Search

PDK1 activates AKT suggesting that PDK1 inhibition might suppress tumor development. However, while PDK1 has been investigated intensively as an oncology target, selective inhibitors suitable for in vivo studies have remained elusive. In this study we present the results of in vivo PDK1 inhibition through a universally applicable RNAi approach for functional drug target validation in oncogenic pathway contexts. This approach, which relies on doxycycline-inducible shRNA expression from the Rosa26 locus, is ideal for functional studies of genes like PDK1 where constitutive mouse models lead to strong developmental phenotypes or embryonic lethality. We achieved more than 90% PDK1 knockdown in vivo, a level sufficient to impact physiological functions resulting in hyperinsulinemia and hyperglycemia. This phenotype was reversible on PDK1 reexpression. Unexpectedly, long-term PDK1 knockdown revealed a lack of potent antitumor efficacy in 3 different mouse models of PTEN-deficient cancer. Thus, despite efficient PDK1 knockdown, inhibition of the PI3K pathway was marginal suggesting that PDK1 was not a rate limiting factor. Ex vivo analysis of pharmacological inhibitors revealed that AKT and mTOR inhibitors undergoing clinical development are more effective than PDK1 inhibitors at blocking activated PI3K pathway signaling. Taken together our findings weaken the widely held expectation that PDK1 represents an appealing oncology target. Cancer Res; 71(8); 3052–65. ©2011 AACR.

Inhibitors of the checkpoint kinases CHK1 and WEE1 are under development as sensitizers to chemotherapy or radiation therapy. Disruption of either CHK1 or WEE1 activity compromises the cell cycle arrest that normally accompanies the DNA damage response, forcing cells to prematurely divide before repairing damaged DNA. However, inhibition of either CHK1 or WEE1 alone also disrupts DNA replication, resulting in DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) primarily in S-phase cells. Here we describe the ability of inhibitors against CHK1 and WEE1 to synergize both in vitro and in vivo. MK-8776 and MK-1775 are advancing through early clinical trials as potent and selective inhibitors of CHK1 and WEE1, respectively. MK-8776 increases the cell-based potency of MK-1775 in multiple cancer cell lines by as much as a 10-fold EC50 shift in proliferation assays. Staining for the DSB marker γH2AX at low concentrations of each drug demonstrates that MK-8776 and MK-1775 in combination induce up to 50-fold more DNA damage than either MK-8776 or MK-1775 alone. The ability of the combination to drive premature mitosis, determined by pHH3 quantitation, was variable, suggesting that generation of DSBs rather than G2/M checkpoint abrogation is the mechanism underlying combination cytotoxicity. Induction of DSBs requires cyclin-dependent kinase activity and takes place largely in S-phase cells, implying deregulation of DNA replication. Furthermore, staining for DNA damage response markers γH2AX and pCHK1-ser345 was both more intense and more durable in a LoVo xenograft model of cancer when MK-8776 and MK-1775 were dosed together compared to either compound alone. At tolerated doses, the combination demonstrated significantly greater anti-tumor efficacy than either MK-8776 or MK-1775 alone in LoVo xenografts (91% tumor growth inhibition for the combination versus 28% and 41% for MK-8776 and MK-1775, respectively). Similar observations were made in additional xenograft models. These results demonstrate in vitro and in vivo synergy between MK-8776 and MK-1775, indicating unique and complimentary anti-tumor effects of CHK1 and WEE1 inhibition. Our studies provide preclinical rationale for combining WEE1 and CHK1 inhibitors as a novel cancer treatment regimen. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 103rd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2012 Mar 31-Apr 4; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2012;72(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 2051. doi:1538-7445.AM2012-2051

The Wee1 tyrosine kinase plays a key role in checkpoint arrest by phosphorylating and inhibiting cyclin-dependent kinases 1 and 2, two CDKs that drive S-phase and G2- to M-phase transitions, respectively. Interfering with Wee1 leads to elevated CDK1 and 2 activity, which in turn overcomes checkpoint arrest and causes cells to progress through the cell cycle in the presence of DNA damage. Wee1 inhibitors are therefore expected to sensitize cancer cells to DNA damaging chemotherapeutics. In particular, p53-deficient cells are postulated to be particularly sensitive to Wee1 inhibition because they lack a G1-checkpoint and rely more on S- and G2-phase checkpoints where Wee1 activity is critical. The p53 pathway is frequently inactivated in cervical carcinoma either through TP53 mutation or through functional inactivation by Human PapillomaVirus (HPV) gene products. We thus investigated the capability of MK-1775, a selective and potent inhibitor of Wee1, to sensitize cervical cancer cell lines to cisplatin and topotecan. We have evaluated the potential of the Wee1 inhibitor MK-1775 to sensitize cervical cancer cells to standard-of-care treatments both in vitro and in vivo. Using a panel of cervical cancer cell lines, we demonstrated that MK-1775 at clinically relevant concentrations potentiates the cytotoxic activity of cisplatin and topotecan in vitro as indicated by the average 3-fold and 2-fold shift in the CC50s for cisplatin and topotecan, respectively. Chemosenstization was observed in both HPV-negative/p53 mutant and HPV-positive p53/wild-type cervical cancer cell lines. Finally, we have demonstrated that MK-1775 significantly increases the in vivo efficacy of a cisplatin-topotecan combination therapy in xenograft models of HPV+ cervical carcinoma. Based on these data, MK-1775 is currently undergoing clinical evaluation in a phase 1b/2 trial in platinum combination for the treatment of cervical carcinoma. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 102nd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2011 Apr 2-6; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2011;71(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 2969. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2011-2969