34
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      JAK inhibitors for the treatment of myeloproliferative neoplasms and other disorders

      review-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

          JAK inhibitors have been developed following the discovery of the JAK2V617F in 2005 as the driver mutation of the majority of non- BCR-ABL1 myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs). Subsequently, the search for JAK2 inhibitors continued with the discovery that the other driver mutations ( CALR and MPL) also exhibited persistent JAK2 activation. Several type I ATP-competitive JAK inhibitors with different specificities were assessed in clinical trials and exhibited minimal hematologic toxicity. Interestingly, these JAK inhibitors display potent anti-inflammatory activity. Thus, JAK inhibitors targeting preferentially JAK1 and JAK3 have been developed to treat inflammation, autoimmune diseases, and graft-versus-host disease. Ten years after the beginning of clinical trials, only two drugs have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration: one JAK2/JAK1 inhibitor (ruxolitinib) in intermediate-2 and high-risk myelofibrosis and hydroxyurea-resistant or -intolerant polycythemia vera and one JAK1/JAK3 inhibitor (tofacitinib) in methotrexate-resistant rheumatoid arthritis. The non-approved compounds exhibited many off-target effects leading to neurological and gastrointestinal toxicities, as seen in clinical trials for MPNs. Ruxolitinib is a well-tolerated drug with mostly anti-inflammatory properties. Despite a weak effect on the cause of the disease itself in MPNs, it improves the clinical state of patients and increases survival in myelofibrosis. This limited effect is related to the fact that ruxolitinib, like the other type I JAK2 inhibitors, inhibits equally mutated and wild-type JAK2 (JAK2WT) and also the JAK2 oncogenic activation. Thus, other approaches need to be developed and could be based on either (1) the development of new inhibitors specifically targeting JAK2V617F or (2) the combination of the actual JAK2 inhibitors with other therapies, in particular with molecules targeting pathways downstream of JAK2 activation or the stability of JAK2 molecule. In contrast, the strong anti-inflammatory effects of the JAK inhibitors appear as a very promising therapeutic approach for many inflammatory and auto-immune diseases.

          Related collections

          Most cited references141

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

          Genetic basis and molecular pathophysiology of classical myeloproliferative neoplasms

          The genetic landscape of classical myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) is in large part elucidated. The MPN-restricted driver mutations, including those in JAK2, calreticulin (CALR), and myeloproliferative leukemia virus (MPL), abnormally activate the cytokine receptor/JAK2 pathway and their downstream effectors, more particularly the STATs. The most frequent mutation, JAK2V617F, activates the 3 main myeloid cytokine receptors (erythropoietin receptor, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor receptor, and MPL) whereas CALR or MPL mutants are restricted to MPL activation. This explains why JAK2V617F is associated with polycythemia vera, essential thrombocythemia (ET), and primary myelofibrosis (PMF) whereas CALR and MPL mutants are found in ET and PMF. Other mutations in genes involved in epigenetic regulation, splicing, and signaling cooperate with the 3 MPN drivers and play a key role in the PMF pathogenesis. Mutations in epigenetic regulators TET2 and DNMT3A are involved in disease initiation and may precede the acquisition of JAK2V617F. Other mutations in epigenetic regulators such as EZH2 and ASXL1 also play a role in disease initiation and disease progression. Mutations in the splicing machinery are predominantly found in PMF and are implicated in the development of anemia or pancytopenia. Both heterogeneity of classical MPNs and prognosis are determined by a specific genomic landscape, that is, type of MPN driver mutations, association with other mutations, and their order of acquisition. However, factors other than somatic mutations play an important role in disease initiation as well as disease progression such as germ line predisposition, inflammation, and aging. Delineation of these environmental factors will be important to better understand the precise pathogenesis of MPN.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Oncogenic CSF3R mutations in chronic neutrophilic leukemia and atypical CML.

            The molecular causes of many hematologic cancers remain unclear. Among these cancers are chronic neutrophilic leukemia (CNL) and atypical (BCR-ABL1-negative) chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), both of which are diagnosed on the basis of neoplastic expansion of granulocytic cells and exclusion of genetic drivers that are known to occur in other myeloproliferative neoplasms and myeloproliferative-myelodysplastic overlap neoplasms. To identify potential genetic drivers in these disorders, we used an integrated approach of deep sequencing coupled with the screening of primary leukemia cells obtained from patients with CNL or atypical CML against panels of tyrosine kinase-specific small interfering RNAs or small-molecule kinase inhibitors. We validated candidate oncogenes using in vitro transformation assays, and drug sensitivities were validated with the use of assays of primary-cell colonies. We identified activating mutations in the gene encoding the receptor for colony-stimulating factor 3 (CSF3R) in 16 of 27 patients (59%) with CNL or atypical CML. These mutations segregate within two distinct regions of CSF3R and lead to preferential downstream kinase signaling through SRC family-TNK2 or JAK kinases and differential sensitivity to kinase inhibitors. A patient with CNL carrying a JAK-activating CSF3R mutation had marked clinical improvement after the administration of the JAK1/2 inhibitor ruxolitinib. Mutations in CSF3R are common in patients with CNL or atypical CML and represent a potentially useful criterion for diagnosing these neoplasms. (Funded by the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society and others.).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Ruxolitinib in corticosteroid-refractory graft-versus-host disease after allogeneic stem cell transplantation: a multicenter survey.

              Despite major improvements in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation over the past decades, corticosteroid-refractory (SR) acute (a) and chronic (c) graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) cause high mortality. Preclinical evidence indicates the potent anti-inflammatory properties of the JAK1/2 inhibitor ruxolitinib. In this retrospective survey, 19 stem cell transplant centers in Europe and the United States reported outcome data from 95 patients who had received ruxolitinib as salvage therapy for SR-GVHD. Patients were classified as having SR-aGVHD (n=54, all grades III or IV) or SR-cGVHD (n=41, all moderate or severe). The median number of previous GVHD-therapies was 3 for both SR-aGVHD (1-7) and SR-cGVHD (1-10). The overall response rate was 81.5% (44/54) in SR-aGVHD including 25 complete responses (46.3%), while for SR-cGVHD the ORR was 85.4% (35/41). Of those patients responding to ruxolitinib, the rate of GVHD-relapse was 6.8% (3/44) and 5.7% (2/35) for SR-aGVHD and SR-cGVHD, respectively. The 6-month-survival was 79% (67.3-90.7%, 95% confidence interval (CI)) and 97.4% (92.3-100%, 95% CI) for SR-aGVHD and SR-cGVHD, respectively. Cytopenia and cytomegalovirus-reactivation were observed during ruxolitinib treatment in both SR-aGVHD (30/54, 55.6% and 18/54, 33.3%) and SR-cGVHD (7/41, 17.1% and 6/41, 14.6%) patients. Ruxolitinib may constitute a promising new treatment option for SR-aGVHD and SR-cGVHD that should be validated in a prospective trial.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: Writing – Review & Editing
                Journal
                F1000Res
                F1000Res
                F1000Research
                F1000Research
                F1000 Research Limited (London, UK )
                2046-1402
                17 January 2018
                2018
                : 7
                : 82
                Affiliations
                [1 ]INSERM UMR 1170, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
                [2 ]Université Paris-Saclay, UMR1170, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
                [3 ]UMR 1170, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
                [4 ]Signal Transduction & Molecular Hematology Unit, Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Brussels, Belgium
                [5 ]de Duve Institute, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium
                [6 ]Institut National de la Transfusion Sanguine, Paris, France
                Author notes

                No competing interests were disclosed.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4705-202X
                Article
                10.12688/f1000research.13167.1
                5773931
                29399328
                6ec6be54-8a3c-4430-bea2-723e1312a314
                Copyright: © 2018 Vainchenker W et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 11 January 2018
                Funding
                Funded by: MPN Research Foundation
                Funded by: Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer
                Funded by: Institut National du Cancer
                Award ID: PLBIO2015
                Funded by: Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (Inserm)
                This work was supported by grants from Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer (‘Equipe labellisée 2016’ to WV and IP), Institut National du Cancer (PLBIO2015 to IP), MPN Research Foundation (IP), and Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (Inserm). The Laboratory of Excellence Globule Rouge-Excellence (IP and WV) is funded by the program ‘Investissements d’avenir’. SNC has received funding from the Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, FRS-FNRS, Salus Sanguinis, Fondation contre le cancer, Project Action de Recherche Concerte of the Université Catholique de Louvain ARC10/15-027, the PAI (Interuniversity Support Program) Belgian Medical Genetics Initiative, and the Foundation ‘Les avions de Sébastien’ (Belgium).
                The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Review
                Articles
                Immune Response

                jak inhibitors,mpn,auto-immune diseases,inflammation,allosteric inhibitor

                Comments

                Comment on this article