Explore the vast range of titles available.

Cyclin-dependent kinase 7 (CDK7), along with cyclin H and MAT1, forms the CDK-activating complex (CAK), which directs progression through the cell cycle via T-loop phosphorylation of cell cycle CDKs. CAK is also a component of the general transcription factor, TFIIH. CDK7-mediated phosphorylation of RNA polymerase II (Pol II) at active gene promoters permits transcription. Cell cycle dysregulation is an established hallmark of cancer, and aberrant control of transcriptional processes, through diverse mechanisms, is also common in many cancers. Furthermore, CDK7 levels are elevated in a number of cancer types and are associated with clinical outcomes, suggestive of greater dependence on CDK7 activity, compared with normal tissues. These findings identify CDK7 as a cancer therapeutic target, and several recent publications report selective CDK7 inhibitors (CDK7i) with activity against diverse cancer types. Preclinical studies have shown that CDK7i cause cell cycle arrest, apoptosis and repression of transcription, particularly of super-enhancer-associated genes in cancer, and have demonstrated their potential for overcoming resistance to cancer treatments. Moreover, combinations of CDK7i with other targeted cancer therapies, including BET inhibitors, BCL2 inhibitors and hormone therapies, have shown efficacy in model systems. Four CDK7i, ICEC0942 (CT7001), SY-1365, SY-5609 and LY3405105, have now progressed to Phase I/II clinical trials. Here we describe the work that has led to the development of selective CDK7i, the current status of the most advanced clinical candidates, and discuss their potential importance as cancer therapeutics, both as monotherapies and in combination settings. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT03363893; NCT03134638; NCT04247126; NCT03770494.

Most cancer-related deaths are a result of metastasis, and thus the importance of this process as a target of therapy cannot be understated. By asking ‘how can we effectively treat cancer?’, we do not capture the complexity of a disease encompassing >200 different cancer types — many consisting of multiple subtypes — with considerable intratumoural heterogeneity, which can result in variable responses to a specific therapy. Moreover, we have much less information on the pathophysiological characteristics of metastases than is available for the primary tumour. Most disseminated tumour cells that arrive in distant tissues, surrounded by unfamiliar cells and a foreign microenvironment, are likely to die; however, those that survive can generate metastatic tumours with a markedly different biology from that of the primary tumour. To treat metastasis effectively, we must inhibit fundamental metastatic processes and develop specific preclinical and clinical strategies that do not rely on primary tumour responses. To address this crucial issue, Cancer Research UK and Cancer Therapeutics CRC Australia formed a Metastasis Working Group with representatives from not-for-profit, academic, government, industry and regulatory bodies in order to develop recommendations on how to tackle the challenges associated with treating (micro)metastatic disease. Herein, we describe the challenges identified as well as the proposed approaches for discovering and developing anticancer agents designed specifically to prevent or delay the metastatic outgrowth of cancer.

Resistant tumours are thought to arise from the action of Darwinian selection on genetically heterogenous cancer cell populations. However, simple clonal selection is inadequate to describe the late relapses often characterising luminal breast cancers treated with endocrine therapy (ET), suggesting a more complex interplay between genetic and non-genetic factors. Here, we dissect the contributions of clonal genetic diversity and transcriptional plasticity during the early and late phases of ET at single-cell resolution. Using single-cell RNA-sequencing and imaging we disentangle the transcriptional variability of plastic cells and define a rare subpopulation of pre-adapted (PA) cells which undergoes further transcriptomic reprogramming and copy number changes to acquire full resistance. We find evidence for sub-clonal expression of a PA signature in primary tumours and for dominant expression in clustered circulating tumour cells. We propose a multi-step model for ET resistance development and advocate the use of stage-specific biomarkers. The development of resistance to endocrine therapy is a significant, clinical problem in breast cancer. Here, the authors identify a rare subpopulation of cells that drive resistance following transcriptional reprogramming.

Triple-negative breast cancers are defined by a lack of expression of oestrogen, progesterone, and ERBB2 receptors. This subgroup accounts for 15% of all types of breast cancer and for a higher percentage of breast cancer arising in African and African-American women who are premenopausal. Because of the absence of specific treatment guidelines for this subgroup, triple-negative breast cancers are managed with standard treatment; however, such treatment leaves them associated with a high rate of local and systemic relapse. Histologically, such cancers are poorly differentiated, and most fall into the basal subgroup of breast cancers, characterised by staining for basal markers (ie, cytokeratin 5/6). Analyses of microarray gene-expression profiling data show that they form a homogeneous group (or so-called cluster) in transcriptional terms and, increasingly, research studies are identifying basal cancers on the basis of exhibiting this distinctive transcriptional profile. Histologically and transcriptionally, triple-negative breast cancers have many similarities to BRCA1-associated breast cancers, which suggests that dysfunction in BRCA1 or related pathways occurs in this subset of sporadic cancers. In this review, we discuss the molecular features of triple-negative breast cancers and consider how the use of existing cytotoxic agents can be optimised for this patient group. We discuss the implications of a possible underlying BRCA1-pathway dysfunction in this subgroup in terms of treatment and we also investigate the predominant proliferative signals and the on-going research addressing the suitability of these signals as therapeutic targets.

PurposeBreast cancer is one of the most commonly diagnosed cancers in women. Five subtypes of breast cancer differ in their genetic expression profiles and carry different prognostic values, with no treatments available for some types, such as triple-negative, due to the absence of genetic signatures that could otherwise be targeted by molecular therapies. Although endocrine treatments are largely successful for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive cancers, a significant proportion of patients with metastatic tumors fail to respond and acquire resistance to therapy. FOXA1 overexpression mediates endocrine therapy resistance in ER-positive breast cancer, although the regulation of chemotherapy response by FOXA1 has not been addressed previously. FOXA1, together with EP300 and RUNX1, regulates the expression of E-cadherin, and is expressed in luminal, but absent in triple-negative and basal-like breast cancers. We have previously determined that EP300 regulates drug resistance and tumor initiation capabilities in breast cancer cells.MethodsHere we describe the generation of breast cancer cell models in which FOXA1 expression has been modulated either by expression of hairpins targeting FOXA1 mRNA or overexpression plasmids.ResultsUpon FOXA1 knockdown in luminal MCF-7 and T47D cells, we found an increase in doxorubicin and paclitaxel sensitivity as well as a decrease in anchorage independence. Conversely, upregulation of FOXA1 in basal-like MDA-MB-231 cells led to an increase in drug resistance and anchorage independence.ConclusionTogether, these data suggest that FOXA1 plays a role in making tumors more aggressive.

Background Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer in women, and despite the introduction of new screening programmes, therapies and monitoring technologies, there is still a need to develop more useful tests for monitoring treatment response and to inform clinical decision making. The purpose of this study was to compare circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) and circulating tumour cells (CTCs) with conventional breast cancer blood biomarkers (CA15-3 and alkaline phosphatase (AP)) as predictors of response to treatment and prognosis in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Methods One hundred ninety-four female patients with radiologically confirmed MBC were recruited to the study. Total cfDNA levels were determined by qPCR and compared with CELLSEARCH® CTC counts and CA15-3 and alkaline phosphatase (AP) values. Blood biomarker data were compared with conventional tumour markers, treatment(s) and response as assessed by RECIST and survival. Non-parametric statistical hypothesis tests were used to examine differences, correlation analysis and linear regression to determine correlation and to describe its effects, logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC curve) to estimate the strength of the relationship between biomarkers and clinical outcomes and value normalization against standard deviation to make biomarker values comparable. Kaplan–Meier estimator and Cox regression models were used to assess survival. Univariate and multivariate models were performed where appropriate. Results Multivariate analysis showed that both the amount of total cfDNA ( p value = 0.024, HR = 1.199, CI = 1.024–1.405) and the number of CTCs ( p value = 0.001, HR = 1.243, CI = 1.088–1.421) are predictors of overall survival (OS), whereas total cfDNA levels is the sole predictor for progression-free survival (PFS) ( p value = 0.042, HR = 1.193, CI = 1.007–1.415) and disease response when comparing response to non-response to treatment (HR = 15.917, HR = 12.481 for univariate and multivariate analysis, respectively). Lastly, combined analysis of CTCs and cfDNA is more informative than the combination of two conventional biomarkers (CA15-3 and AP) for prediction of OS. Conclusion Measurement of total cfDNA levels, which is a simpler and less expensive biomarker than CTC counts, is associated with PFS, OS and response in MBC, suggesting potential clinical application of a cheap and simple blood-based test.

Activating mutations in the estrogen receptor 1 (ESR1) gene are acquired on treatment and can drive resistance to endocrine therapy. Because of the spatial and temporal limitations of needle core biopsies, our goal was to develop a highly sensitive, less invasive method of detecting activating ESR1 mutations via circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) and tumor cells as a \"liquid biopsy.\" We developed a targeted 23-amplicon next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel for detection of hot-spot mutations in ESR1, phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase, catalytic subunit alpha (PIK3CA), tumor protein p53 (TP53), fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 (FGFR1), and fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) in 48 patients with estrogen receptor-α-positive metastatic breast cancer who were receiving systemic therapy. Selected mutations were validated using droplet digital PCR (ddPCR). Nine baseline cfDNA samples had an ESR1 mutation. NGS detected 3 activating mutations in ESR1, and 3 hot-spot mutations in PIK3CA, and 3 in TP53 in baseline cfDNA, and the ESR1 p.D538G mutation in 1 matched circulating tumor cell sample. ddPCR analysis was more sensitive than NGS and identified 6 additional baseline cfDNA samples with the ESR1 p.D538G mutation at a frequency of <1%. In serial blood samples from 11 patients, 4 showed changes in cfDNA, 2 with emergence of a mutation in ESR1. We also detected a low frequency ESR1 mutation (1.3%) in cfDNA of 1 primary patient who was thought to have metastatic disease but was clear by scans. Early identification of ESR1 mutations by liquid biopsy might allow for cessation of ineffective endocrine therapies and switching to other treatments, without the need for tissue biopsy and before the emergence of metastatic disease.

Circulating nucleic acids (CNAs) are under investigation as a liquid biopsy in cancer. However there is wide variation in blood processing and methods for isolation of circulating free DNA (cfDNA) and microRNAs (miRNAs). Here we compare the extraction efficiency and reproducibility of 4 commercially available kits for cfDNA and 3 for miRNA using spike-in of reference templates. We also compare the effects of increasing time between venepuncture and centrifugation and differential centrifugation force on recovery of CNAs. cfDNA was quantified by TaqMan qPCR and targeted deep sequencing. miRNA profiles were assessed with TaqMan low-density arrays and assays. The QIAamp(®) DNA Blood Mini and Circulating nucleic acid kits gave the highest recovery of cfDNA and efficient recovery (>90%) of a 564bp spike-in. Moreover, targeted sequencing revealed overlapping cfDNA profiles and variant depth, including detection of HER2 gene amplification, using the Ion AmpliSeq™Cancer Hotspot Panel v2. Highest yields of miRNA and the synthetic Arabidopsis thaliana miR-159a spike-in were obtained using the miRNeasy Serum/Plasma kit, with saturation above 200 µl of plasma. miRNA profiles showed significant variation with increasing time before centrifugation (p<0.001) and increasing centrifugation force, with depletion of platelet associated miRNAs, whereas cfDNA was unaffected. However, sample replicates showed excellent reproducibility on TaqMan low density arrays (ρ = 0.96, p<0.0001). We also successfully generated miRNA profiles for plasma samples stored > 12 years, highlighting the potential for analysis of stored sample biobanks. In the era of the liquid biopsy, standardisation of methods is required to minimise variation, particularly for miRNA.

BackgroundWe report copy-number profiling by low-pass WGS (LP-WGS) in individual circulating tumour cells (CTCs) for guiding treatment in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), comparing CTC results with mutations detected in circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) in the same blood samples.MethodsAcross 10 patients with MBC who were progressing at the time of blood sampling and that had >20 CTCs detected by CellSearch®, 63 single cells (50 CTCs and 13 WBCs) and 16 cell pools (8 CTC pools and 8 WBC pools) were recovered from peripheral blood by CellSearch®/DEPArray™ and sequenced with Ampli1 LowPass technology (Menarini Silicon Biosystems). Copy-number aberrations were identified using the MSBiosuite software platform, and results were compared with mutations detected in matched plasma cfDNA analysed by targeted next-generation sequencing using the Oncomine™ Breast cfDNA Assay (Thermo Fisher).ResultsLP-WGS data demonstrated copy-number gains/losses in individual CTCs in regions including FGFR1, JAK2 and CDK6 in five patients, ERBB2 amplification in two HER2-negative patients and BRCA loss in two patients. Seven of eight matched plasmas also had mutations in ctDNA in PIK3CA, TP53, ESR1 and KRAS genes with mutant allele frequencies (MAF) ranging from 0.05 to 33.11%. Combining results from paired CTCs and ctDNA, clinically actionable targets were identified in all ten patients.ConclusionThis combined analysis of CTCs and ctDNA may offer a new approach for monitoring of disease progression and to direct therapy in patients with advanced MBC, at a time when they are coming towards the end of other treatment options.

The CDK7 inhibitors (CDK7i) ICEC0942 and THZ1, are promising new cancer therapeutics. Resistance to targeted drugs frequently compromises cancer treatment. We sought to identify mechanisms by which cancer cells may become resistant to CDK7i. Resistant lines were established through continuous drug selection. ABC-transporter copy number, expression and activity were examined using real-time PCR, immunoblotting and flow cytometry. Drug responses were measured using growth assays. ABCB1 was upregulated in ICEC0942-resistant cells and there was cross-resistance to THZ1. THZ1-resistant cells upregulated ABCG2 but remained sensitive to ICEC0942. Drug resistance in both cell lines was reversible upon inhibition of ABC-transporters. CDK7i response was altered in adriamycin- and mitoxantrone-resistant cell lines demonstrating ABC-transporter upregulation. ABCB1 expression correlated with ICEC0942 and THZ1 response, and ABCG2 expression with THZ2 response, in a panel of cancer cell lines. We have identified ABCB1 upregulation as a common mechanism of resistance to ICEC0942 and THZ1, and confirmed that ABCG2 upregulation is a mechanism of resistance to THZ1. The identification of potential mechanisms of CDK7i resistance and differences in susceptibility of ICEC0942 and THZ1 to ABC-transporters, may help guide their future clinical use.