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
_version_ 1784746245763366912
author 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
author_facet 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
author_sort Sagmeister, Paula
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9278726
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92787262022-07-14 Comparative Response of HCC Cells to TKIs: Modified in vitro Testing and Descriptive Expression Analysis 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 J Hepatocell Carcinoma Original Research 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. Dove 2022-07-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9278726/ /pubmed/35845819 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JHC.S356333 Text en © 2022 Sagmeister et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
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
Comparative Response of HCC Cells to TKIs: Modified in vitro Testing and Descriptive Expression Analysis
title Comparative Response of HCC Cells to TKIs: Modified in vitro Testing and Descriptive Expression Analysis
title_full Comparative Response of HCC Cells to TKIs: Modified in vitro Testing and Descriptive Expression Analysis
title_fullStr Comparative Response of HCC Cells to TKIs: Modified in vitro Testing and Descriptive Expression Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Response of HCC Cells to TKIs: Modified in vitro Testing and Descriptive Expression Analysis
title_short Comparative Response of HCC Cells to TKIs: Modified in vitro Testing and Descriptive Expression Analysis
title_sort comparative response of hcc cells to tkis: modified in vitro testing and descriptive expression analysis
topic Original Research
url 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
work_keys_str_mv AT sagmeisterpaula comparativeresponseofhcccellstotkismodifiedinvitrotestinganddescriptiveexpressionanalysis
AT dazajimmy comparativeresponseofhcccellstotkismodifiedinvitrotestinganddescriptiveexpressionanalysis
AT ofnerandrea comparativeresponseofhcccellstotkismodifiedinvitrotestinganddescriptiveexpressionanalysis
AT zieschandreas comparativeresponseofhcccellstotkismodifiedinvitrotestinganddescriptiveexpressionanalysis
AT yeliangtao comparativeresponseofhcccellstotkismodifiedinvitrotestinganddescriptiveexpressionanalysis
AT benkhalednajib comparativeresponseofhcccellstotkismodifiedinvitrotestinganddescriptiveexpressionanalysis
AT ebertmatthias comparativeresponseofhcccellstotkismodifiedinvitrotestinganddescriptiveexpressionanalysis
AT mayerlejulia comparativeresponseofhcccellstotkismodifiedinvitrotestinganddescriptiveexpressionanalysis
AT teufelandreas comparativeresponseofhcccellstotkismodifiedinvitrotestinganddescriptiveexpressionanalysis
AT detonienricon comparativeresponseofhcccellstotkismodifiedinvitrotestinganddescriptiveexpressionanalysis
AT munkerstefan comparativeresponseofhcccellstotkismodifiedinvitrotestinganddescriptiveexpressionanalysis