Differential Sensitivity of Wild-Type and BRAF-Mutated Cells to Combined BRAF and Autophagy Inhibition

BRAF inhibitors are insufficient monotherapies for BRAF-mutated cancer; therefore, we investigated which inhibitory pathway would yield the most effective therapeutic approach when targeted in combination with BRAF inhibition. The oncogenic BRAF inhibitor, PLX4720, increased basal autophagic flux in BRAF-mutated cells compared to wild-type (WT) BRAF cells. Interestingly, early autophagy inhibition improved the effectiveness of PLX4720 regardless of BRAF mutation, whereas late autophagy inhibition did not. Although ATG5 knockout led to PLX4720 resistance in both WT and BRAF-mutated cells, the MEK inhibitor trametinib exhibited a synergistic effect on PLX4720 sensitivity in WT BRAF cells but not in BRAF-mutated cells. Conversely, the prolonged inhibition of endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress reduced basal autophagy in BRAF-mutated cells, thereby increasing PLX4720 sensitivity. Taken together, our results suggest that the combined inhibition of ER stress and BRAF may simultaneously suppress both pro-survival ER stress and autophagy, and may therefore be suitable for treatment of BRAF-mutated tumors whose autophagy is increased by chronic ER stress. Similarly, for WT BRAF tumors, therapies targeting MEK signaling may be a more effective treatment strategy. Together, this study presents a rational combination treatment strategy to improve the efficacy of BRAF inhibitors depending on BRAF mutation status.

Differential Sensitivity of Wild-Type and BRAF-Mutated Cells to Combined BRAF and Autophagy Inhibition

BRAF inhibitors are insufficient monotherapies for BRAF-mutated cancer; therefore, we investigated which inhibitory pathway would yield the most effective therapeutic approach when targeted in combination with BRAF inhibition. The oncogenic BRAF inhibitor, PLX4720, increased basal autophagic flux in BRAF-mutated cells compared to wild-type (WT) BRAF cells. Interestingly, early autophagy inhibition improved the effectiveness of PLX4720 regardless of BRAF mutation, whereas late autophagy inhibition did not. Although ATG5 knockout led to PLX4720 resistance in both WT and BRAF-mutated cells, the MEK inhibitor trametinib exhibited a synergistic effect on PLX4720 sensitivity in WT BRAF cells but not in BRAF-mutated cells. Conversely, the prolonged inhibition of endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress reduced basal autophagy in BRAF-mutated cells, thereby increasing PLX4720 sensitivity. Taken together, our results suggest that the combined inhibition of ER stress and BRAF may simultaneously suppress both pro-survival ER stress and autophagy, and may therefore be suitable for treatment of BRAF-mutated tumors whose autophagy is increased by chronic ER stress. Similarly, for WT BRAF tumors, therapies targeting MEK signaling may be a more effective treatment strategy. Together, this study presents a rational combination treatment strategy to improve the efficacy of BRAF inhibitors depending on BRAF mutation status.

Induction of Resistance to BRAF Inhibitor Is Associated with the Inability of Spry2 to Inhibit BRAF-V600E Activity in BRAF Mutant Cells

The clinical benefits of oncogenic BRAF inhibitor therapies are limited by the emergence of drug resistance. In this study, we investigated the role of a negative regulator of the MAPK pathway, Spry2, in acquired resistance using BRAF inhibitor-resistant derivatives of the BRAF-V600E melanoma (A375P/Mdr). Real-time RT-PCR analysis indicated that the expression of Spry2 was higher in A375P cells harboring the BRAF V600E mutation compared with wild-type BRAF-bearing cells (SK-MEL-2) that are resistant to BRAF inhibitors. This result suggests the ability of BRAF V600E to evade feedback suppression in cell lines with BRAF V600E mutations despite high Spry2 expression. Most interestingly, Spry2 exhibited strongly reduced expression in A375P/Mdr cells with acquired resistance to BRAF inhibitors. Furthermore, the overexpression of Spry2 partially restored sensitivity to the BRAF inhibitor PLX4720 in two BRAF inhibitor-resistant cells, indicating a positive role for Spry2 in the growth inhibition induced by BRAF inhibitors. On the other hand, long-term treatment with PLX4720 induced pERK reactivation following BRAF inhibition in A375P cells, indicating that negative feedback including Spry2 may be bypassed in BRAF mutant melanoma cells. In addition, the siRNA-mediated knockdown of Raf-1 attenuated the rebound activation of ERK stimulated by PLX4720 in A375P cells, strongly suggesting the positive role of Raf-1 kinase in ERK activation in response to BRAF inhibition. Taken together, these data suggest that RAF signaling may be released from negative feedback inhibition through interacting with Spry2, leading to ERK rebound and, consequently, the induction of acquired resistance to BRAF inhibitors.