Cargando…

ETS-targeted therapy: can it substitute for MEK inhibitors?

BACKGROUND: The RAS/MAPK pathway has been intensively studied in cancer. Constitutive activation of ERK1 and ERK2 is frequently found in cancer cells from a variety of tissues. In clinical practice and clinical trials, small molecules targeting receptor tyrosine kinases or components in the MAPK cas...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tetsu, Osamu, McCormick, Frank
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5418169/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28474232
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40169-017-0147-4
_version_ 1783234017184710656
author Tetsu, Osamu
McCormick, Frank
author_facet Tetsu, Osamu
McCormick, Frank
author_sort Tetsu, Osamu
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The RAS/MAPK pathway has been intensively studied in cancer. Constitutive activation of ERK1 and ERK2 is frequently found in cancer cells from a variety of tissues. In clinical practice and clinical trials, small molecules targeting receptor tyrosine kinases or components in the MAPK cascade are used for treatment. MEK1 and MEK2 are ideal targets because these enzymes are physiologically important and have narrow substrate specificities and distinctive structural characteristics. Despite success in pre-clinical testing, only two MEK inhibitors, trametinib and cobimetinib, have been approved, both for treatment of BRAF-mutant melanoma. Surprisingly, the efficacy of MEK inhibitors in other tumors has been disappointing. These facts suggest the need for a different approach. We here consider transcription factor ETS1 and ETS2 as alternate therapeutic targets because they are major MAPK downstream effectors. MAIN TEXT: The lack of clinical efficacy of MEK inhibitors is attributed mostly to a subsequent loss of negative feedback regulation in the MAPK pathway. To overcome this obstacle, second-generation MEK inhibitors, so-called “feedback busters,” have been developed. However, their efficacy is still unsatisfactory in the majority of cancers. To substitute ETS-targeted therapy, therapeutic strategies to modulate the transcription factor in cancer must be considered. Chemical targeting of ETS1 for proteolysis is a promising strategy; Src and USP9X inhibitors might achieve this by accelerating ETS1 protein turnover. Targeting the ETS1 interface might have great therapeutic value because ETS1 dimerizes itself or with other transcription factors to regulate target genes. In addition, transcriptional cofactors, including CBP/p300 and BRD4, represent intriguing targets for both ETS1 and ETS2. CONCLUSIONS: ETS-targeted therapy appears to be promising. However, it may have a potential problem. It might inhibit autoregulatory negative feedback loops in the MAPK pathway, with consequent resistance to cell death by ERK1 and ERK2 activation. Further research is warranted to explore clinically applicable ways to inhibit ETS1 and ETS2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5418169
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54181692017-05-19 ETS-targeted therapy: can it substitute for MEK inhibitors? Tetsu, Osamu McCormick, Frank Clin Transl Med Review BACKGROUND: The RAS/MAPK pathway has been intensively studied in cancer. Constitutive activation of ERK1 and ERK2 is frequently found in cancer cells from a variety of tissues. In clinical practice and clinical trials, small molecules targeting receptor tyrosine kinases or components in the MAPK cascade are used for treatment. MEK1 and MEK2 are ideal targets because these enzymes are physiologically important and have narrow substrate specificities and distinctive structural characteristics. Despite success in pre-clinical testing, only two MEK inhibitors, trametinib and cobimetinib, have been approved, both for treatment of BRAF-mutant melanoma. Surprisingly, the efficacy of MEK inhibitors in other tumors has been disappointing. These facts suggest the need for a different approach. We here consider transcription factor ETS1 and ETS2 as alternate therapeutic targets because they are major MAPK downstream effectors. MAIN TEXT: The lack of clinical efficacy of MEK inhibitors is attributed mostly to a subsequent loss of negative feedback regulation in the MAPK pathway. To overcome this obstacle, second-generation MEK inhibitors, so-called “feedback busters,” have been developed. However, their efficacy is still unsatisfactory in the majority of cancers. To substitute ETS-targeted therapy, therapeutic strategies to modulate the transcription factor in cancer must be considered. Chemical targeting of ETS1 for proteolysis is a promising strategy; Src and USP9X inhibitors might achieve this by accelerating ETS1 protein turnover. Targeting the ETS1 interface might have great therapeutic value because ETS1 dimerizes itself or with other transcription factors to regulate target genes. In addition, transcriptional cofactors, including CBP/p300 and BRD4, represent intriguing targets for both ETS1 and ETS2. CONCLUSIONS: ETS-targeted therapy appears to be promising. However, it may have a potential problem. It might inhibit autoregulatory negative feedback loops in the MAPK pathway, with consequent resistance to cell death by ERK1 and ERK2 activation. Further research is warranted to explore clinically applicable ways to inhibit ETS1 and ETS2. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017-05-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5418169/ /pubmed/28474232 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40169-017-0147-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Review
Tetsu, Osamu
McCormick, Frank
ETS-targeted therapy: can it substitute for MEK inhibitors?
title ETS-targeted therapy: can it substitute for MEK inhibitors?
title_full ETS-targeted therapy: can it substitute for MEK inhibitors?
title_fullStr ETS-targeted therapy: can it substitute for MEK inhibitors?
title_full_unstemmed ETS-targeted therapy: can it substitute for MEK inhibitors?
title_short ETS-targeted therapy: can it substitute for MEK inhibitors?
title_sort ets-targeted therapy: can it substitute for mek inhibitors?
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5418169/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28474232
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40169-017-0147-4
work_keys_str_mv AT tetsuosamu etstargetedtherapycanitsubstituteformekinhibitors
AT mccormickfrank etstargetedtherapycanitsubstituteformekinhibitors