靶向铁下垂耐药性使转移性HR+HER2乳腺癌细胞对palbociclib-激素治疗重新敏感。

IF 20.1 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Charles Pottier, Laetitia Montero-Ruiz, Robin Jehay, Coline Wery, Dominique Baiwir, Gabriel Mazzucchelli, Sophie Bekisz, Romain Thissen, Claire Josse, Andrée Rorive, Stéphanie Gofflot, Ahmed Dahmani, Ludivine Morisset, Joëlle Collignon, Philipe Delvenne, Elisabetta Marangoni, Agnès Noël, Guy Jerusalem, Nor Eddine Sounni
{"title":"靶向铁下垂耐药性使转移性HR+HER2乳腺癌细胞对palbociclib-激素治疗重新敏感。","authors":"Charles Pottier,&nbsp;Laetitia Montero-Ruiz,&nbsp;Robin Jehay,&nbsp;Coline Wery,&nbsp;Dominique Baiwir,&nbsp;Gabriel Mazzucchelli,&nbsp;Sophie Bekisz,&nbsp;Romain Thissen,&nbsp;Claire Josse,&nbsp;Andrée Rorive,&nbsp;Stéphanie Gofflot,&nbsp;Ahmed Dahmani,&nbsp;Ludivine Morisset,&nbsp;Joëlle Collignon,&nbsp;Philipe Delvenne,&nbsp;Elisabetta Marangoni,&nbsp;Agnès Noël,&nbsp;Guy Jerusalem,&nbsp;Nor Eddine Sounni","doi":"10.1002/cac2.12646","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Metastatic hormone receptor-positive (HR<sup>+</sup>), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2<sup>−</sup>) breast cancer often develops resistance to first-line treatment, typically combining cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) with hormone therapy (HT) [<span>1, 2</span>]. After an initial response, most patients become resistant, and compensatory mechanisms are not fully uncovered [<span>3</span>]. To address this, we analyzed HR<sup>+</sup> resistant CAMA1 and 747D cells using whole-exome and RNA sequencing, supplemented by proteomics and target validation with human samples. Additionally, we conducted combination therapy trials using xenografts and patient-derived xenografts (PDXs). Detailed study designs and methods are provided in the Supplementary file.</p><p>In a cohort of 27 patients with metastatic breast cancer, we observed reduced progression-free survival in second- and third-line therapies following progression post palbociclib-HT treatment (Supplementary Figure S1A and Supplementary Table S1). Resistant tumors showed reduced estrogen receptor alpha (ERα) and progesterone receptor (PR) and increased proliferation rates (Supplementary Figure S1B-D). CAMA1 and T47D cells, treated with palbociclib and fulvestrant (PF) for 2 years, developed resistance (CAMA1-PFR and T47D-PFR) confirmed by proliferation assays and elevated half-maximal inhibitory concentrations. Resistant cells exhibited reduced levels of ERα and retinoblastoma protein (Supplementary Figure S2). Exome analysis revealed no drug resistance-related mutations (Supplementary Tables S2-S3), suggesting non-genetic factors.</p><p>RNA sequencing of T47D cells treated with DMSO or PF for 20 days and T47D-PFR cells revealed 1,172 upregulated genes and 824 downregulated genes in the resistant cells (Supplementary Figure S3A). Gene set enrichment analysis indicated increased fatty acid localization (Supplementary Figure S3B), with a heatmap showing elevated fatty acid uptake and metabolism-related genes, such as fatty acid binding protein-6 (FABP6), FABP7, cluster of differentiation-36 (CD36), and proteasome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma (PPARγ) in T47D-PFR cells (Figure 1A). Lipid droplets accumulated in PF-treated parental and PF-resistant T47D and CAMA1 cells (Figure 1B and Supplementary Figure S3C). FABP6 levels were elevated in PF-treated parental and PF-resistant cells, with CD36 overexpression unique to T47D-PFR cells at both protein and mRNA levels (Figure 1C and Supplementary Figure S3D-E), suggesting that lipid uptake might be an adaptive response to oxidative stress [<span>4, 5</span>]. This was supported by elevated reactive oxygen species (ROS) levels in PF-treated parental cells (Figure 1D). Furthermore, proteomic analysis in human biopsies revealed a functional network of 11 oxidative stress-triggered proteasomes (Supplementary Figure S4A and Supplementary Tables S4-S5) as indicators of oxidative stress [<span>6</span>]. Immunohistochemistry validated increased proteasome subunit alpha type-7 (PSMA7) in resistant biopsies (Supplementary Figure S4B).</p><p>We investigated whether cell survival is affected by ferroptosis—a type of non-apoptotic cell death linked to lipid peroxidation. GPX4 protein, the main protector against ferroptosis, was overexpressed in parental cells after PF treatment and in PF-resistant cells, even after drug wash-out, with no changes in mRNA levels (Figure 1E and Supplementary Figure S5A-C). Silencing GPX4 expression reduced cell proliferation in parental and PF-resistant cells (Supplementary Figure S5D-F), indicating their reliance on GPX4. GPX4 overexpression was also observed in resistant human tumors (Figure 1F).</p><p>Cells were treated with the GPX4 inhibitor RAS-selective lethal 3 (RSL3) and the antioxidant Trolox for 6 days. CAMA1 and T47D cells were insensitive to RSL3, whereas CAMA1-PFR and T47D-PFR cells showed high sensitivity to RSL3 (Figure 1G). Trolox reversed RSL3's effect in both cell lines (Figure 1G), highlighting the role of GPX4 in PF-resistant cell proliferation. Due to unverified safety of RLS3, we used eprenetapopt (Ep), a p53 activator and GSH depletory [<span>7</span>] proven safe in hematological cancer patients [<span>8</span>]. In vitro, CAMA1 and CAMA1-PFR cells were sensitive to Ep, while T47D cells were insensitive; T47D-PFR showed higher sensitivity (Figure 1H).</p><p>To investigate the effect of pharmacologically induced ferroptosis on the palbociclib-fulvestrant response in vivo, we used nude mice implanted with estrogen pellets. Due to its low pharmacokinetics in mouse plasma [<span>9</span>], RSL3 was administered via intratumoral injection. Mice were treated with vehicle, PF, Ep, RSL3, a combination of palbociclib-fulvestrant and eprenetapopt (PFEp), or a combination of palbociclib-fulvestrant and RSL3 (PF-RSL3). PF effectively inhibited the growth of the CAMA1 xenografts, while CAMA1-PFR tumors were insensitive (Figure 1I and J). RSL3 alone did not affect CAMA1-PFR tumor growth, whereas PF-RSL3 demonstrated a strong antitumor effect (Figure 1J), suggesting that RSL3 sensitizes CAMA1-PFR cells to PF, or vice versa. Similarly, Ep alone did not inhibit CAMA1-PFR tumor growth, but its combination with PF completely abolished tumor growth (Figure 1J).</p><p>To evaluate treatment effects on proliferation and cell death, we assessed Ki67, caspase-3 and hydroxynonenal (HNE) in tumors by immunohistochemistry. Parental CAMA1 tumors treated with PF showed a significant decrease in Ki67, with no effect on caspase-3, while CAMA1-PFR tumors exhibited no significant changes in either marker after treatment with PF, PFEp, or PF-RSL3 (Supplementary Figure S6A-D). HNE labeling revealed no difference between PF- and vehicle-treated CAMA1 tumors (Supplementary Figure S6E), but HNE increased moderately in CAMA1-PFR tumors treated with RSL3 and significantly with PFEp or PF-RSL3 (Supplementary Figure S6F), indicating potential cell death by ferroptosis. No treatments affected CD36 expression in either tumor type, although CAMA1-PFR xenografts showed significantly increased basal expression compared to human biopsies (Supplementary Figure S6G-J).</p><p>To strengthen the translational impact of our findings, we used patient-derived xenografts (PDXs) from HR<sup>+</sup>HER2<sup>−</sup> breast cancer patients without <i>p53</i> mutations (Supplementary Figure S7A) [<span>10</span>]. Consistent with human samples, GPX4 protein was upregulated in the palbociclib-HT-resistant PDX model (HBCx-180) compared to the palbociclib-HT-naïve PDX model (HBCx-124) (Supplementary Figure S7B). While GPX4 mRNA levels were unaffected in resistant cells, its expression was significantly higher in HBCx-180 (Supplementary Figure S7C), suggesting specific transcriptional/translational regulation differing between in vitro and in vivo contexts. In the HBCx-124 model, all the tumors (<i>n</i> = 5) responded well to PF, with no added benefit from Ep (PFEp), although a partial response to Ep monotherapy was observed (Figure 1K). Conversely, the HBCx-180 model showed no significant response to PF or Ep, with significant differences in tumor volumes between PFEp and vehicle and Ep groups from Day 25 onward (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.05) (Figure 1L). These results confirm that adding Ep to PF in PF-resistant tumors produces a strong antitumor effect. Ki67 labeling decreased with PF in the HBCx-124 PDX but not in the HBCx-180 PDX (Supplementary Figure S8A-B). Aside from reduction in caspase-3 labeling in the HBCx-124 treated with PF, no significant changes were observed with Ep or PFEp, and none of the treatment conditions affected HBCx-180 (Supplementary Figure S8C-D), indicating that proliferation and apoptosis are not affected in HBCx-180. HNE labeling suggested that PF promoted ferroptosis in HBCx-124, while only tumors treated with PFEp in HBCx-180 exhibited significant HNE increase compared to vehicle (Supplementary Figure S8E-F). PF slightly increased HNE in HBCx-124 without significance but the only vulnerability of HBCx-180 is attributed to ferroptosis induced with PFEp. The p53-dependent antitumor effect of eprenetapopt was excluded, as p53 expression was similar in parental and PF-resistant cells and in PDXs, while slightly elevated in resistant human tumors (Supplementary Figure S9). Finally, the addition of Ep or RSL3 to PF did not induce significant renal, hepatic, or hematological toxicity in mice (Supplementary Figure S10).</p><p>In conclusion, HR<sup>+</sup>HER2<sup>−</sup> tumors resistant to palbociclib-HT are vulnerable to ferroptosis inducers, highlighting the potential of collateral drug sensitivity and the promise of developing pro-ferroptosis agents for treating drug-resistant metastatic breast cancer (Supplementary Figure S11).</p><p><i>Conception and design</i>: CP and NES. <i>Development of methodology</i>: CP, LMR, NES. <i>Acquisition of data</i>: CP, LMR, RT, CW, RJ, AR, JC, CJ, SG, SB, AD, PD, LM and EM. <i>Analysis and interpretation of data (e.g., statistical analysis, biostatistics)</i>: CP, LMR, DB, GM, RT, CJ and NES. <i>Writing, review, and/or revision of the manuscript</i>: CP, GJ, AN and NES. <i>Study supervision</i>: GJ and NES.</p><p>The authors declare no competing interest except for Dr. Guy Jerusalem, who declares receiving grant support, paid to his institution, advisory board fees, lecture fees, travel support, and writing assistance from Novartis, Roche, and Pfizer. Disclosure is provided with the full text of this article. No other potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.</p><p>This work was supported by grants from the National Fund for Scientific Research (NFSR-FNRS) Belgium (NES: PDR T.023020; CDR J.0178.22); the credit sectorial of the University of Liege (NES: FSR-S-SS-22/61; FSR-S-SS-22/64); and the Foundation Contre le Cancer, Belgium (NES and AN: FCC-2022-181).</p>","PeriodicalId":9495,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Communications","volume":"45 4","pages":"460-464"},"PeriodicalIF":20.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cac2.12646","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Targeting ferroptosis resistance resensitizes metastatic HR+HER2− breast cancer cells to palbociclib-hormone therapy\",\"authors\":\"Charles Pottier,&nbsp;Laetitia Montero-Ruiz,&nbsp;Robin Jehay,&nbsp;Coline Wery,&nbsp;Dominique Baiwir,&nbsp;Gabriel Mazzucchelli,&nbsp;Sophie Bekisz,&nbsp;Romain Thissen,&nbsp;Claire Josse,&nbsp;Andrée Rorive,&nbsp;Stéphanie Gofflot,&nbsp;Ahmed Dahmani,&nbsp;Ludivine Morisset,&nbsp;Joëlle Collignon,&nbsp;Philipe Delvenne,&nbsp;Elisabetta Marangoni,&nbsp;Agnès Noël,&nbsp;Guy Jerusalem,&nbsp;Nor Eddine Sounni\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/cac2.12646\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Metastatic hormone receptor-positive (HR<sup>+</sup>), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2<sup>−</sup>) breast cancer often develops resistance to first-line treatment, typically combining cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) with hormone therapy (HT) [<span>1, 2</span>]. After an initial response, most patients become resistant, and compensatory mechanisms are not fully uncovered [<span>3</span>]. To address this, we analyzed HR<sup>+</sup> resistant CAMA1 and 747D cells using whole-exome and RNA sequencing, supplemented by proteomics and target validation with human samples. Additionally, we conducted combination therapy trials using xenografts and patient-derived xenografts (PDXs). Detailed study designs and methods are provided in the Supplementary file.</p><p>In a cohort of 27 patients with metastatic breast cancer, we observed reduced progression-free survival in second- and third-line therapies following progression post palbociclib-HT treatment (Supplementary Figure S1A and Supplementary Table S1). Resistant tumors showed reduced estrogen receptor alpha (ERα) and progesterone receptor (PR) and increased proliferation rates (Supplementary Figure S1B-D). CAMA1 and T47D cells, treated with palbociclib and fulvestrant (PF) for 2 years, developed resistance (CAMA1-PFR and T47D-PFR) confirmed by proliferation assays and elevated half-maximal inhibitory concentrations. Resistant cells exhibited reduced levels of ERα and retinoblastoma protein (Supplementary Figure S2). Exome analysis revealed no drug resistance-related mutations (Supplementary Tables S2-S3), suggesting non-genetic factors.</p><p>RNA sequencing of T47D cells treated with DMSO or PF for 20 days and T47D-PFR cells revealed 1,172 upregulated genes and 824 downregulated genes in the resistant cells (Supplementary Figure S3A). Gene set enrichment analysis indicated increased fatty acid localization (Supplementary Figure S3B), with a heatmap showing elevated fatty acid uptake and metabolism-related genes, such as fatty acid binding protein-6 (FABP6), FABP7, cluster of differentiation-36 (CD36), and proteasome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma (PPARγ) in T47D-PFR cells (Figure 1A). Lipid droplets accumulated in PF-treated parental and PF-resistant T47D and CAMA1 cells (Figure 1B and Supplementary Figure S3C). FABP6 levels were elevated in PF-treated parental and PF-resistant cells, with CD36 overexpression unique to T47D-PFR cells at both protein and mRNA levels (Figure 1C and Supplementary Figure S3D-E), suggesting that lipid uptake might be an adaptive response to oxidative stress [<span>4, 5</span>]. This was supported by elevated reactive oxygen species (ROS) levels in PF-treated parental cells (Figure 1D). Furthermore, proteomic analysis in human biopsies revealed a functional network of 11 oxidative stress-triggered proteasomes (Supplementary Figure S4A and Supplementary Tables S4-S5) as indicators of oxidative stress [<span>6</span>]. Immunohistochemistry validated increased proteasome subunit alpha type-7 (PSMA7) in resistant biopsies (Supplementary Figure S4B).</p><p>We investigated whether cell survival is affected by ferroptosis—a type of non-apoptotic cell death linked to lipid peroxidation. GPX4 protein, the main protector against ferroptosis, was overexpressed in parental cells after PF treatment and in PF-resistant cells, even after drug wash-out, with no changes in mRNA levels (Figure 1E and Supplementary Figure S5A-C). Silencing GPX4 expression reduced cell proliferation in parental and PF-resistant cells (Supplementary Figure S5D-F), indicating their reliance on GPX4. GPX4 overexpression was also observed in resistant human tumors (Figure 1F).</p><p>Cells were treated with the GPX4 inhibitor RAS-selective lethal 3 (RSL3) and the antioxidant Trolox for 6 days. CAMA1 and T47D cells were insensitive to RSL3, whereas CAMA1-PFR and T47D-PFR cells showed high sensitivity to RSL3 (Figure 1G). Trolox reversed RSL3's effect in both cell lines (Figure 1G), highlighting the role of GPX4 in PF-resistant cell proliferation. Due to unverified safety of RLS3, we used eprenetapopt (Ep), a p53 activator and GSH depletory [<span>7</span>] proven safe in hematological cancer patients [<span>8</span>]. In vitro, CAMA1 and CAMA1-PFR cells were sensitive to Ep, while T47D cells were insensitive; T47D-PFR showed higher sensitivity (Figure 1H).</p><p>To investigate the effect of pharmacologically induced ferroptosis on the palbociclib-fulvestrant response in vivo, we used nude mice implanted with estrogen pellets. Due to its low pharmacokinetics in mouse plasma [<span>9</span>], RSL3 was administered via intratumoral injection. Mice were treated with vehicle, PF, Ep, RSL3, a combination of palbociclib-fulvestrant and eprenetapopt (PFEp), or a combination of palbociclib-fulvestrant and RSL3 (PF-RSL3). PF effectively inhibited the growth of the CAMA1 xenografts, while CAMA1-PFR tumors were insensitive (Figure 1I and J). RSL3 alone did not affect CAMA1-PFR tumor growth, whereas PF-RSL3 demonstrated a strong antitumor effect (Figure 1J), suggesting that RSL3 sensitizes CAMA1-PFR cells to PF, or vice versa. Similarly, Ep alone did not inhibit CAMA1-PFR tumor growth, but its combination with PF completely abolished tumor growth (Figure 1J).</p><p>To evaluate treatment effects on proliferation and cell death, we assessed Ki67, caspase-3 and hydroxynonenal (HNE) in tumors by immunohistochemistry. Parental CAMA1 tumors treated with PF showed a significant decrease in Ki67, with no effect on caspase-3, while CAMA1-PFR tumors exhibited no significant changes in either marker after treatment with PF, PFEp, or PF-RSL3 (Supplementary Figure S6A-D). HNE labeling revealed no difference between PF- and vehicle-treated CAMA1 tumors (Supplementary Figure S6E), but HNE increased moderately in CAMA1-PFR tumors treated with RSL3 and significantly with PFEp or PF-RSL3 (Supplementary Figure S6F), indicating potential cell death by ferroptosis. No treatments affected CD36 expression in either tumor type, although CAMA1-PFR xenografts showed significantly increased basal expression compared to human biopsies (Supplementary Figure S6G-J).</p><p>To strengthen the translational impact of our findings, we used patient-derived xenografts (PDXs) from HR<sup>+</sup>HER2<sup>−</sup> breast cancer patients without <i>p53</i> mutations (Supplementary Figure S7A) [<span>10</span>]. Consistent with human samples, GPX4 protein was upregulated in the palbociclib-HT-resistant PDX model (HBCx-180) compared to the palbociclib-HT-naïve PDX model (HBCx-124) (Supplementary Figure S7B). While GPX4 mRNA levels were unaffected in resistant cells, its expression was significantly higher in HBCx-180 (Supplementary Figure S7C), suggesting specific transcriptional/translational regulation differing between in vitro and in vivo contexts. In the HBCx-124 model, all the tumors (<i>n</i> = 5) responded well to PF, with no added benefit from Ep (PFEp), although a partial response to Ep monotherapy was observed (Figure 1K). Conversely, the HBCx-180 model showed no significant response to PF or Ep, with significant differences in tumor volumes between PFEp and vehicle and Ep groups from Day 25 onward (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.05) (Figure 1L). These results confirm that adding Ep to PF in PF-resistant tumors produces a strong antitumor effect. Ki67 labeling decreased with PF in the HBCx-124 PDX but not in the HBCx-180 PDX (Supplementary Figure S8A-B). Aside from reduction in caspase-3 labeling in the HBCx-124 treated with PF, no significant changes were observed with Ep or PFEp, and none of the treatment conditions affected HBCx-180 (Supplementary Figure S8C-D), indicating that proliferation and apoptosis are not affected in HBCx-180. HNE labeling suggested that PF promoted ferroptosis in HBCx-124, while only tumors treated with PFEp in HBCx-180 exhibited significant HNE increase compared to vehicle (Supplementary Figure S8E-F). PF slightly increased HNE in HBCx-124 without significance but the only vulnerability of HBCx-180 is attributed to ferroptosis induced with PFEp. The p53-dependent antitumor effect of eprenetapopt was excluded, as p53 expression was similar in parental and PF-resistant cells and in PDXs, while slightly elevated in resistant human tumors (Supplementary Figure S9). Finally, the addition of Ep or RSL3 to PF did not induce significant renal, hepatic, or hematological toxicity in mice (Supplementary Figure S10).</p><p>In conclusion, HR<sup>+</sup>HER2<sup>−</sup> tumors resistant to palbociclib-HT are vulnerable to ferroptosis inducers, highlighting the potential of collateral drug sensitivity and the promise of developing pro-ferroptosis agents for treating drug-resistant metastatic breast cancer (Supplementary Figure S11).</p><p><i>Conception and design</i>: CP and NES. <i>Development of methodology</i>: CP, LMR, NES. <i>Acquisition of data</i>: CP, LMR, RT, CW, RJ, AR, JC, CJ, SG, SB, AD, PD, LM and EM. <i>Analysis and interpretation of data (e.g., statistical analysis, biostatistics)</i>: CP, LMR, DB, GM, RT, CJ and NES. <i>Writing, review, and/or revision of the manuscript</i>: CP, GJ, AN and NES. <i>Study supervision</i>: GJ and NES.</p><p>The authors declare no competing interest except for Dr. Guy Jerusalem, who declares receiving grant support, paid to his institution, advisory board fees, lecture fees, travel support, and writing assistance from Novartis, Roche, and Pfizer. Disclosure is provided with the full text of this article. No other potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.</p><p>This work was supported by grants from the National Fund for Scientific Research (NFSR-FNRS) Belgium (NES: PDR T.023020; CDR J.0178.22); the credit sectorial of the University of Liege (NES: FSR-S-SS-22/61; FSR-S-SS-22/64); and the Foundation Contre le Cancer, Belgium (NES and AN: FCC-2022-181).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9495,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancer Communications\",\"volume\":\"45 4\",\"pages\":\"460-464\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":20.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cac2.12646\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancer Communications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cac2.12646\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Communications","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cac2.12646","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Targeting ferroptosis resistance resensitizes metastatic HR+HER2− breast cancer cells to palbociclib-hormone therapy

Targeting ferroptosis resistance resensitizes metastatic HR+HER2− breast cancer cells to palbociclib-hormone therapy

Metastatic hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2) breast cancer often develops resistance to first-line treatment, typically combining cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) with hormone therapy (HT) [1, 2]. After an initial response, most patients become resistant, and compensatory mechanisms are not fully uncovered [3]. To address this, we analyzed HR+ resistant CAMA1 and 747D cells using whole-exome and RNA sequencing, supplemented by proteomics and target validation with human samples. Additionally, we conducted combination therapy trials using xenografts and patient-derived xenografts (PDXs). Detailed study designs and methods are provided in the Supplementary file.

In a cohort of 27 patients with metastatic breast cancer, we observed reduced progression-free survival in second- and third-line therapies following progression post palbociclib-HT treatment (Supplementary Figure S1A and Supplementary Table S1). Resistant tumors showed reduced estrogen receptor alpha (ERα) and progesterone receptor (PR) and increased proliferation rates (Supplementary Figure S1B-D). CAMA1 and T47D cells, treated with palbociclib and fulvestrant (PF) for 2 years, developed resistance (CAMA1-PFR and T47D-PFR) confirmed by proliferation assays and elevated half-maximal inhibitory concentrations. Resistant cells exhibited reduced levels of ERα and retinoblastoma protein (Supplementary Figure S2). Exome analysis revealed no drug resistance-related mutations (Supplementary Tables S2-S3), suggesting non-genetic factors.

RNA sequencing of T47D cells treated with DMSO or PF for 20 days and T47D-PFR cells revealed 1,172 upregulated genes and 824 downregulated genes in the resistant cells (Supplementary Figure S3A). Gene set enrichment analysis indicated increased fatty acid localization (Supplementary Figure S3B), with a heatmap showing elevated fatty acid uptake and metabolism-related genes, such as fatty acid binding protein-6 (FABP6), FABP7, cluster of differentiation-36 (CD36), and proteasome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma (PPARγ) in T47D-PFR cells (Figure 1A). Lipid droplets accumulated in PF-treated parental and PF-resistant T47D and CAMA1 cells (Figure 1B and Supplementary Figure S3C). FABP6 levels were elevated in PF-treated parental and PF-resistant cells, with CD36 overexpression unique to T47D-PFR cells at both protein and mRNA levels (Figure 1C and Supplementary Figure S3D-E), suggesting that lipid uptake might be an adaptive response to oxidative stress [4, 5]. This was supported by elevated reactive oxygen species (ROS) levels in PF-treated parental cells (Figure 1D). Furthermore, proteomic analysis in human biopsies revealed a functional network of 11 oxidative stress-triggered proteasomes (Supplementary Figure S4A and Supplementary Tables S4-S5) as indicators of oxidative stress [6]. Immunohistochemistry validated increased proteasome subunit alpha type-7 (PSMA7) in resistant biopsies (Supplementary Figure S4B).

We investigated whether cell survival is affected by ferroptosis—a type of non-apoptotic cell death linked to lipid peroxidation. GPX4 protein, the main protector against ferroptosis, was overexpressed in parental cells after PF treatment and in PF-resistant cells, even after drug wash-out, with no changes in mRNA levels (Figure 1E and Supplementary Figure S5A-C). Silencing GPX4 expression reduced cell proliferation in parental and PF-resistant cells (Supplementary Figure S5D-F), indicating their reliance on GPX4. GPX4 overexpression was also observed in resistant human tumors (Figure 1F).

Cells were treated with the GPX4 inhibitor RAS-selective lethal 3 (RSL3) and the antioxidant Trolox for 6 days. CAMA1 and T47D cells were insensitive to RSL3, whereas CAMA1-PFR and T47D-PFR cells showed high sensitivity to RSL3 (Figure 1G). Trolox reversed RSL3's effect in both cell lines (Figure 1G), highlighting the role of GPX4 in PF-resistant cell proliferation. Due to unverified safety of RLS3, we used eprenetapopt (Ep), a p53 activator and GSH depletory [7] proven safe in hematological cancer patients [8]. In vitro, CAMA1 and CAMA1-PFR cells were sensitive to Ep, while T47D cells were insensitive; T47D-PFR showed higher sensitivity (Figure 1H).

To investigate the effect of pharmacologically induced ferroptosis on the palbociclib-fulvestrant response in vivo, we used nude mice implanted with estrogen pellets. Due to its low pharmacokinetics in mouse plasma [9], RSL3 was administered via intratumoral injection. Mice were treated with vehicle, PF, Ep, RSL3, a combination of palbociclib-fulvestrant and eprenetapopt (PFEp), or a combination of palbociclib-fulvestrant and RSL3 (PF-RSL3). PF effectively inhibited the growth of the CAMA1 xenografts, while CAMA1-PFR tumors were insensitive (Figure 1I and J). RSL3 alone did not affect CAMA1-PFR tumor growth, whereas PF-RSL3 demonstrated a strong antitumor effect (Figure 1J), suggesting that RSL3 sensitizes CAMA1-PFR cells to PF, or vice versa. Similarly, Ep alone did not inhibit CAMA1-PFR tumor growth, but its combination with PF completely abolished tumor growth (Figure 1J).

To evaluate treatment effects on proliferation and cell death, we assessed Ki67, caspase-3 and hydroxynonenal (HNE) in tumors by immunohistochemistry. Parental CAMA1 tumors treated with PF showed a significant decrease in Ki67, with no effect on caspase-3, while CAMA1-PFR tumors exhibited no significant changes in either marker after treatment with PF, PFEp, or PF-RSL3 (Supplementary Figure S6A-D). HNE labeling revealed no difference between PF- and vehicle-treated CAMA1 tumors (Supplementary Figure S6E), but HNE increased moderately in CAMA1-PFR tumors treated with RSL3 and significantly with PFEp or PF-RSL3 (Supplementary Figure S6F), indicating potential cell death by ferroptosis. No treatments affected CD36 expression in either tumor type, although CAMA1-PFR xenografts showed significantly increased basal expression compared to human biopsies (Supplementary Figure S6G-J).

To strengthen the translational impact of our findings, we used patient-derived xenografts (PDXs) from HR+HER2 breast cancer patients without p53 mutations (Supplementary Figure S7A) [10]. Consistent with human samples, GPX4 protein was upregulated in the palbociclib-HT-resistant PDX model (HBCx-180) compared to the palbociclib-HT-naïve PDX model (HBCx-124) (Supplementary Figure S7B). While GPX4 mRNA levels were unaffected in resistant cells, its expression was significantly higher in HBCx-180 (Supplementary Figure S7C), suggesting specific transcriptional/translational regulation differing between in vitro and in vivo contexts. In the HBCx-124 model, all the tumors (n = 5) responded well to PF, with no added benefit from Ep (PFEp), although a partial response to Ep monotherapy was observed (Figure 1K). Conversely, the HBCx-180 model showed no significant response to PF or Ep, with significant differences in tumor volumes between PFEp and vehicle and Ep groups from Day 25 onward (P < 0.05) (Figure 1L). These results confirm that adding Ep to PF in PF-resistant tumors produces a strong antitumor effect. Ki67 labeling decreased with PF in the HBCx-124 PDX but not in the HBCx-180 PDX (Supplementary Figure S8A-B). Aside from reduction in caspase-3 labeling in the HBCx-124 treated with PF, no significant changes were observed with Ep or PFEp, and none of the treatment conditions affected HBCx-180 (Supplementary Figure S8C-D), indicating that proliferation and apoptosis are not affected in HBCx-180. HNE labeling suggested that PF promoted ferroptosis in HBCx-124, while only tumors treated with PFEp in HBCx-180 exhibited significant HNE increase compared to vehicle (Supplementary Figure S8E-F). PF slightly increased HNE in HBCx-124 without significance but the only vulnerability of HBCx-180 is attributed to ferroptosis induced with PFEp. The p53-dependent antitumor effect of eprenetapopt was excluded, as p53 expression was similar in parental and PF-resistant cells and in PDXs, while slightly elevated in resistant human tumors (Supplementary Figure S9). Finally, the addition of Ep or RSL3 to PF did not induce significant renal, hepatic, or hematological toxicity in mice (Supplementary Figure S10).

In conclusion, HR+HER2 tumors resistant to palbociclib-HT are vulnerable to ferroptosis inducers, highlighting the potential of collateral drug sensitivity and the promise of developing pro-ferroptosis agents for treating drug-resistant metastatic breast cancer (Supplementary Figure S11).

Conception and design: CP and NES. Development of methodology: CP, LMR, NES. Acquisition of data: CP, LMR, RT, CW, RJ, AR, JC, CJ, SG, SB, AD, PD, LM and EM. Analysis and interpretation of data (e.g., statistical analysis, biostatistics): CP, LMR, DB, GM, RT, CJ and NES. Writing, review, and/or revision of the manuscript: CP, GJ, AN and NES. Study supervision: GJ and NES.

The authors declare no competing interest except for Dr. Guy Jerusalem, who declares receiving grant support, paid to his institution, advisory board fees, lecture fees, travel support, and writing assistance from Novartis, Roche, and Pfizer. Disclosure is provided with the full text of this article. No other potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.

This work was supported by grants from the National Fund for Scientific Research (NFSR-FNRS) Belgium (NES: PDR T.023020; CDR J.0178.22); the credit sectorial of the University of Liege (NES: FSR-S-SS-22/61; FSR-S-SS-22/64); and the Foundation Contre le Cancer, Belgium (NES and AN: FCC-2022-181).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cancer Communications
Cancer Communications Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Cancer Research
CiteScore
25.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
153
审稿时长
4 weeks
期刊介绍: Cancer Communications is an open access, peer-reviewed online journal that encompasses basic, clinical, and translational cancer research. The journal welcomes submissions concerning clinical trials, epidemiology, molecular and cellular biology, and genetics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信