Cargando…

Comparative Response of HCC Cells to TKIs: Modified in vitro Testing and Descriptive Expression Analysis

INTRODUCTION: Although the treatment paradigm for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has recently shifted in favour of checkpoint inhibitor (CPI)-based treatment options, the tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) currently approved for the treatment of HCC are expected to remain the cornerstone of HCC treatm...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sagmeister, Paula, Daza, Jimmy, Ofner, Andrea, Ziesch, Andreas, Ye, Liangtao, Ben Khaled, Najib, Ebert, Matthias, Mayerle, Julia, Teufel, Andreas, De Toni, Enrico N, Munker, Stefan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9278726/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35845819
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JHC.S356333
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION: Although the treatment paradigm for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has recently shifted in favour of checkpoint inhibitor (CPI)-based treatment options, the tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) currently approved for the treatment of HCC are expected to remain the cornerstone of HCC treatment alone or in combination with CPIs. Despite considerable research efforts, no biomarker capable of predicting the response to specific TKIs has been validated. Thus, personalized approaches to HCC may aid in determining optimal treatment lines for 2nd and 3rd lines. To identify new biomarkers, we examined differential sensitivity and investigated potential transcriptomic predictors. METHODS: To this aim, the sensitivity of nine HCC cell lines to sorafenib, lenvatinib, regorafenib, and cabozantinib was evaluated by a prolonged treatment scheme to determine their respective growth rate inhibition concentrations (GR(50)). Subgroups discriminated by GR(50) values underwent differential expression and gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA). RESULTS: The nine cell lines showed broadly different sensitivities to different TKIs. GR(50) values of sorafenib and regorafenib clustered closer in all cell lines, whereas treatments with lenvatinib and cabozantinib showed diversified GR(50) values. GSEA showed the activation of specific pathways in sensitive vs non-sensitive cell lines. A signature consisting of 14 biomarkers (GAGE12H, GJB6, PTCHD3, PRH1-PRR4, C6orf222, HBB, C17orf99, GOLGA6A, CRYAA, CCL23, RP11-347C12.3, RP11-514O12.4, FAM180B, and TMPRSS4) discriminates the cell lines’ response into three distinct treatment profiles: 1) equally sensible to sorafenib, regorafenib and cabozantinib, 2) sensible to lenvatinib, and 3) more sensible to regorafenib than sorafenib. CONCLUSION: We observed diverse responses to either of the four TKIs. Subgroup analysis of TKI effectiveness showed distinct transcriptomic profiles and signaling pathways associated with responsiveness. This prompts more extensive studies to explore and validate pharmacogenomic and transcriptomic strategies for a personalized treatment approach, particularly after the failure of CPI treatment.