Cantharidin Overcomes Imatinib Resistance by Depleting BCR-ABL in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia.

Cantharidin (CTD) is an active compound isolated from the traditional Chinese medicine blister beetle and displayed anticancer properties against various types of cancer cells. However, little is known about its effect on human chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) cells, including imatinib-resistant CML cells. The objective of this study was to investigate whether CTD could overcome imatinib resistance in imatinib-resistant CML cells and to explore the possible underlying mechanisms associated with the effect. Our results showed that CTD strongly inhibited the growth of both imatinib-sensitive and imatinib-resistant CML cells. CTD induced cell cycle arrest at mitotic phase and triggered DNA damage in CML cells. The ATM/ATR inhibitor CGK733 abrogated CTD-induced mitotic arrest but promoted the cytotoxic effects of CTD. In addition, we demonstrated that CTD downregulated the expression of the BCR-ABL protein and suppressed its downstream signal transduction. Real-time quantitative PCR revealed that CTD inhibited BCR-ABL at transcriptional level. Knockdown of BCR-ABL increased the cell-killing effects of CTD in K562 cells. These findings indicated that CTD overcomes imatinib resistance through depletion of BCR-ABL. Taken together, CTD is an important new candidate agent for CML therapy.

AKT is a therapeutic target in myeloproliferative neoplasms.

The majority of patients with BCR-ABL1-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) harbor mutations in JAK2 or MPL, which lead to constitutive activation of the JAK/STAT, PI3K and ERK signaling pathways. JAK inhibitors by themselves are inadequate in producing selective clonal suppression in MPN and are associated with hematopoietic toxicities. MK-2206 is a potent allosteric AKT inhibitor that was well tolerated, including no evidence of myelosuppression, in a phase I study of solid tumors. Herein, we show that inhibition of PI3K/AKT signaling by MK-2206 affected the growth of both JAK2V617F- or MPLW515L-expressing cells via reduced phosphorylation of AKT and inhibition of its downstream signaling molecules. Moreover, we demonstrate that MK-2206 synergizes with ruxolitinib in suppressing the growth of JAK2V617F-mutant SET2 cells. Importantly, MK-2206 suppressed colony formation from hematopoietic progenitor cells in patients with primary myelofibrosis and alleviated hepatosplenomegaly and reduced megakaryocyte burden in the bone marrows, livers and spleens of mice with MPLW515L-induced MPN. Together, these findings establish AKT as a rational therapeutic target in the MPNs.

CBL mutations in myeloproliferative neoplasms are also found in the gene's proline-rich domain and in patients with the V617FJAK2.

BACKGROUND: Despite the discovery of the p.V617F in JAK2, the molecular pathogenesis of some chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms remains unclear. Although very rare, different studies have identified CBL (Cas-Br-Murine ecotropic retroviral transforming sequence) mutations in V617FJAK2-negative patients, mainly located in the RING finger domain. In order to determine the frequency of CBL mutations in these diseases, we studied different regions of all CBL family genes (CBL, CBLB and CBLC) in a selected group of patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms. We also included V617FJAK2-positive patients to check whether mutations in CBL and JAK2 are mutually exclusive events. DESIGN AND METHODS: Using denaturing high performance liquid chromatography, we screened for mutations in CBL, CBLB and CBLC in a group of 172 V617FJAK2-negative and 232 V617FJAK2-positive patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms not selected for loss of heterozygosity. The effect on cell proliferation of the mutations detected was analyzed on a 32D(FLT3) cell model. RESULTS: An initial screening of all coding exons of CBL, CBLB and CBLC in 44 V617FJAK2-negative samples revealed two new CBL mutations (p.C416W in the RING finger domain and p.A678V in the proline-rich domain). Analyses performed on 128 additional V617FJAK2-negative and 232 V617FJAK2-positive samples detected three CBL changes (p.T402HfsX29, p.P417R and p.S675C in two cases) in four V617FJAK2-positive patients. None of these mutations was found in 200 control samples. Cell proliferation assays showed that all of the mutations promoted hypersensitivity to interleukin-3 in 32D(FLT3) cells. CONCLUSIONS: Although mutations described to date have been found in the RING finger domain and in the linker region of CBL, we found a similar frequency of mutations in the proline-rich domain. In addition, we found CBL mutations in both V617FJAK2-positive (4/232; 1.7%) and negative (2/172; 1.2%) patients and all of them promoted hypersensitivity to interleukin-3.

Endothelial colony-forming cells from patients with chronic myeloproliferative disorders lack the disease-specific molecular clonality marker.

Two putative types of circulating endothelial progenitor cells have been recently identified in vitro: (1) endothelial colony-forming cell (ECFC) and (2) colony-forming unit-endothelial cell (CFU-EC). Only the former is now recognized to belong to endothelial lineage. We have used the ECFC and CFU-EC assays to readdress the issue of the clonal relation between endothelial progenitor cells and hematopoietic stem cells in patients with Philadelphia-positive and Philadelphia-negative chronic myeloproliferative disorders. Both ECFCs and CFU-ECs were cultured from peripheral blood mononuclear cells, and either BCR-ABL rearrangement or JAK2-V617F mutation were assessed in both types of endothelial colonies. We found that ECFCs lack the disease-specific markers, which are otherwise present in CFU-ECs, thus reinforcing the concept that the latter belongs to the hematopoietic lineage, and showing that in chronic myeloproliferative disorders the cell that gives rise to circulating ECFC has a distinct origin from the cell of the hematopoietic malignant clone.

Alternating versus concurrent schedules of imatinib and chemotherapy as front-line therapy for Philadelphia-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph+ ALL).

The best strategy for incorporating imatinib in front-line treatment of Ph+ acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) has not been established. We enrolled 92 patients with newly diagnosed Ph+ ALL in a prospective, multicenter study to investigate sequentially 2 treatment schedules with imatinib administered concurrent to or alternating with a uniform induction and consolidation regimen. Coadministration of imatinib and induction cycle 2 (INDII) resulted in a complete remission (CR) rate of 95% and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) negativity for BCR-ABL in 52% of patients, compared with 19% in patients in the alternating treatment cohort (P = .01). Remarkably, patients with and without a CR after induction cycle 1 (INDI) had similar hematologic and molecular responses after concurrent imatinib and INDII. In the concurrent cohort, grades III and IV cytopenias and transient hepatotoxicity necessitated interruption of induction in 87% and 53% of patients, respectively; however, duration of induction was not prolonged when compared with patients receiving chemotherapy alone. No imatinib-related severe hematologic or nonhematologic toxicities were noted with the alternating schedule. In each cohort, 77% of patients underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT) in first CR (CR1). Both schedules of imatinib have acceptable toxicity and facilitate SCT in CR1 in the majority of patients, but concurrent administration of imatinib and chemotherapy has greater antileukemic efficacy.