Pan-cancer analysis of non-oncogene addiction to DNA repair

Cancer cells usually depend on the aberrant function of one or few driver genes to initiate and promote their malignancy, an attribute known as oncogene addiction. However, cancer cells might become dependent on the normal cellular functions of certain genes that are not oncogenes but ensure cell survival (non-oncogene addiction). The downregulation or silencing of DNA repair genes and the consequent genetic and epigenetic instability is key to promote malignancy, but the activation of the DNA-damage response (DDR) has been shown to become a type of non-oncogene addiction that critically supports tumour survival. In the present study, a systematic evaluation of DNA repair addiction at the pan-cancer level was performed using data derived from The Cancer Dependency Map and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). From 241 DDR genes, 59 were identified as commonly essential in cancer cell lines. However, large differences were observed in terms of dependency scores in 423 cell lines and transcriptomic alterations across 18 cancer types. Among these 59 commonly essential genes, 14 genes were exclusively associated with better overall patient survival and 19 with worse overall survival. Notably, a specific molecular signature among the latter, characterized by DDR genes like UBE2T, RFC4, POLQ, BRIP1, and H2AFX showing the weakest dependency scores, but significant upregulation was strongly associated with worse survival. The present study supports the existence and importance of non-oncogenic addiction to DNA repair in cancer and may facilitate the identification of prognostic biomarkers and therapeutic opportunities.

Targeting Oncogene Addiction for Cancer Therapy

Oncogene addiction, a term first coined by Bernard Weinstein in 2000, refers to a condition where a tumor cell, despite harboring a multitude of genetic alterations, depends on a single oncogenic pathway or oncoprotein for sustained proliferation and survival. Several lines of evidence from mammalian cell culture models, genetically modified mice models, and human intervention trials of targeted drugs have revealed that many tumors, if not all, rely on oncogene addiction for sustained proliferation and survival. Oncogene addiction strongly impacts the therapeutic response of tumors to acute oncoprotein inhibition. An important implication of oncogene addiction is that inhibiting this critical pathway, on which cancer cells become dependent, can cause selective and specific cell death in cancer cells while sparing normal surrounding cells that are not oncogene addicted. However, the mechanism by which cancer cells become dependent on a single pathway or activated oncoprotein is not precisely understood in most cases. Thus, a better understanding of oncogene addiction may provide a rationale for improving current cancer therapies and help develop novel therapeutic strategies for the management of cancer.

Pan-cancer analysis of non-oncogene addiction to DNA repair

Cancer cells usually depend on the aberrant function of one or few driver genes to initiate and promote their malignancy, an attribute known as oncogene addiction. However, cancer cells might become dependent on the normal cellular functions of certain genes that are not oncogenes but ensure cell survival (non-oncogene addiction). The downregulation of DNA repair genes and the consequent genetic and epigenetic instability is key to promote malignancy, but the activation of the DNA-damage response (DDR) has been shown to become a type of non-oncogene addiction that critically supports tumour survival. While we know that different cancer types can become dependent on specific DDR genes for their survival, a systematic evaluation of DNA repair addiction at the pan-cancer level is missing. In the present study, this systematic evaluation was addressed using data derived from The Cancer Dependency Map and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Following this approach, 59 DDR genes were identified as commonly essential in cancer cells with 14 genes being exclusively associated with better overall patient survival and 19 with worse overall survival. Notably, a specific molecular signature among the latter, characterized by DDR genes showing the weakest dependency scores, but significant upregulation was strongly associated with worse survival, supporting the presence and relevance of non-oncogenic addiction to DNA repair in cancer. Particularly, UBE2T, RFC4, POLQ, BRIP1, and H2AFX represent the best predictors of poor overall survival, and some might represent promising therapeutic targets, especially under the synthetic lethality approach.

EGFR blockade leads to singular oncogene-addiction in ETV6-NTRK3 transformed human epithelial cells and hypersensitization to entrectinib.

e18055 Background: Entrectinib, a TRK kinase inhibitor, has been approved for the treatment of tissue agnostic rare tumors positive for TRK fusions. A very low frequency molecular subset of TRK fusion tumors dubbed as secretory carcinoma (SC) are characterized by organ-agnostic epithelial origin, ETV6-NTRK3 (EN) fusion and distinguishable secretory-type tumor cells. These tumors have been frequently miscategorized as acinic cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma. A previous mouse study identified EGF dependent epithelial progenitors as putative cell-of-origin for SC. Methods: To test the role of EGFR signaling in EN mediated transformation and therapy resistance, we expressed EN, kinase-dead EN-K380M, and drug-resistant EN-G623R in human epithelial MCF10A cells with EGF-dependent primitive function and investigated their ability to grow in the presence and absence of EGF and/or entrectinib. To understand the significance of findings based on our model, we analyzed a total of 22 ‘rare’ patients from Mayo Clinic Tissue Registry and analyzed TCGA PanCan datasets. Results: We report herein that EGF signaling is essential for normal growth but dispensable during EN driven transformation. Our findings suggest that levels equivalent to circulating EGF (0.5-1ng/ml) is sufficient to drive 100% resistance to entrectinib in vitro. Three different strategies to blockade EGF/EGFR axis including depletion of EGF in culture system, genetic depletion of EGFR using shRNA as well as cetuximab antibody-based EGFR neutralization potentiated oncogene-addiction and hypersensitivity to entrectinib in our models. As predicted, models with G623R mutation in EN was refractory to entrectinib under all experimental conditions. Further omics analysis of TCGA PanCan suggested that EN and EGFR mutations are mutually exclusive and entrectinib-resistant G623R mutation were uncommon. Interestingly, nearly all EN tumors from Mayo Clinic Tissue Registry immunostained weakly or strongly for EGFR and showed perfect concordance with pEGFR suggesting pathway activation. Conclusions: Together, these findings raise an important question whether blockade of ‘wildtype’ EGFR signaling could improve medical intervention in SC patients presenting with wildtype EGFR and no drug-resistant mutation in entrectinib, by improving oncogene-addiction and attendant hypersensitization of transformed cells to entrectinib.

Targeting Protein Kinases in Blood Cancer: Focusing on CK1α and CK2

Disturbance of protein kinase activity may result in dramatic consequences that often lead to cancer development and progression. In tumors of blood origin, both tyrosine kinases and serine/threonine kinases are altered by different types of mutations, critically regulating cancer hallmarks. CK1α and CK2 are highly conserved, ubiquitously expressed and constitutively active pleiotropic kinases, which participate in multiple biological processes. The involvement of these kinases in solid and blood cancers is well documented. CK1α and CK2 are overactive in multiple myeloma, leukemias and lymphomas. Intriguingly, they are not required to the same degree for the viability of normal cells, corroborating the idea of “druggable” kinases. Different to other kinases, mutations on the gene encoding CK1α and CK2 are rare or not reported. Actually, these two kinases are outside the paradigm of oncogene addiction, since cancer cells’ dependency on these proteins resembles the phenomenon of “non-oncogene” addiction. In this review, we will summarize the general features of CK1α and CK2 and the most relevant oncogenic and stress-related signaling nodes, regulated by kinase phosphorylation, that may lead to tumor progression. Finally, we will report the current data, which support the positioning of these two kinases in the therapeutic scene of hematological cancers.

Oncogenic mutation or overexpression of oncogenic KRAS or BRAF is not sufficient to confer oncogene addiction

Oncogene addiction is a cellular property by which cancer cells become highly dependent on the expression of oncogenes for their survival. Oncogene addiction can be exploited to design molecularly targeted drugs that kill only cancer cells by inhibiting the specific oncogenes. Genes and cell lines exhibiting oncogene addiction, as well as the mechanisms by which cell death is induced when addicted oncogenes are suppressed, have been extensively studied. However, it is still not fully understood how oncogene addiction is acquired in cancer cells. Here, we take a synthetic biology approach to investigate whether oncogenic mutation or oncogene expression suffices to confer the property of oncogene addiction to cancer cells. We employed human mammary epithelium-derived MCF-10A cells expressing the oncogenic KRAS or BRAF. MCF-10A cells harboring an oncogenic mutation in a single-allele of KRAS or BRAF showed weak transformation activity, but no characteristics of oncogene addiction. MCF-10A cells overexpressing oncogenic KRAS demonstrated the transformation activity, but MCF-10A cells overexpressing oncogenic BRAF did not. Neither cell line exhibited any oncogene addiction properties. These results indicate that the introduction of oncogenic mutation or the overexpression of oncogenes is not sufficient for cells to acquire oncogene addiction, and that oncogene addiction is not associated with transformation activity.