Search

Cyclin E2, but not cyclin E1, is included in several gene signatures that predict disease progression in either tamoxifen-resistant or metastatic breast cancer. We therefore examined the role of cyclin E2 in antiestrogen resistance in vitro and its potential for therapeutic targeting through cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) inhibition. High expression of CCNE2, but not CCNE1, was characteristic of the luminal B and HER2 subtypes of breast cancer and was strongly predictive of shorter distant metastasis-free survival following endocrine therapy. After antiestrogen treatment of MCF-7 breast cancer cells, cyclin E2 mRNA and protein were downregulated and cyclin E2–CDK2 activity decreased. However, this regulation was lost in tamoxifen-resistant (MCF-7 TAMR) cells, which overexpressed cyclin E2. Expression of either cyclin E1 or E2 in T-47D breast cancer cells conferred acute antiestrogen resistance, suggesting that cyclin E overexpression contributes to the antiestrogen resistance of tamoxifen-resistant cells. Ectopic expression of cyclin E1 or E2 also reduced sensitivity to CDK4, but not CDK2, inhibition. Proliferation of tamoxifen-resistant cells was inhibited by RNAi-mediated knockdown of cyclin E1, cyclin E2, or CDK2. Furthermore, CDK2 inhibition of E-cyclin overexpressing cells and tamoxifen-resistant cells restored sensitivity to tamoxifen or CDK4 inhibition. Cyclin E2 overexpression is therefore a potential mechanism of resistance to both endocrine therapy and CDK4 inhibition. CDK2 inhibitors hold promise as a component of combination therapies in endocrine-resistant disease as they effectively inhibit cyclin E1 and E2 overexpressing cells and enhance the efficacy of other therapeutics. Mol Cancer Ther; 11(7); 1488–99. ©2012 AACR.

Cyclin D1, and to a lesser extent the other D-type cyclins, is frequently deregulated in cancer and is a biomarker of cancer phenotype and disease progression. The ability of these cyclins to activate the cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) CDK4 and CDK6 is the most extensively documented mechanism for their oncogenic actions and provides an attractive therapeutic target. Is this an effective means of targeting the cyclin D oncogenes, and how might the patient subgroups that are most likely to benefit be identified?

Increases in the levels and/or activity of nonreceptor tyrosine kinases c-Src and c-Yes are often associated with colorectal carcinogenesis. The physiological consequences of increased c-Yes activity during the early and late stages of tumorigenesis, in addition to the degree of redundancy between c-Yes and c-Src in colorectal cancer cells, remain elusive. To study the consequences of increases in c-Yes levels and activity in later stages of colorectal carcinogenesis, we developed human colorectal cancer cell lines in which c-Yes levels and activity can be inducibly increased by a tightly controlled expression of wild-type c-Yes or by constitutively active mutants of c-Yes, c-YesY537F, c-YesΔr6aa. c-Yes induction resulted in increased cell motility but did not promote proliferation either in vitro or in vivo . These results suggest that in later stages of colorectal carcinogenesis, elevations in cYes levels/activity may promote cancer spread and metastasis rather than tumor growth.

The levels and activity of c-Src in colorectal cancer cells increase steadily during the course of colorectal carcinogenesis and are most highly elevated in advanced metastatic disease. However, the effects of increases in c-Src activity on the proliferation of colorectal cancer cells during early and late stages of tumorigenesis remain elusive. To study the consequences of increases in c-Src levels and activity on the growth of colorectal cancer cells in later stages of colorectal carcinogenesis, we developed human colorectal cancer cell lines in which c-Src levels and activity could be inducibly increased by a tightly controlled expression of wild-type c-Src or of the constitutively active mutant of c-Src, c-SrcY527F. Src induction activated multiple signaling pathways (often associated with a proliferative response) but promoted neither cell proliferation in vitro nor tumor growth in a xenograft model in vivo. These results indicate that, in more advanced stages of colorectal carcinogenesis, increases in c-Src levels and activity are likely to have functions other than the direct promotion of tumor growth.