Search

Most patients who initially respond to treatment with the multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitor sunitinib eventually relapse. Therefore, developing a deeper understanding of the contribution of sunitinib's numerous targets to the clinical response or to resistance is crucial. Here, we have shown that cancer cells respond to clinically relevant doses of sunitinib by enhancing the stability of the antiapoptotic protein MCL-1 and inducing mTORC1 signaling, thus evoking little cytotoxicity. Inhibition of MCL-1 or mTORC1 signaling sensitized cells to clinically relevant doses of sunitinib in vitro and was synergistic with sunitinib in impairing tumor growth in vivo, indicating that these responses are triggered as prosurvival mechanisms that enable cells to tolerate the cytotoxic effects of sunitinib. Furthermore, higher doses of sunitinib were cytotoxic, triggered a decline in MCL-1 levels, and inhibited mTORC1 signaling. Mechanistically, we determined that sunitinib modulates MCL-1 stability by affecting its proteasomal degradation. Dual modulation of MCL-1 stability at different dose ranges of sunitinib was due to differential effects on ERK and GSK3 beta activity, and the latter also accounted for dual modulation of mTORC1 activity. Finally, comparison of patient samples prior to and following sunitinib treatment suggested that increases in MCL-1 levels and mTORC1 activity correlate with resistance to sunitinib in patients.

Aims Gene fusions assays are key for personalised treatments of advanced human cancers. Their implementation on cytological material requires a preliminary validation that may make use of cell line slides mimicking cytological samples. In this international multi-institutional study, gene fusion reference standards were developed and validated. Methods Cell lines harbouring EML4(13)-ALK(20) and SLC34A2(4)-ROS1(32) gene fusions were adopted to prepare reference standards. Eight laboratories (five adopting amplicon-based and three hybridisation-based platforms) received, at different dilution points two sets of slides (slide A 50.0%, slide B 25.0%, slide C 12.5% and slide D wild type) stained by Papanicolaou (Pap) and May Grunwald Giemsa (MGG). Analysis was carried out on a total of 64 slides. Results Four (50.0%) out of eight laboratories reported results on all slides and dilution points. While 12 (37.5%) out of 32 MGG slides were inadequate, 27 (84.4%) out of 32 Pap slides produced libraries adequate for variant calling. The laboratories using hybridisation-based platforms showed the highest rate of inadequate results (13/24 slides, 54.2%). Conversely, only 10.0% (4/40 slides) of inadequate results were reported by laboratories adopting amplicon-based platforms. Conclusions Reference standards in cytological format yield better results when Pap staining and processed by amplicon-based assays. Further investigation is required to optimise these standards for MGG stained cells and for hybridisation-based approaches.

Aims Gene fusions assays are key for personalised treatments of advanced human cancers. Their implementation on cytological material requires a preliminary validation that may make use of cell line slides mimicking cytological samples. In this international multi-institutional study, gene fusion reference standards were developed and validated. Methods Cell lines harbouring EML4(13)-ALK(20) and SLC34A2(4)-ROS1(32) gene fusions were adopted to prepare reference standards. Eight laboratories (five adopting amplicon-based and three hybridisation-based platforms) received, at different dilution points two sets of slides (slide A 50.0%, slide B 25.0%, slide C 12.5% and slide D wild type) stained by Papanicolaou (Pap) and May Grunwald Giemsa (MGG). Analysis was carried out on a total of 64 slides. Results Four (50.0%) out of eight laboratories reported results on all slides and dilution points. While 12 (37.5%) out of 32 MGG slides were inadequate, 27 (84.4%) out of 32 Pap slides produced libraries adequate for variant calling. The laboratories using hybridisation-based platforms showed the highest rate of inadequate results (13/24 slides, 54.2%). Conversely, only 10.0% (4/40 slides) of inadequate results were reported by laboratories adopting amplicon-based platforms. Conclusions Reference standards in cytological format yield better results when Pap staining and processed by amplicon-based assays. Further investigation is required to optimise these standards for MGG stained cells and for hybridisation-based approaches.