Inhibition of mutant BRAF splice variant signaling by next‐generation,selective RAF inhibitors

Vemurafenib and dabrafenib block MEK‐ERK1/2 signaling and cause tumor regression in the majority of advanced‐stage BRAF^V600E melanoma patients; however, acquired resistance and paradoxical signaling have driven efforts for more potent and selective RAF inhibitors. Next‐generation RAF inhibitors, such as PLX7904 (PB04), effectively inhibit RAF signaling in BRAF^V600E melanoma cells without paradoxical effects in wild‐type cells. Furthermore, PLX7904 blocks the growth of vemurafenib‐resistant BRAF^V600E cells that express mutant NRAS. Acquired resistance to vemurafenib and dabrafenib is also frequently driven by expression of mutation BRAF splice variants; thus, we tested the effects of PLX7904 and its clinical analog, PLX8394 (PB03), in BRAF^V600E splice variant‐mediated vemurafenib‐resistant cells. We show that paradox‐breaker RAF inhibitors potently block MEK‐ERK1/2 signaling, G1/S cell cycle events, survival and growth of vemurafenib/PLX4720‐resistant cells harboring distinct BRAF^V600E splice variants. These data support the further investigation of paradox‐breaker RAF inhibitors as a second‐line treatment option for patients failing on vemurafenib or dabrafenib.     

Activities of multiple cancer-related pathways are associated with BRAF mutation and predict the resistance to BRAF/MEK inhibitors in melanoma cells

Drug resistance is a major obstacle in the targeted therapy of melanoma using BRAF/MEK inhibitors. This study was to identify BRAF V600E-associated oncogenic pathways that predict resistance of BRAF-mutated melanoma to BRAF/MEK inhibitors. We took in silico approaches to analyze the activities of 24 cancer-related pathways in melanoma cells and identify those whose activation was associated with BRAF V600E and used the support vector machine (SVM) algorithm to predict the resistance of BRAF-mutated melanoma cells to BRAF/MEK inhibitors. We then experimentally confirmed the in silico findings. In a microarray gene expression dataset of 63 melanoma cell lines, we found that activation of multiple oncogenic pathways preferentially occurred in BRAF-mutated melanoma cells. This finding was reproduced in 5 additional independent melanoma datasets. Further analysis of 46 melanoma cell lines that harbored BRAF mutation showed that 7 pathways, including TNFα, EGFR, IFNα, hypoxia, IFNγ, STAT3, and MYC, were significantly differently expressed in AZD6244-resistant compared with responsive melanoma cells. A SVM classifier built on this 7-pathway activation pattern correctly predicted the response of 10 BRAF-mutated melanoma cell lines to the MEK inhibitor AZD6244 in our experiments. We experimentally showed that TNFα, EGFR, IFNα, and IFNγ pathway activities were also upregulated in melanoma cell A375 compared with its sub-line DRO, while DRO was much more sensitive to AZD6244 than A375. In conclusion, we have identified specific oncogenic pathways preferentially activated in BRAF-mutated melanoma cells and a pathway pattern that predicts resistance of BRAF-mutated melanoma to BRAF/MEK inhibitors, providing novel clinical implications for melanoma therapy.     

Discrete cytosolic macromolecular BRAF complexes exhibit distinct activities and composition

As a central element within the RAS/ERK pathway, the serine/threonine kinase BRAF plays a key role in development and homeostasis and represents the most frequently mutated kinase in tumors. Consequently, it has emerged as an important therapeutic target in various malignancies. Nevertheless, the BRAF activation cycle still raises many mechanistic questions as illustrated by the paradoxical action and side effects of RAF inhibitors. By applying SEC‐PCP‐SILAC, we analyzed protein–protein interactions of hyperactive BRAF^V600E and wild‐type BRAF (BRAF^WT). We identified two macromolecular, cytosolic BRAF complexes of distinct molecular composition and phosphorylation status. Hyperactive BRAF^V600E resides in large complexes of higher molecular mass and activity, while BRAF^WT is confined to smaller, slightly less active complexes. However, expression of oncogenic K‐Ras^G12V, either by itself or in combination with RAF dimer promoting inhibitors, induces the incorporation of BRAF^WT into large, active complexes, whereas pharmacological inhibition of BRAF^V600E has the opposite effect. Thus, the quaternary structure of BRAF complexes is shaped by its activation status, the conformation of its kinase domain, and clinically relevant inhibitors.     

NRAS and BRAF Mutations in Melanoma-Associated Nevi and Uninvolved Nevi

According to the prevailing multistep model of melanoma development, oncogenic BRAF or NRAS mutations are crucial initial events in melanoma development. It is not known whether melanocytic nevi that are found in association with a melanoma are more likely to carry BRAF or NRAS mutations than uninvolved nevi. By laser microdissection we were able to selectively dissect and genotype cells either from the nevus or from the melanoma part of 46 melanomas that developed in association with a nevus. In 25 cases we also genotyped a control nevus of the same patients. Available tissue was also immunostained using the BRAF^V600E-mutation specific antibody VE1. The BRAF^V600E mutation was found in 63.0% of melanomas, 65.2% of associated nevi and 50.0% of control nevi. No significant differences in the distribution of BRAF or NRAS mutations could be found between melanoma and associated nevi or between melanoma associated nevi and control nevi. In concordant cases immunohistochemistry showed a higher expression (intensity of immunohistochemistry) of the mutated BRAF^V600E-protein in melanomas compared to their associated nevi. In this series the presence of a BRAF- or NRAS mutation in a nevus was not associated with the risk of malignant transformation. Our findings do not support the current traditional model of stepwise tumor progression.     

Recurrent BRAF kinase fusions in melanocytic tumors offer an opportunity for targeted therapy

BRAF is the most prevalent oncogene and an important therapeutic target in melanoma. In some cancers, BRAF is activated by rearrangements that fuse its kinase domain to 5′ partner genes. We examined 848 comparative genomic hybridization profiles of melanocytic tumors and found copy number transitions within BRAF in 10 tumors, of which six could be further characterized by sequencing. In all, the BRAF kinase domain was fused in‐frame to six N‐terminal partners. No other mutations were identified in melanoma oncogenes. One of the seven melanoma cell lines without known oncogenic mutations harbored a similar BRAF fusion, which constitutively activated the MAP kinase pathway. Sorafenib, but not vemurafenib, could block MAP kinase pathway activation and proliferation of the cell line at clinically relevant concentrations, whereas BRAF^V600E mutant melanoma cell lines were significantly more sensitive to vemurafenib. The patient from whom the cell line was derived showed a durable clinical response to sorafenib.     

Modification,Biological Evaluation and SAR Studies of Novel 1H‐Pyrazol Derivatives Containing N,N′‐Disubstituted Urea Moiety as Potential Anti‐melanoma Agents

Malignant melanomas are amongst the most aggressive cancers. BRAF Inhibitors have exhibited therapeutic effects against BRAF‐mutant melanoma. In continuation of our earlier studies on anti‐melanoma agents based on 1H‐pyrazole skeleton, two sets of novel compounds that include 1H‐pyrazole‐4‐amines FA 1 – FA13 and corresponding urea derivatives FN 1 – FN13 have been synthesized and evaluated for their BRAF^V600E inhibitory and antiproliferation activities. Compound FN 10 displayed the most potent biological activity against BRAF^V600E (IC₅₀ = 0.066 μm ) and the A375 human melanoma cell line (GI₅₀ = 0.81 μm ), which was comparable to the positive control vemurafenib, and more potent than our previously reported 1H‐pyrazole‐3‐amines and their urea derivatives. The results of SAR studies and molecular docking can guide further optimization and may help to improve potency of these pyrazole‐based anti‐melanoma agents.     

MicroRNA‐125a promotes resistance to BRAF inhibitors through suppression of the intrinsic apoptotic pathway

Melanoma patients with BRAF^V600E‐mutant tumors display striking responses to BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi); however, almost all invariably relapse with drug‐resistant disease. Here, we report that microRNA‐125a (miR‐125a) expression is upregulated in human melanoma cells and patient tissues upon acquisition of BRAFi resistance. We show that miR‐125a induction confers resistance to BRAF^V600E melanoma cells to BRAFi by directly suppressing pro‐apoptotic components of the intrinsic apoptosis pathway, including BAK1 and MLK3. Apoptotic suppression and prolonged survival favor reactivation of the MAPK and AKT pathways by drug‐resistant melanoma cells. We demonstrate that miR‐125a inhibition suppresses the emergence of resistance to BRAFi and, in a subset of resistant melanoma cell lines, leads to partial drug resensitization. Finally, we show that miR‐125a upregulation is mediated by TGFβ signaling. In conclusion, the identification of this novel role for miR‐125a in BRAFi resistance exposes clinically relevant mechanisms of melanoma cell survival that can be exploited therapeutically.     

The tumor suppressor BAP1 cooperates with BRAFV600E to promote tumor formation in cutaneous melanoma

The deubiquitinating enzyme BAP1 is mutated in a hereditary cancer syndrome with a high risk of mesothelioma and melanocytic tumors. Here, we show that Bap1 deletion in melanocytes cooperates with the constitutively active, oncogenic form of BRAF (BRAF^V600E) and UV to cause melanoma in mice, albeit at very low frequency. In addition, Bap1‐null melanoma cells derived from mouse tumors are more aggressive and colonize and grow at distant sites more than their wild‐type counterparts. Molecularly, Bap1‐null melanoma cell lines have increased DNA damage measured by γH2aX and hyperubiquitination of histone H2a. Therapeutically, these Bap1‐null tumors are completely responsive to BRAF‐ and MEK‐targeted therapies. Therefore, BAP1 functions as a tumor suppressor and limits tumor progression in melanoma.     

Reversing melanoma cross-resistance to BRAF and MEK inhibitors by co-targeting the AKT/mTOR pathway

Background

The sustained clinical activity of the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib (PLX4032/RG7204) in patients with BRAF^V600 mutant melanoma is limited primarily by the development of acquired resistance leading to tumor progression. Clinical trials are in progress using MEK inhibitors following disease progression in patients receiving BRAF inhibitors. However, the PI3K/AKT pathway can also induce resistance to the inhibitors of MAPK pathway.

Methodology/Principal Findings

The sensitivity to vemurafenib or the MEK inhibitor AZD6244 was tested in sensitive and resistant human melanoma cell lines exploring differences in activation-associated phosphorylation levels of major signaling molecules, leading to the testing of co-inhibition of the AKT/mTOR pathway genetically and pharmacologically. There was a high degree of cross-resistance to vemurafenib and AZD6244, except in two vemurafenib-resistant cell lines that acquired a secondary mutation in NRAS. In other cell lines, acquired resistance to both drugs was associated with persistence or increase in activity of AKT pathway. siRNA-mediated gene silencing and combination therapy with an AKT inhibitor or rapamycin partially or completely reversed the resistance.

Conclusions/Significance

Primary and acquired resistance to vemurafenib in these in vitro models results in frequent cross resistance to MEK inhibitors, except when the resistance is the result of a secondary NRAS mutation. Resistance to BRAF or MEK inhibitors is associated with the induction or persistence of activity within the AKT pathway in the presence of these drugs. This resistance can be potentially reversed by the combination of a RAF or MEK inhibitor with an AKT or mTOR inhibitor. These combinations should be available for clinical testing in patients progressing on BRAF inhibitors.     

Mitogen‐activated protein kinase dependency in BRAF/RAS wild‐type melanoma: A rationale for combination inhibitors

Inhibitors targeting the mitogen‐activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway and immune checkpoint molecules have dramatically improved the survival of patients with BRAF^V600‐mutant melanoma. For BRAF/RAS wild‐type (WT) melanoma patients, however, immune checkpoint inhibitors remain the only effective therapeutic option with 40% of patients responding to PD‐1 inhibition. In the present study, a large panel of 10 BRAF^V600‐mutant and 13 BRAF/RAS WT melanoma cell lines was analyzed to examine MAPK dependency and explore the potential utility of MAPK inhibitors in this melanoma subtype. We now show that the majority of BRAF/RAS WT melanoma cell lines (8/13) display some degree of sensitivity to trametinib treatment and resistance to trametinib in this melanoma subtype is associated with, but not mediated by NF1 suppression. Although knockdown of NF1 stimulates RAS and CRAF activity, the activation of CRAF by NF1 knockdown is limited by ERK‐dependent feedback in BRAF‐mutant cells, but not in BRAF/RAS WT melanoma cells. Thus, NF1 is not a dominant regulator of MAPK signaling in BRAF/RAS WT melanoma, and co‐targeting multiple MAP kinase nodes provides a therapeutic opportunity for this melanoma subtype.     

Inhibition of both BRAF and MEK in BRAFV600E mutant melanoma restores compromised dendritic cell (DC) function while having differential direct effects on DC properties

Purpose

Dendritic cells (DCs) can induce strong tumor-specific T-cell immune responses. Constitutive upregulation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway by a BRAF^V600 mutation, which is present in about 50 % of metastatic melanomas, may be linked to compromised function of DCs in the tumor microenvironment. Targeting both MEK and BRAF has shown efficacy in BRAF^V600 mutant melanoma.

Methods

We co-cultured monocyte-derived human DCs with melanoma cell lines pretreated with the MEK inhibitor U0126 or the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib. Cytokine production (IL-12 and TNF-α) and surface marker expression (CD80, CD83, and CD86) in DCs matured with the Toll-like receptor 3/Melanoma Differentiation-Associated protein 5 agonist polyI:C was examined. Additionally, DC function, viability, and T-cell priming capacity were assessed upon direct exposure to U0126 and vemurafenib.

Results

Cytokine production and co-stimulation marker expression were suppressed in polyI:C-matured DCs exposed to melanoma cells in co-cultures. This suppression was reversed by MAPK blockade with U0126 and/or vemurafenib only in melanoma cell lines carrying a BRAF^V600E mutation. Furthermore, when testing the effect of U0126 directly on DCs, marked inhibition of function, viability, and DC priming capacity was observed. In contrast, vemurafenib had no effect on DC function across a wide range of dose concentrations.

Conclusions

BRAF^V600E mutant melanoma cells modulate DC through the MAPK pathway as its blockade can reverse suppression of DC function. MEK inhibition negatively impacts DC function and viability if applied directly. In contrast, vemurafenib does not have detrimental effects on important functions of DCs and may therefore be a superior candidate for combination immunotherapy approaches in melanoma patients.     

The broad‐spectrum receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor dovitinib suppresses growth of BRAF‐mutant melanoma cells in combination with other signaling pathway inhibitors

BRAF inhibitors have revolutionized treatment of mutant BRAF metastatic melanomas. However, resistance develops rapidly following BRAF inhibitor treatment. We have found that BRAF‐mutant melanoma cell lines are more sensitive than wild‐type BRAF cells to the small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor dovitinib. Sensitivity is associated with inhibition of a series of known dovitinib targets. Dovitinib in combination with several agents inhibits growth more effectively than either agent alone. These combinations inhibit BRAF‐mutant melanoma and colorectal carcinoma cell lines, including cell lines with intrinsic or selected BRAF inhibitor resistance. Hence, combinations of dovitinib with second agents are potentially effective therapies for BRAF‐mutant melanomas, regardless of their sensitivity to BRAF inhibitors.     

Loss of PI(4,5)P2 5-Phosphatase A Contributes to Resistance of Human Melanoma Cells to RAF/MEK Inhibitors

Past studies have shown that the inositol polyphosphate 5-phosphatase, phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate 5-phosphatase (PIB5PA), is commonly downregulated or lost in melanomas, which contributes to elevated activation of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/Akt in melanoma cells. In this report, we provide evidence that PIB5PA deficiency plays a role in resistance of melanoma cells to RAF/mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEK) inhibitors. Ectopic expression of PIB5PA enhanced apoptosis induced by the RAF inhibitor PLX4720 in BRAF^V600E and by the MEK inhibitor U0126 in both BRAF^V600E and wild-type BRAF melanoma cells. This was due to inhibition of PI3K/Akt, as co-introduction of an active form of Akt (myr-Akt) abolished the effect of overexpression of PIB5PA on apoptosis induced by PLX4720 or U0126. While overexpression of PIB5PA triggered activation of Bad and down-regulation of Mcl-1, knockdown of Bad or overexpression of Mcl-1 recapitulated, at least in part, the effect of myr-Akt, suggesting that regulation of Bad and Mcl-1 is involved in PIB5PA-mediated sensitization of melanoma cells to the inhibitors. The role of PIB5PA deficiency in BRAF inhibitor resistance was confirmed by knockdown of PIB5PA, which led to increased growth of BRAF^V600E melanoma cells selected for resistance to PLX4720. Consistent with its role in vitro, overexpression of PIB5PA and the MEK inhibitor selumetinib cooperatively inhibited melanoma tumor growth in a xenograft model. Taken together, these results identify loss of PIB5PA as a novel resistance mechanism of melanoma to RAF/MEK inhibitors and suggest that restoration of PIB5PA may be a useful strategy to improve the therapeutic efficacy of the inhibitors in the treatment of melanoma.     

Hairy cell leukaemia with unusual BRAF mutations

Hairy cell leukaemia (HCL) diagnosis is based on the morphologic detection of circulating abnormal hairy cells in the peripheral blood and/or bone marrow, an HCL immunological score of 3 or 4 based on the expression of the CD11c, CD25, CD103 and CD123 and also the presence of a BRAF V600E activating mutation in the B-raf proto-oncogene (BRAF gene) (7q34). When using new generation sequencing of 21 targeted genes in 124 HCL patients, we identified a cohort of 6/124 (2%) patients with unusual BRAF mutations: two patients presented non-V600 mutations (BRAF F595L, BRAF W604L respectively) and four other patients silent BRAF mutations. When using droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) three of the four patients with concomitant BRAF V600E and silent mutation were negative. The respective role of these mutations in the occurrence of HCL or its progression remains to be clarified, but BRAF sequencing is necessary in case of negative BRAF V600E by ddPCR.     

Conditional KIAA1549:BRAF mice reveal brain region‐ and cell type‐specific effects

Low‐grade brain tumors (pilocytic astrocytomas) that result from a genomic rearrangement in which the BRAF kinase domain is fused to the amino terminal of the KIAA1549 gene (KIAA1549:BRAF fusion; f‐BRAF) commonly arise in the cerebellum of young children. To model this temporal and spatial specificity in mice, we generated conditional KIAA1549:BRAF strains that coexpresses green fluorescent protein (GFP). Although both primary astrocytes and neural stem cells (NSCs) from these mice express f‐BRAF and GFP as well as exhibit increased MEK activity, only f‐BRAF‐expressing NSCs exhibit increased proliferation in vitro. Using Cre driver lines in which KIAA1549:BRAF expression was directed to NSCs (f‐BRAF; BLBP‐Cre mice), astrocytes (f‐BRAF; GFAP‐Cre mice), and NG2 progenitor cells (f‐BRAF; NG2‐Cre mice), increased glial cell numbers were observed only in the cerebellum of f‐BRAF; BLBP‐Cre mice in vivo. The availability of this unique KIAA1549:BRAF conditional transgenic mouse strain will enable future mechanistic studies aimed at defining the developmentally–regulated temporal and spatial determinants that underlie low‐grade astrocytoma formation in children. genesis 51:708–716. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Identification of PLX4032‐resistance mechanisms and implications for novel RAF inhibitors

BRAF inhibitors improve melanoma patient survival, but resistance invariably develops. Here we report the discovery of a novel BRAF mutation that confers resistance to PLX4032 employing whole‐exome sequencing of drug‐resistant BRAF^V600K melanoma cells. We further describe a new screening approach, a genome‐wide piggyBac mutagenesis screen that revealed clinically relevant aberrations (N‐terminal BRAF truncations and CRAF overexpression). The novel BRAF mutation, a Leu505 to His substitution (BRAF^L505H), is the first resistance‐conferring second‐site mutation identified in BRAF mutant cells. The mutation replaces a small nonpolar amino acid at the BRAF‐PLX4032 interface with a larger polar residue. Moreover, we show that BRAF^L505H, found in human prostate cancer, is itself a MAPK‐activating, PLX4032‐resistant oncogenic mutation. Lastly, we demonstrate that the PLX4032‐resistant melanoma cells are sensitive to novel, next‐generation BRAF inhibitors, especially the ‘paradox‐blocker’ PLX8394, supporting its use in clinical trials for treatment of melanoma patients with BRAF‐mutations.     

Dabrafenib; Preclinical Characterization,Increased Efficacy when Combined with Trametinib,while BRAF/MEK Tool Combination Reduced Skin Lesions

Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase (MAPK) pathway activation has been implicated in many types of human cancer. BRAF mutations that constitutively activate MAPK signalling and bypass the need for upstream stimuli occur with high prevalence in melanoma, colorectal carcinoma, ovarian cancer, papillary thyroid carcinoma, and cholangiocarcinoma. In this report we characterize the novel, potent, and selective BRAF inhibitor, dabrafenib (GSK2118436). Cellular inhibition of BRAF^V600E kinase activity by dabrafenib resulted in decreased MEK and ERK phosphorylation and inhibition of cell proliferation through an initial G₁ cell cycle arrest, followed by cell death. In a BRAF^V600E-containing xenograft model of human melanoma, orally administered dabrafenib inhibited ERK activation, downregulated Ki67, and upregulated p27, leading to tumor growth inhibition. However, as reported for other BRAF inhibitors, dabrafenib also induced MAPK pathway activation in wild-type BRAF cells through CRAF (RAF1) signalling, potentially explaining the squamous cell carcinomas and keratoacanthomas arising in patients treated with BRAF inhibitors. In addressing this issue, we showed that concomitant administration of BRAF and MEK inhibitors abrogated paradoxical BRAF inhibitor-induced MAPK signalling in cells, reduced the occurrence of skin lesions in rats, and enhanced the inhibition of human tumor xenograft growth in mouse models. Taken together, our findings offer preclinical proof of concept for dabrafenib as a specific and highly efficacious BRAF inhibitor and provide evidence for its potential clinical benefits when used in combination with a MEK inhibitor.     

Effects of BRAF inhibitors on human melanoma tissue before treatment,early during treatment,and on progression

Selective BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) are a standard of care for the treatment of BRAF^V600‐mutant metastatic melanoma. We analyzed a unique set of serial triplicate human metastatic melanoma tumor biopsies to identify biomarkers of BRAFi response and resistance. Morphologic features and immunohistochemical biomarkers were analyzed in 37 metastatic melanoma biopsies at pretreatment (PRE), early during treatment (EDT), and on progression (PROG) from 15 patients treated with a BRAFi and correlated with response and outcome. At EDT, proliferative markers decreased regardless of response, whereas markers of cell death increased in responders. High expression of nuclear p27 at baseline was the strongest predictor of a poorer OS and predicted worse response. The results show that BRAFi are universally antiproliferative, regardless of clinical response, whereas markers of cell death increased only in responders. The addition of therapies targeting the cell cycle machinery may improve the response and duration of BRAFi, and investigation of the mechanisms of apoptosis may provide additional therapeutic targets.     

Receptor tyrosine kinases in cancer escape from BRAF inhibitors

The BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) induce anti-tumor responses in nearly 60% of patients with advanced ^V600BRAF-mutant melanomas but only 5% of patients with ^V600BRAF-mutant colorectal carcinomas. Earlier studies of how a subset of melanoma that initially responds to BRAFi but later acquires drug resistance pointed to the importance of receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) in drug escape. In a pair of recent reports, this RTK-mediated mechanism of acquired BRAFi resistance in melanoma is re-surfacing in the context of innate or primary BRAFi resistance in ^V600BRAF-mutant colorectal carcinomas, suggesting potential upfront therapeutic strategies to prevent BRAFi resistance.^V600BRAF mutations are found in >50% of melanomas, nearly 100% of hairy cell leukemias but smaller subsets of more common human malignancies (e.g., colorectal, thyroid)¹. The in-human “druggability” of mutant BRAF has been best demonstrated in metastatic BRAF mutant melanomas using the novel small-molecule BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi) PLX4032/vemurafenib, producing survival benefits². Early clinical results of BRAFi in colorectal carcinoma, however, were disappointing, with only 5% of patients (1 of 21 patients) experiencing a partial response and 19% of patients (4 of 21 patients) experiencing minor responses³. This difference in the clinical results (melanoma vs. colorectal carcinoma) may relate less to their ontological origins but more to alternative states of a dynamic and plastic survival signaling network.The majority of BRAF mutant melanomas responds to BRAFi rapidly but acquires drug resistance within a median time of 6-7 months. The specific mechanisms of acquired BRAFi resistance are variegated but fall under two core pathways: 1) reactivation of RAF-MEK-ERK MAPK signaling, and 2) activation of MAPK-redundant signaling via the receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK)-PI3K-AKT pathway, which is parallel but interconnected to the MAPK pathway. MAPK reactivation can occur via NRAS activating mutations⁴, COT overexpression⁵, ^V600BRAF alternative splicing⁶, ^V600BRAF amplification⁷, and MEK1 activating mutation^8,9. MAPK-redundant signaling via RTK overexpression has been shown to result in AKT activation and RAS-CRAF-MEK signaling, bypassing mutant BRAF^4,10,11. The repertoire of RTK overexpressed appears restricted but shares a common pattern of PDGFRβ and EGFR overexpression, at least in melanoma cell lines with acquired resistance to vemurafenib⁴. It is unclear at present how this overexpression of a select number of wild-type RTKs contributes to the molecular details of survival pathway redundancy and cooperativity. Nevertheless, understanding how melanomas acquire BRAFi resistance via core pathways may shed key insights into mechanisms of innate BRAFi resistance in multiple malignancies. Hence, it came as not a complete surprise that a pair of papers published recently implicated RTKs in innate BRAFi resistance in colorectal cancer cell lines^12,13. Both studies pointed to EGFR activation and downstream signaling as a key component to innate BRAFi resistance, at least in a majority of colorectal carcinoma (CRC) cell lines examined.Corcoran et al.¹² showed that BRAF mutant CRC cell lines, in contrast to BRAF mutant melanoma cell lines, displayed innate resistance to growth inhibition by vemurafenib. An important clue implicating RTK involvement in innate vemurafenib resistance of BRAF mutant CRC cell lines came from the observation that p-ERK recovery occurred soon (hours to days) after vemurafenib treatment, unlike the kinetics of p-ERK recovery in BRAF mutant melanoma cell lines. This relatively rapid recovery of p-ERK post vemurafenib treatment in CRC cell lines is akin to that in melanoma cell lines with acquired BRAFi resistance driven by RTK overexpresion¹⁰. Corcoran et al. then traced this propensity for early p-ERK recovery to vemurafenib treatment (24 h)-dependent enhancement of (activated) RAS-GTP levels and MEK activity, parallel to elevated RAS-GTP levels in melanoma cell lines with RTK-driven, acquired BRAFi resistance⁴. In phospho-RTK arrays, they determined that the p-EGFR level (among others such as p-c-MET and p-IGF1R levels) was elevated in CRC cell lines relative to those in melanoma cells. Vemurafenib treatment (24 h) did not significantly enhance the p-EGFR level (but did elevate the p-IGFR1 level). Elevated p-EGFR levels in BRAF mutant CRC cell lines were correlated with elevated total EGFR levels (i.e., overexpressed compared with BRAF mutant melanoma cell lines). Thus, several observations correlated with innate BRAFi resistance in CRC cell lines: RTK (mostly consistently EGFR) overexpression (at baseline); upregulation of activation-associated phosphorylation of RTKs (at baseline); and upregulation of RAS-GTP levels (in response to BRAFi treatment). Curiously, although EGFR is highly phosphorylated at baseline, the RAS-GTP levels only rose in response to vemurafenib treatment.Corcoran et al. further showed that small-molecule EGFR inhibitors (EGFRi) could downregulate, partially or completely, the RAS-GTP level induced by vemurafenib treatment. The combination of vemurafenib (BRAFi) and gefitnib (EGFRi) could synergistically reduce p-ERK levels and the net growth inhibition of most but not all CRC cell lines studied, suggesting that survival in some CRC cell lines may also depend on other RTKs and downstream signaling (e.g., AKT). Consistently, the combination of vemurafenib and erlotinib (EGFRi) stabilized the growth of, but did not cause significant regression of, CRC xenografts. Simultaneous inhibition or genetic knockdown of multiple RTKs was not explored, leaving unresolved the issue of how multiple RTKs may potentially play cooperative survival roles at baseline or in response to kinase inhibitor therapy.Prahallad et al.¹³ also compared CRC and melanoma cell lines and showed that EGFR expression is generally higher in CRC cell lines. Vemurafenib treatment (6 h) of the WiDr CRC cell line led to an induction in p-EGFR and p-AKT levels, concomitant with the expected suppression of p-MEK and p-ERK. MEK inhibition, by AZD6244 treatment, similarly led to the rebound phosphorylation of EGFR. Based on earlier literature showing that the ERK kinase phosphorylates Cdc25c, activating its phosphatase activity, and that Cdc25c can dephosphorylate EGFR, Prahallad et al. went on to show that Cdc25c knockdown mimicked vemurafenib treatment in inducing p-EGFR levels. As predicted, vemurafenib treatment of CRC cell line inhibited Cdc25c phosphorylation at a key threonine (Thr 48), which was previously demonstrated to be a key event for its phosphatase activity. Addition of an EGFRi (cetuximab or gefitnib) to the BRAFi vemurafenib treatment downregulated the baseline level of p-ERK and the BRAFi-induced p-AKT level (but not the baseline p-AKT level). Moreover, addition of an EGFRi sensitized CRC cell lines to growth inhibition by vemurafenib in vitro but did not induce tumor regression in vivo, again suggesting incomplete survival signaling blockade. Accordingly, it has been shown that the effect of vemurafenib in shrinking CRC tumor xenografts was enhanced by combining with an AKT inhibitor (MK-2206)¹⁴. Moreover, in this study, the addition of vemurafenib to erlotinib treatment also resulted in increased anti-tumor activity and improved survival in xenograft models. It should be pointed out that Prahallad et al. did not formally assess BRAFi and EGFRi synergy, nor did they examine the diversity of RTK overexpression/activity and its contribution to downstream survival signaling (e.g., AKT).These works, along with prior studies^4,10, highlight the importance of expression and activity level of RTKs as a key sensitivity determinant of BRAFi resistance in BRAF mutant cancer cell lines (Figure 1). An important question remains as to whether the diversity of RTK overexpression and/or upregulation participates in and contributes to the full BRAFi resistance phenotype. A recent study afforded us a systems-wide view of the RTKinome reprogramming in response to MEK inhibition in the so-called triple-negative breast cancer cell lines¹⁵. The balance of the MAPK vs. RTK network signaling may be dynamically influenced by kinase inhibitors targeting RAF or MEK. This daunting diversity of RTK expression/activity may corner us into abandoning a combination of RTK inhibitors (already approved for clinical usage) with a BRAF inhibitor. Instead, we might need to resort to downstream pathway inhibitors not yet approved for clinical usage (e.g., an inhibitor of MEK with an inhibitor of the PI3K-AKT-mTORC1/2 axis) before we have a chance to corner BRAF mutant cancers into death.Open in a separate windowFigure 1Upregulation of receptor tyrosine kinase(s) (RTKs) as a key sensitivity determinant of BRAFi resistance in BRAF mutant cancer cell lines. (A) In BRAF mutant melanoma cell lines, RTKs are generally expressed at very low levels and contribute minimally to survival signaling, resulting in a strong addiction to mutant BRAF signaling and sensitivity to BRAFi. When BRAF mutant melanoma cell lines acquire BRAFi resistance, they upregulate the expression and activity of PDGFRb and other RTKs, resulting in reactivation of MEK-ERK as well as MAPK-redundant PI3K-AKT survival signaling. (B) In BRAF mutant colorectal carcinoma (CRC) cell lines, EGFR and other RTKs are upregulated by overexpression and some level of activation, resulting in MAPK-redundant survival signaling and conferring innate or primary BRAFi resistance. Treatment of CRC cell lines wth a BRAF or a MEK inhibitor can further activate EGFR and potentially other RTKs and stimulate GTP-RAS levels, consolidating innate BRAFi resistance. Red denotes mutated protein (e.g., BRAF); gray symbols denote weak signaling or interactions; multiplicity of protein symbols denotes overexpression; P in blue denotes activation-associated phosphorylation.