HER2-positive, trastuzumab-resistant, advanced breast carcinoma who had previously received taxane therapy. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a central patient screening and randomisation system to daily everolimus (5 mg/day) plus weekly trastuzumab (2 mg/kg) and vinorelbine (25 mg/m(2)) or to placebo plus trastuzumab plus vinorelbine, in 3-week cycles, stratified by previous lapatinib use. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by local assessment in the intention-to-treat population. We report the final analysis for PFS; overall survival follow-up is still in progress. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01007942. Between Oct 26, 2009, and May 23, 2012, 569 patients were randomly assigned to everolimus (n=284) or placebo (n=285). Median follow-up at the time of analysis was 20.2 months (IQR 15.0-27.1). Median PFS was 7.00 months (95% CI 6.74-8.18) with everolimus and 5.78 months (5.49-6.90) with placebo (hazard ratio 0.78 [95% CI 0.65-0.95]; p=0.0067). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (204 [73%] of 280 patients in the everolimus group vs 175 [62%] of 282 patients in the placebo group), leucopenia (106 [38%] vs 82 [29%]), anaemia (53 [19%] vs 17 [6%]), febrile neutropenia (44 [16%] vs ten [4%]), stomatitis (37 [13%] vs four [1%]), and fatigue (34 [12%] vs 11 [4%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 117 (42%) patients in the everolimus group and 55 (20%) in the placebo group; two on-treatment deaths due to adverse events occurred in each group. The addition of everolimus to trastuzumab plus vinorelbine significantly prolongs PFS in patients with trastuzumab-resistant and taxane-pretreated, HER2-positive, advanced breast cancer. The clinical benefit should be considered in the context of the adverse event profile in this population. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                shankha@broadinstitute.org
                scarr@broad.mit.edu
                Matthew.Ellis@bcm.edu
                Journal
                Nat Commun
                Nat Commun
                Nature Communications
                Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                2041-1723
                27 January 2020
                27 January 2020
                2020
                : 11
                : 532
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.66859.34, Broad Institute of Harvard and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, ; Cambridge, MA 02142 USA
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2160 926X, GRID grid.39382.33, Lester and Sue Smith Breast Center and Dan L Duncan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baylor College of Medicine, ; Houston, TX 77030 USA
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2160 926X, GRID grid.39382.33, Verna and Marrs McLean Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, , Baylor College of Medicine, ; Houston, TX 77030 USA
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2355 7002, GRID grid.4367.6, Siteman Comprehensive Cancer Center and Washington University School of Medicine, ; St. Louis, MO 63110 USA
                [5 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0433 7962, GRID grid.472704.2, NSABP Foundation, ; Pittsburgh, PA 15212 USA
                [6 ]ISNI 0000000100241216, GRID grid.189509.c, Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, , Duke University Medical Center, ; Durham, NC 27710 USA
                [7 ]ISNI 0000000122483208, GRID grid.10698.36, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, , University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, ; Chapel Hill, NC 27514 USA
                [8 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0386 9924, GRID grid.32224.35, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, ; Boston, MA 02115 USA
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6040-4854
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9618-6011
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2261-3150
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9763-3899
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4284-5656
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1696-5213
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2953-6485
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9827-2247
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8676-2425
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7203-4299
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8467-8534
                Article
                14381
                10.1038/s41467-020-14381-2
                6985126
                31988290
                03eb09b1-7cd8-407e-be32-64d5e72b4ab8
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 13 September 2019
                : 31 December 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: This work was done in collaboration with the U.S. National Cancer Institute’s Clinical Proteomic Tumor Analysis Consortium (CPTAC) and supported by grants NIH/NCI U24-CA210986 (to SAC and MAG), NIH/NCI U01 CA214125 (to SAC and MJE), NIH/NCI U24CA210979 (to DRM), NIH/NCI U24 CA210954 (to BZ), NIH/NCI U10 CA180860 (to DM and MJE) and NIH/NCI U54CA233223 (MJE). Tissue acquisition was partly supported by the Breast Cancer Research Foundation (BCRF) grant to MJE. MJE was also supported by Cancer Prevention & Research Institutes of Texas Scholar (CPRIT) established investigator recruitment award CPRIT RR140033. MJE is a Susan G. Komen Scholar and McNair Medical Foundation Fellow and BZ is a Cancer Prevention & Research Institutes of Texas Scholar in Cancer Research (CPRIT RR160027) and McNair Medical Institute Scholar. The authors would like to thank Broad Genomics platform for their assistance with genomic sequencing, Shayan Avanessian and Michael Burgess for technical support and Rena Mao for help with immunohistochemistry. We also thank the Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center at Washington University School of Medicine and Barnes-Jewish Hospital in St. Louis, MO. and the Institute of Clinical and Translational Sciences (ICTS) at Washington University in St. Louis, for the use of the Tissue Procurement Core, which provided clinical cores. The Siteman Cancer Center is supported in part by an NCI Cancer Center Support Grant #P30 CA091842 and the ICTS is funded by the National Institutes of Health’s NCATS Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program grant #UL1 TR002345.
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Uncategorized
                biological techniques,cancer
                Uncategorized
                biological techniques, cancer

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content249

                Cited by47

                Most referenced authors2,200